HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 19830920 55�
MINUTES
1
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
September 20, 1983
The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday,
September 20, 1983 at 7:30 P.M. in the Courtroom of the Old Post Office
Building, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Commissioners Present: Richard E. Whitten, Chair, and Commissioners Ben
Lloyd, Shirley E. Marshall, Norman Walker and Don Willhoit.
A. BOARD SQL
Commissioner Willhoit added an executive session for consideration of the
acquisition of property.
B.
There were no comments.
1. U=RS_ NOT-D&THE P UMD AQEMA
There were no comments.
2. MATTERS ,N THE pEINTED AGENDA
There were no comments.
C-1 ter_RegiRtlation
Ms. Margaret Parker, Chair of the Board of Elections, presented the new
voter registration cards to members of the Board and staff, and distributed a
Board of Elections pamphlet, which had been distributed already to County
offices, departments, clinics, libraries, banks, etc.
C-2 Child Cnrp Report
The charge to the ad hoc Committee was to look at alternatives for
establishing enhanced child care in the County. All members were present: Dr.
Jan Schopler (Chair of the Board of Social Services) , Dr. Arthur Michael
Sharpe, (Chair of the Child Care Subcommittee of the Orange County Human
Services Advisory Commission; and County Manager Ken Thompson.
Commissioner Marshall noted that direct staff proposed in Model 3 was too
top heavy with administrators and suggested the Department Head could serve as
Social Services Supervisor.
Dr. Schopler noted that the Board of Social Services passed a
recommendation for enhancement of day care services within the Department of
Social Services, but with two serious modifications -- staff structure to
include a full-time Daycare Unit Director, a half-time supervisor, a half-time
information and referral professional, and with the creation of an Advisory
Committee on Child Care Services.
Commissioner Marshall noted the important need to recognize that the report
also asked for a department or program that would meet other needs of parents
and children besides day care.
Commissioner whitted commended the Committee for providing an excellent
report.
C-3 Affi (see pages of this book)
Commissioner Whitted noted that information requested by the Board has been
supplied and incorporated into a set of seven recommendations.
County Manager, Ken Thompson noted changes in the composition of the County
work force from 1976 forward and from a period of 1981 to present there is a
breakdown by salary, race and sex.
Commisioner Willhoit noted a need to develop a format for reporting data
in a more meaningful way.
Virginia Weisz, a representative of the Affirmative Action Committee of the
r^•^^;�� nn fin. T.:nmcn r annmmcrr7ear7 m4nnt i nn of 1-hp rPc nmmPn6a1-i nnA mAap by the
i7 i7 cv
2
Personnel Department and the County Manager and offered supplemental material
to members of the Board for clarification of the statistics pertaining to the
percent of total employees who are female -- a statistic that is relevant.
Ken Thompson, County Manager noted that the earlier report identified the
proportion of each protective class employed in the County.
Commissioner Lloyd voiced some concern for dealing with the handicapped as
a protective class in the area of affirmative action. He noted that once
particular goals or quotas are met and that point is surpassed, then you get
into reverse discrimination.
Commissioner Willhoit moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall to put the
recommendatons of the Manager and the Commission for Women on the next agenda
under the decisions categoric. VOTE: Ayes, 5; Noes, 0.
D. Board Decisions
D-1 (for public comment and decision) (see
page
for this ordinance)
Mr. Doug Champion spoke on behalf of the Animal Protection Society of
Orange County, responding to the comments made at the meeting in Hillsborough
as requested -- a formal response was prepared and made available to the Board
for review. Additionally, Mr. Champion offered to try to put into perspective
the needs for the ordinance and the essential amendment changes.
Mr. Champion stated and elaborated on three essential protections that are
needed: (1) protection of animals against mistreatment, abandonment, against
unauthorized haboring, and hit and run injury; (2) protection of responsible
owners and keepers, such as the right to have dogs for protection and the right
to reclaim animals; (3) protection of others (meaning other persons, other
animals, other property, and the public at large) by limiting nuisances. Most
of these are listed under offenses, with the exception of female dogs in heat.
It is proposed that those portions of the Ordinance relating to public
health and safety be rewritten to provide a process for citizen complaints,
animal control ordinance citation, impoundment or confinement of dangerous
animals off the premises.
Harvey Carnes stated that he has been a resident of the unincorporated
portion of Orange County for twenty years, and would like to have the
assistance of the Board to keep other dogs off his property - day and night.
He supports the Ordinance.
Dwayne Dryer stated that many refer to the problem of whining and barking
dogs as a nuisance:- when one loses sleep night after night, then it is no
longer a nuisance, but a health endangered situation.
Jean Simmons (a Veterinarian) stated concern for her goats' safety: she
does not want to shoot someone else's dog, but she will if the Ordinance is not
adopted.
Doug McKay spoke in favor of the proposed Ordinance and the changes
recommended by the Animal Protection Society and noted incidents involving his
family and dogs.
Alvin Kennedy noted the need for evening emergency calls for the Animal
Protection Society as well as his concern for the number of dogs that are hit
on city streets and roads.
Hugh Wilson noted that people in the County use dogs for companionship and
protection and is particularly concerned that the Board consider that a civil
and/or legal action of applying to the Magistrate is one remedy for dealing
with dog nuisances.
55�
Mr. Laws, resident of Eno stated that dogs killed two of his cattle last
year, and asked that something be done to control the dogs. He presented
pictures to the Board.
Frances Stagg, member of the Orange County Animal Shelter stated that
education and legislation are the two most valuable aids toward responsible
ownership. Because dog problems are the same everywhere, rural taxpayers
should have the same rights and protections as taxpayers in urban areas.
Ms. Cole stated that she is a resident of the County, and feels that the
Ordinance is needed because of population growth in the County.
Bill Rump, Chair of the North Carolina Humane Federation, which is an
organization of all the humane societies in North Carolina, stated that the
problem is not just in Orange County, but a statewide problem and is extremely
complex. The national average for shelters handling pets is $15 per pet, and
animal shelters are presently handling between 4,000 and 5,000 pets per year;
somebody has to bite the bullet and force irresponsible pet owners to take
responsibility for the actions of their animals.
Dr. Robert Greenberg noted that this Ordinance will pose no problem for the
owner who has dogs that happen to wander from the owner's property onto
another. But, it will take care of the vast problems in the northern and
southern parts of the County.
Dr. Vanstee, a veterinarian, noted that people have rights to own animals
and dogs have rights to be exercised, but others who take daily walks also
should have the right not to be injured by dogs. Animal owners have a
responsibility to provide human care to animals.
Commissioner Willhoit gave to the Clerk two letters received from residents
of the County in support of the Animal Control Ordinance.
Commissioner Willhoit moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall, a
committee, to include the County Attorney, Health Director, and a
representative from the Animal Protection Society (possibly Dr. Greenberg) , to
consider the proposed changes and comments heard at the two public hearings and
-bring back a document to consider for action at the first meeting in October.
VOTE: Ayes, 5; Noes, 0.
There was discussion regarding possible conflict 'of State laws relative to
hunting dogs.
Commissioner Whitted noted- that the Ordinance, if adopted, will be applied
countywide.
D-2 One-Half Cent- Sa1ps_T�a.X
Commissioner Whitted noted that the Board has received a resolution from
the Town of Chapel Hill and correspondence from Carrboro and the Orange County
Schools as well as having had communication with Dr. Mayor and Mr. Caldwell of
_._ the Chapel Hill-Carrboro School District in reference to the one-half cent
sales tax option that was passed in the last session of the General Assembly.
Commissioner Marshall stated that sales taxes should be a part of the
considerations of the task force being set up by the Board to address capital
needs; she believes it necessary to put any new sales taxes to the vote of the
citizens.
Commissioner Whitted stated that if the task farce recommends the one-half
cent sales tax and the needs are identified, this item should be considered at
the next county-wide election -- the May primary.
Commissioner Lloyd stated that the County is overdue for some relief of the
property tax due to the drastic increases over the past several years; a short
range relief of the County's problem is a sales tax of some kind.
4
Commissioner Walked noted, in agreement with Commissioner Whitted the need
to wait for the task force report and then go to referendum.
Commissioner Willhoit noted that some in-depth studies need to be made of
sales tax as an additional revenue source for Orange County.
Max Kennedy, Chair of the County Board of Education, suggested this issue
be placed on the ballot with municipal elections in November and not at the
spring primary because at that time it will become a part of other political
issues.
In response to Mr. Kennedy's concern, Commissioner Whitted stated that
there is a need for the public to be educated in regards to understanding the
tax and the needs; if the November vote is defeated, then a five year waiting
period is mandated before another vote can be held.
Commissioner Whitted suggested he would draft a response to those who have
been in communication with the Board --raising some points of interest
mentioned -- and distribute copies of that response to the Board.
D-3 Audit
Comprehensive annual financial reports and the management letter to the
year end of June 30, 1983 were distributed. Wallace Harding, Finance Director,
and representatives of Touche Ross and Company were present for questions. A
representative of Touche Ross and Company noted that of 100 counties, 278
municipalities and 143 school districts in North Carolina, fifteen areas of
North Carolina were listed in the MFOA newsletter as areas that received the
Certificate of Conformance. Orange County is on this list which is a
significant achievement.
D-4 Fuhlig Defe era Office(see page of this book)
Mr. Kirk Osborn stated that the space for the Public Defenders Office
should be located in Chapel Hill, because there is a need for a place that is
centrally located. He asked that alternative #1 be ruled out completely.
Bob Mahler noted that in order to do an effective job for defenders (with
at least 150 cases at any given time) , there is a need for ready access; 70%
of the indigent clients are in the Chapel Hill area, making it difficult to
provide for transportation to Hillsborough.
County Manager, Ken Thompson noted that Chatham County is not interested in
contributing any rental space for the Public Defenders Office as there is space
obligated for court personnel in their renovated courthouse.
Commissioner Marshall stated that she has a problem with using the old
Police Building unrenovated or renovated. Throwing good money after bad. She
also noted that the Public Defenders Office should work with the Commissioners
of Chatham County regarding space because Chatham County is involved.
Commissioner Lloyd moved, seconded by Commissioner Walker to use the Old
Police Building with renovations. VOTE: Ayes, 4; Noes, l (Commissioner
Marshall) .
D-5 Qrading S'oxact (see page for this contract)
There is consideration to award the landfill reclamation contract
(clearing, grading, creek channelization and seeding) for Northern Fairview
Neighborhood Park.
Commissioner Lloyd moved, seconded by Commissioner Walker to award $150,415
(not to include $13,525 for Public Works road repairs) to the Bob Glover
Grading Company, as recommended by Ken Thompson. VOTE: Ayes, 4; Noes, l
(Commissioner Willhoit) .
D-6 Housjac�$ea];rat;n.,_ rgAtract (see page for this contract)
Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner Whitted to accept the
Dot
5
recommendation for the three housing rehabilitation contracts. VOTE: Ayes, 5;
Noes, 0.
D-7 Appointments - School_ Task_ Fozpe
The Orange County Board of Commissioners have appointed eighteen members to
the School Capital Task Force, and there is a stated goal of twenty-five
members
Commissioner Willhoit moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall to appoint
Milton Julian, Louise Baker, Thomas Shanklin, and Ed Riley to the School
Capital Task Force. VOTE: Ayes, 5; Noes, 0.
Commissioner Whitted stated that he would contact Dick Sharpless regarding
his willingness to chair the Committee and noted the need for the County
Finance Office to serve as support staff for this Committee.
D-8 prig C
Commissioner Willhoit moved, seconded by Commissioner Whitted to (1) accept
additional funds for the CETA IIB ABE program and to adjust the program's
budget in accordance with the State's budget backup; and (2) accept the CETA
IIB YWE program's deobligation of funds and to adjust the program's budget in
accordance with the State's budget backup. VOTE: Ayes, 5; Noes, 0.
D-9 Budgat Ames (see page for this amendment)
Commissioner Marshall moved•, seconded by Commissioner Willhoit to accept
the proposed amendments for Supplemental Family Planning and Maternal and Child
Care. VOTE: Ayes, 5; Noes, 0.
D-10 Added ment
Commissioner Whitted stated that the annual meeting of the Triangle J
Council of Governments will take place at the Jane S. McKimmon Center on
September 18, 1983. Each members calendar schedule should be given to the
Clerk tonight, indicating availability for interviewing the Clerk to the Board.
Commissioner Whitted moved, seconded by Commissioner Willhoit to go into
executive session to discuss acquisition of property. VOTE: Ayes, 5; Noes, 0.
Richard E. Whitted, Chair
Sharon Allison, Acting Clerk
APPROVED 2/6/84
S � qj,
0
PERCENT INCREASE BY CATEGORY OF EMPLOYEE
= 1976-83
BY RACE BY SE]( MALES FEMALES
TOTAL HON-MINORITY MINORITY MALE FEMALE wit M/M W/F iii F
'76 '83 % '76 '83 '76 '83 % A '76 '83 '76 '83 .% '76 '83 %A-'76 '83 % '76 '83 '76 '83 %
N-S 85 153 90.6 67 98 46,3 18 53 194,0 25 58 132 60 95 58.3 19 36 89.5 6 22 266.7 48 62 29.2 12 33 175.(
MM 55 731 138.2 51. 105 105.9 4 26 550,0 31 fit 100.0 24 69 187.5 28 50, 78.6 3 12 300.0 23 55 139.1 I 14 1300,(
UM 7 25 259.1 7 21 200.0 0 4 400.9 6 21 250.0 1 4 300,0 6 19 216,1 0 2 290.0 1 2 100.0 0 2 200.'
TOTAL 147 309 110.2 125 224 79.2 22 85 286.4 62 741 127.4 85 168 97.6 53 105 98.1 9 36 300.0 72 119 65.3 13 49 276.!
PERCENT INCREASE BY CATEGORY OF EMPLOYEE
1981-83
N-S 152 153 ,66. 102 98 (2.9) 50 53 6.0 55 58 5.4 97 95 (-2.1) 36 26 (27.8) 19 22 15.8 66 62 (6.1) 31 33
MN 119 131 10.7 98 105 7.1 21 26 23.8 56 62 9,7 63 . 69 9,5 46 50 (0.7) 10 12 20.0 52 55 5.8 11 14 21.;
UM 21 25 19.0 19 21 10.5 2 4 100,0 15 21 40,0 6 4 (33,3) 14 19 35,1 7 2 100.0 5 2 (60.0) 1 2 la0.f.
TOTAL 292 309 5.8 219 224 2.3 73 .85 12.3 726 141 11.9 166 168 1,2 96 105 9.4 30 36 20.0 123 119 (3.2) 43 49 13.1
CODES,
N-S = Ron-Supervisory (office clerical, service maintenance, protective services)
MM = Middle Management (paraprofessional, professional, technicians)
UM - Upper Management (Department and Division Beads)
W/M = White Male
W/F = White Female
M/M - Minority Male
M/F = Minority Female
= Percent Change
UID
SALARY GRADE AVERAGE TOTAL• # SUMMARY ***
SALARY FAMPLOYEES BY RACE BY SEX MALES FEh1ALES
NON-MINORITY MINORITY MALE FEMALE W/M M/M W/F M/F
Unclassified 7,368 a. 5 3 3 5 2 1 3 2
L 49
50
52
I
53 8,429 4 4 1' 3 1 3
! 54 11,074 5 5 a
55 9,997 8 8 3 5 3 5
55 10,477 29 2O 1 4 24 20 4
57 8,578 I 3 1 2 ! 2
- '----._
SR 12,567 ' 3' 2 1 1 ! 2 1 2 I
-59 '11,691 33 22 _ 11 12 21• • -8 4 14 7
60 12,502 22 14 8 7 75 3 4 11 4
61 13,069 41`'. 30-' -13 30 13 22 8 8 5
62 14,592 31 22 9 17 14 73 4 9 5
63 15,273 17 15 2 12 5 11 1 4 }
64 16,338 3 3 1 2 1 2
65 15,969 6 5 1 1 5 1 4 1
66 16,180 30 24 6 11 19 8 3 16 3
67 16,726 17 11 6 6 11 4 2 7 4
68 20,331 9 8 1 6 3 5 1 3
69 19,098. 8 - 7 1 3 5 2 1 5
70 19,883 2 2 1 1 1 1
71 20,569 8• 01 . .4 4 4 4
12 - 22,725 4 3 1 4• 3 1
73 •22,345 5 2 3 2 3 1 1 1 2
74 25,973 3 3 3 3
75 26,918 3 3 3 3
75 27,330 2 2 1 1 7 1
77 29,925 1 1 1 1 I
78 35,767 3 3 3 3 J
79 ' 28,565 •1 1 1 1
So 33,787 2 z 2 a
1
87 43,836 1 1 1 1 I
TOTALS
309 224 85 141 168 105 36 179 49
i
I CODES:
W1N1 — White Male
W/F'— White Female
M/M Minority Male _
M/F -- Minority Femalr
ei
I�
�.w
1
i
z.
5.
_ x�R=19si - •
SALARY GRADE AVERAGE TOTALJ SUMMARY ***
SALARY EMPLOYEES BY 'RACE SX SEX MALES FEMALES
NON-MINORITY MINORITY MALE FEMALE W/M M/M W/F M/F
i
I
Unclassified 7,218 7 4 3 3 4 2 1 2 2
{ 49
50
52 9,204
53 7,958 5 .5 1 4 7
54 9,699 5 ; 5 5 5.
i55 -8,863 9 2 3 2 4
56 I '•` 9,328 36 26 - I 10 5 31" 1 I 2> 6
9.611 2 k 2 2. , [13 �
53-- 1 7,552 8 4 4' 7 1 1 4 1
! 59 `°10;674 22 . 16 6--l- 4 18 4 12 6
60 -11,563 25 20 5 5 20 5 1'S 5
6'1 11,784 32," '(' 24 8 22 10 17., 5 7 3
62 13,652 23 19 4 1'5 8 13 2 6 2
63 12,723 17 - •14 3 8 9 7 1. 7 2
64 14,433 7 6 7 2 5 2 A 1
65 14,061 14 11 3 5 9 9 1 7 2
66 14,785 29 23 6 10 "19 6 4 17 2
67 16,623 8 6 2 4 4 4 2 2
68 18,176 11 11 5 6 5 6
69 16,036 3 2 1 2 1 1 1 1
70 17,644 3 3 2' 1 2 1
71 17,622 4 ' 3 1 3 1 2 1 1
i 72 20,460 -3 2 1 2• 1 1 1 1
} 73 :20,484 3 - .2 . 1 1 2 1 1 1
74 23,022 4 4 4 4
75 . .24,168 2 2 1 1 1 I 7
76 25,908 1 1 1 1
77 27,132 I .1 . 1 1 1
78 29,178' 4 4 3 1 3 9 i
-79 29,796 1 1 1 1
80 .31,284 1 1 1 1
87 41,676 1
TOTALS 292 219 73 126 166 96 30 123 Lj 43
i
CODES:
1ff W/H — White Male
J W/F — White Female
M/[+1 — Minority Male
M/F — Minority Fc twle
1 .
aria?, - ~.+f9M~ •9^�' _ _ _ _
06
Kf.- 5..
YEAR: DIARCH 1976��
SALARY GRADE AVERAGE TOTAL-0 .4 SUMMARY ***
I SALARY EMPLOYEES BY RACE BY SEX MALES FaLALES
NON-MINORITY MINORITY MALE FEMALE W/M M/M W/F 1111F
unclassified 5,222 -6 5 1 3 3 3 2 1
49 5,040 3 3 3 3
50 6,168 2 2 2 2
52 . 5,784 2 1 1 2 1 1
I I� 53
5,331 11 8 -3 11 8 3
i�
54
55 •..6,436 4 4 4 4
56 " 61441 17 13 4 1 16 1 13 1 3
53 7,752
58 8;127 12-` :12 3 9 1 I 9
59 _a7;5i1 5. :•5 • 2 3 2 3
60 $1450 6 4 - 2 6 4 2
1 61 8,378 16% ''14 2 . 13 1 3 11 2 3
r 62 10.504 9 6 3 g 6 3
63 9,913 13 12 1 8 5 8 4 1
64 9,454 8 8 8 8
66 10,775 -17 17 3 14 3 14
67 11.892 1 1 1 1
68 13,264 5 51 1 4 1 4
69
70 13,146 2 2 1 1 1 1
71
72 14,052 1 1 1 1
73
.74 18,888 1 1 7 1
75 17,052 1 1 1 1
i 76 15,624 . 1 1 1 1
! 77 I
78
79 '
80 18,408 2 2 2 2
87 22,836 1 1 1 1 I
TOTALS 147 125 22 62 85 53 9 72 13 i
CODES:
W/M - White Male
W/F - White x•�.nale
HAS -ori.ty Male _
M/.>-- Minor.ity Female._- -
i
i ..
i
I
i
;r
020
7
SUMMARY OF COMMENTS AND SUGGESTED
ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE
AMENDMENTS
IN REPONSE THERETO
1 1. It was suggested by persons attending the public hearing that
the proposed ordinance was deficient in that it failed to address depriving
i
animals of adequate shelter. The ordinance defines adequate feed and
adequate water and further states that depriving an animal or causing it to be
deprived of adequate food and adequate water constitutes cruelty to the
animal. What constitutes adequate shelter varies considerably depending upon
the animal in question. For this reason no one definition will suffice. A
I proposed definition of adequate shelter which .would pertain to domesticated
pets is included here along with a proposal which would make depriving a
domesticated pet of shelter constitutes cruelty under the ordinance.
Addressing the adequate shelter issue beyond domesticated pets would require
essentially an animal-by-animal analysis of what is adequate shelter and for
this reason has not been attempted. In the same vein, questions arose
regarding the need for a ."sanitized" receptacle dish or container from which
j to feed animals. A proposed definition of sanitized is included below which
I definition comes directly from Section 19A-23(16) of the North Carolina
General Statutes. That statute is included in the Animal welfare Act of
North Carolina.
Add the following definitions:
Adequate, Shelter: That shelter. which will keep an animal dry, out
of the direct path of prevailing winds and out of the direct sun.
Sanitize: To make physically clean and to remove and destroy to a
practical minimum, agents injurious to health.
s
i
I
A
I
I
yy
I v:Y:
.-.--.0"/
!v
j
f
Section IX A of the ordinance would be rewritten as follows to
include depriving an animal of adequate shelter.
A. It shall be unlawful for any person to subject or cause to
be subjected any animal to cruel treatment or to deprive or cause
I to be deprived an animal of adequate food and water. Depriving
an animal or causing it to be deprived of ddequate food and
f Adequate water constitutes cruelty as defined in this ordinance.
With respect to domesticated pets, it shall be unlawful to deprive
or cause to be deprived any such animal of adequate shelter.
Depriving a domesticated pet or causing it to be deprived of
adequate shelter constitutes cruelty as defined in this ordinance.
All animal cruelty investigators appointed by the Board of County
Commissioners as authorized by G.S. Section 19A-45 shall proceed
in any case involving cruelty to animals as proscribed in Article 4
Ii of Chapter 19A of the North Carolina General Statutes.
{ 2. The civil penalty provision, Section XVII C 4 mistakenly stated
III the civil penalties to be $15.00. That provision should be changed to state
that the civil penalty is $25.00.
3. The concern was expressed that an animal would be considered
a vicious animal under the circumstances described in the ordinance even if
the occurrence took place entirely on the property of the animal's owner.
This can be corrected or changed by the following changes to the oridinance:
The public nuisance definition at Section VI 15 at sub-paragraph
(c) should be changed to read: The animal is vicious and off the
property of the owner or keeper.
Section X should be changed to read as follows:
i
i
1
i
I
j
.. = :'
02Z
i
It shall be unlawful for any person to keep any vicious, fierce
or dangerous animal within the County unless it is confined within
i
a secure building or enclosure, on the property of the owner or
keeper or-securely muzzled or under restraint by means of a leash,
chain or rope and firmly under control of a competent person at
all times.
4. .Concern was expressed regarding the possible conflicts between
the ordinance provisions and laws regulating hunting dogs. To correct this,
the first paragraph of Section XI can be changed by adding the following
sentence:
Nothing in this section is intended to be in conflict with the laws
of the State of North Carolina regulating, restricting, authorizing
or otherwise affecting dogs used in hunting. This section should be
read and enforced consistent with any such law.
5. Concern was expressed about the risk of harm to any one
rendering medical or other assistance to an animal struck by a motor vehicle.
This can be addressed by rewriting Section VIII as follows:
It shall be unlawful for any person who causes injury to an
animal by running over or hitting the animal with any motor
Vehicle to fail to notify immediately (1) the owner(s) of said animal
(if known or ascertainable with reasonable efforts made to locate
the owner) or (2) an Animal Control Officer, and (3) one of the
following: (a) the Sheriffs Department or (b) the local humane
I society.
6. Concern was expressed about the appropriateness of some of
i the provisions of the ordinance in the rural parts of the county. This can be
i
N4I
564
023
f
addressed in any number of ways. If the concern is with the requirement
contained in Section XI and the public nuisance definition that dogs be
maintained at all times under the control, physically or otherwise, by their
owners, it can be addressed by removing this condition county-wide and by
creating a process for clearly defined "districts" within the county to petition
for the full Hpplication of Section XI. Under this p:opnal the first pP.rc:;;rtph
iof Section Xl would be re-written as follows.
Section XI. From sunset until sunrise, it shall be unlawful for
any owner or keeper of a dog to permit it to run at large or be
off the premises of its owner or keeper and not under the restraint
of a competent person. Upon an Animal Control Officer's
observation of a dog running at large or off the premises of its
owner or keeper and not under the control of a competent person,
said officer shall impound said dog. [followed by the newly
recommended provision related to hunting dogs].
The public nuisance definition would be amended by eliminating subsection (a)
which defines as a nuisance an animal repeatedly found at large off the
premises of its owner or keeper. Finally a new section would be added which
permits the creation of a district or districts (defined for example as
{ contiguous property owned by a certain number of people consisting of a
certain area) to petition the Board for provisions the some as those now
contained in Section XI and the public nuisance definition.
7. An issue not raised at the public hearing but subsequently
raised by the Health Director which has merit is the addition of a remedy to
deal with problems which might otherwise result in impoundment. Under
j
certain circumstances the Health Director could be authorized to issue a
confinement order to the animal owner which would require the owner to
confine an animal violating provisions of the ordinance. Failure to do so
would be a further violation of the ordinance subjecting the owner to criminal
1
or civil penalties.
In a similar vein, Section XII D of the ordinance should be
amended to read as follows in order to clorifv that impounded animals may be
reclaimed by owners according to policies of the Animal Control Shelter-
Section XII D. If after forty-eight (48) hours of the date of
receipt by the owner or keeper of the notice the nuisance is not
abated, the animal creating the nuisance shall be impounded. Any
stray may be impounded .immediately upon the Health Director's
determination that it is creating a nuisance as defined in this
ordinance. After seven (7) calendar days of impoundment, the
Shelter may allow the animal to be adopted or humanly destroyed
according to its procedures. An animal impounded may be
reclaimed by its owner or keeper according to the procedures of
the Animal Control Shelter.
i
I
I
i
1 •
02a
I
NDTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
of
ORANGE COUNTY ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE
PUBLIC COMMENT WILL BE RECEIVED
ac
• THE RECULAR MEETINGS
of
I
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
I 7P
on
iSeptember 6, 7:30 PM, Court House, Hillsborough
and
I Saptemoac 20, 7:30 ?M, Old Post Office, vhapel Hill
I i •
i
The Ordinance amendments would
A. Prohibit owners from allowing animals to create a nuisance by:
1. Being diseased and dangerous to public health;
2- Damaging property (such as, livestock, garbage containers, gardens.
Flowers, shubbery, trees);
i 3. Barking, whining, or howling repeatedly;
I[ 4. Chasing, snapping or barking at pedestrians, bicycles, or vehicles
i while unrestrained and off the owner's property;
5. Roaming while in.heat;
6. Being a vicious animal that is unrestrained at any time or place.
B. Require that dogs net be.allowed off the owner's property unless r strained
by competent person. .
C. Define and probibi.t the abuse of animals by-
1. Deprivation of adequate food and water,
2. Cruel treatment,
3. Dog fighting or baiting,
4. Abandonment. s
1 D. Require persons who injure animals with motor vehicles to render assistance
6 and notify authorities.
i
i E.. Prohibit the keeping of strays.
P. Establish a citizen complaint process about ordinance violation.
G. Establish civil penalities for ordinance violation_
1. Animal Impoundment - Certain violations of this ordinance will result in
animal impoundment at the Orange County Animal Shelter at the, owner's
i expense.
2. Civil - violation would be subject,to a $25 civil penalty co be paid
- within 72 hours after issuance of the citation. An additional $25
penalty would be charged for failure to pay.
• r +*t r w a r r w r r r w w r w e a t # * * w r w r r r r r ♦ ♦ * * w r w x a tr
Copies of the proposed amendments are available for inspection at the;
Orange County Health Department Offices - Hillsborough and Carrboro
Orange County Animal Shelter - Airparr Road, Chapel Hill
Chapel Hill Public Library
Orange County Public Library - Hillsborough
Orange County Courthouse
Board of Commissioners Office
f
I
I
j
ORANGE.COUNTY , --_ .. -• v�'��i
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT ITEM No.D R
MEETING DATE; 90.
SUBJECT: Orange-Chatham Public Defender Office
DEPARTMENT: County Manager PUBLIC HEARING: YES y _NO
IINFORMATION CONTACT: County Manager's-`X501
ATTACHMENT(S): f'
PHONE NUMBERS: HILLSBOROUGH - 732-8181
HILLSBOROUGH - 732-9361
CHAPEL HILL - 967-9251
MEBANE - 227-2031
DURHAM - 688-7331
i -
PURPOSE: To consider establishment of the Office as will exist for Orange oun y.
i
i
i
i
iNEED: With the function of public defense being approved by the State, effective
July 7, 1983, it became the .responsibility of the two counties to pay the
cost of space and furniture. Chatham will provide a temporary, office in
a county building in Pittsboro until permanent space can be arranged in the
Courthouse which is under renovation. Options for a counterpart office in
i
Orange County include:
1. Residence Converted to Office on Rosemary Street, Chanel Will
1,200 square feet
Rental is $9.50 per foot per year $11,400 for re
($8,550 for remaining
i 9 months) and.$11,469
for each additional year
of lease
i
i
2. Old Police Building on Rosema Street, Chanel Hill
i 1,200 square feet $4,800
Rental is $4.00. per foot per year
Renovation cost to prepare for rental $4,600
(8,200 for remainder of year
and $4,800 for each additional
year)
3. Residence converted to Office on E. King Street, Hillsborough
1,000 square feet $3,000
Rental is $3,00 per foot per year
($2,240 for remainder of year
and $3,000 for each year
thereafter)
IMPACT: $10,000 was allocated in the budget for the Orange County Office and furniture.
Besides rent other costs to be covered by the $10,000 include:
. $1,750 Orange County's portion of $2,625 rent for the Defender in
University Square from July 1, 1983 thru September 39, 1983.
2,965 Fnr7:ture Purchase
Rental from October 1, 1983 thru June 30, 1984.
Any renovation cost.
RECOr"';.-jArIor!(S):
Approve the Hillsborough location in order to stay within budget unless other
funds are approved which would make possible option 1 or 2.
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda
i
Item No. 'D-5
i
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
i
MEETING DATE September 20 1983
Subject: Landfill Reclamation Contract Award
i
Department: Commmnity Develgpment Public Hearing: ___yes _X_no
!Attachment(s): Information Contact: Alberf Kittrell
1
Bid Tabulations & Explanation Phone Number: 732-8181 Ext. 425
Purpose: To consider awarding landfill reclamation contract
(clearing, grading, creek channelization and seeding)
for Northern Fairview Neighborhood Park.
Need: On September 8, 1983 a -bid opening was conducted by
The John McAdams Company, consulting engineers and
Community Development: Department. The McAdams
Company has tabulated all bids.
Propst Construction Company 335,525.00
Concord, N.C.
Mellott Construction Company 115,405.00
Carrboro, N.C.
Bob Glover Grading Company 163,940.00
High Point, N.C.
The McAdams Company has recomm"nded that one item,
Public Works Road repairs, be excluded from contract.
Impact: Award of contract will facilitate the timely
implementation of the landfill reclamation pro-
ject.
i
I
Recommendation(s): Award $150,415.00 (does not include $13,525.00 for
Public Works Road repairs) to the lowest bidder,
Bob Glover Grading Company.
I
Q4q
-= THE JOHN R. McADAMS COMPANY, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
100 HAYES BUILDING,GLEN LENNOX CENTER,CHAPEL HILL
P.O.BOX 2896,CHAPEL HILL,NORTH CAROLINA 27514 (919)967-7079
I
September 14, 1983
f
Mr. Albert Kittrell
ICommunity Development Director
County of Orange
106 R. Margaret Lane
Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278
RE. Northern Fairview Community Park
j OCO 8001
Dear Albert:
As you are aware, on September S. 1983, at 2:00 P.M., we opened bids received
for the clearing, grading, and other improvements for the site of the Northern
Fairview Community Park. Bob Glover Grading Company of High Point was the
successful low bidder. The' attached official bid tabulation itemizes all the
unit and lump sum prices bid by each of the three bidders.
Based upon our discussions this morning, we recommend that Item No. 1, Public
Works Road, not be included in this contract; but be advertised and awarded
as a separate contract. We feel that the road repairs and resurfacing can be
done for some $6000 less than the amount bid by Bob Glover Grading Company
for that work.
We further recommend that a construction contract in the amount of $150,415.00
for all the work contained in Items 2 through 7, inclusive, of the Proposal,.
be awarded to Bob Glover Grading Company of High Point.
The proposed budget, based upon funds allocated for this work, is as follows.
Construction $150,415.00
Engineering Feess Design 6.5$
Inspection 2.5%
9.0% 13,537.00
Contingencies 51000.00
TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET $168,952.00
If you should have any questions regarding our recommendation, please do not
hesitate to call us.
Sincerely,
THE JOHN R. Me MA14S COMPANY, INC.
BY:
ROBERT (KIM) FISHER, P.E.
RF.cw
Enclosure
I ,
I
I
I
t
f
I
JOBS Northern rairview Area Neighborhood Park BID DATE: September 8, 1983 PAGE I OF 2
.n
OWNER: Orange County
TIME: 2:00 PM
CONTRACTOR
p'! Pro st Construction Mellott Construction Bob Glover Grading
BB OR CC
APPROX. UNIT UNIT UNIT
ESCRIPTIOPI QUANTITY PRICE TOTAL PRICE TOTAL PRICE TOTAL
Public works Road:
a. Repair Existing Pave Road 300 SY 12.00 3,600.00 1D.00 3,000.00 17.25 5,175.00
b. Resurvace Existing Paved Road 1250 SY 2.50 3.125.00 2.50 3,125.00 6.68 8,350.00
Park Improvements - Area 1:
a. Clearing-, LS 35,000.00 23,000.00 27,830.00
b. Trash Disposal 800 CY 30:00 24,400.00 7.00 5,600.00 4.00 3.200.00
c. Grading
LS 55,000.00 15,000.00 6,104.00
d. Seeding and Mulching 11.5 AC
1,100.00 12,650.00 1,200.00 13,800:00 1,100.00 12,650.00
e. Fifty Feet Wide Planted Buffer LS
3,1100.00 3,000.00 1,800.00
Park Improvements - Area 2:
a: Clearing i . .LS 30,000.00 20,000.00 15,480.00
b. Trash Disposal 1000 CY
30.OC 30,000.00 7.00 7,400,00 4.00 4,000.00
c. Grading - - -- LS - � — --.� -
50,400.00 13,060.00 5,675.00
d. Seeding and Mulching 9.6 AC 1,100.0 10.560.00 1,200.00 11,520.00 1,100.00 10,560.0!'
Park Improvements - Area 3
a. Clearing LS 4,000.00 4,000.00 3,340.00
b. Grading LS 10,000.00 5,000.00 975.00
• c. Seeding and Mulching 1.3.AC' 1,100.0 1,430.0C 1,200.00 1,560.0 1,100.00 1,430.00
4Z24 dOa: Northern Fairview Area Neighborhood Park BID DATE: September 8, 1983 PAGE 2 OF 2
O
�. OWNER, Orange County TIME: . 2:00 PM
� m
�
CONTRACTOR
Pro st Construction Mellott Construction Bob Glover Grading
BB OR CC
APPROX. UNIT a UNIT UNIT
DESCRIPTION QUANTITY PRICE TOTAL PRICE TOTAL PRICE TOTAL
i. Park Improvements - Area 4:
a. Clearing -LS 5,000.00 4,000.00 2,156.00
b. Seeding and Mulching 0.6 AC ,100.00 660,00 2,000.00 . 1,200.00 1,100.00 660.00
i. Creek Channelization 1600 IF 25.00 40,000.00 15.00 24,000.00 15.07 24,112.00
1. Erosion and Sedimentation Control:
a. Silt Fences 4200 IF 2.50 10,500.00 3.00 12,600.00 3.34 14,038.00
'b. Sedimentation Pit LS 3,000,00 2,000.00 835.00
c. Temporary Sediment Basin LS 4,000.00 3,000.00 9,580.00
Total Amount Bid for Pay Items 1,2,3,4,5,
6, & 7 :,,. 335,525.00 175,405.00 163,940.00
Bids received sealed and opened publicly.
Tahitl,riol is hr Bbv._ e ilf'e- 4�e-tmie
accurate. ---
P
ROBERT K. FISHER, P E. 9/9/63 ;� SO
1 •r r
=o: 23t
rdr+s• :r::;;�1�
i -
1 _ -
RESULTS OF BID OPENING
OWNER: James Wi - APPLICATION NUMBER 87
ADDRESS: Daye Street COST ESTIMATE:. 5.556.00
PERCENTAGE OF BID OVER UNDER, R_Q7
i
CHECK ONE: JOB BID JOB NEGOTIATED L_
i
CoPiPANX w BID AMOUNT
1. Frank Griffin & Associates
5,525.00
1 .
3. MGDuffie Constr 6 795.00
4, Samuel En lish 5,080.00
S.
Bids opened by: Robert Wilson
Time of Bid Opening: 3:00 p.m.
Date of Bid Opening September 1. 19AI
r Aitnessed by: Roxanne Warren
Lowest Acceptable Bid: 51080.00
Negotiated Amount: N A
Contractor: Samuel English
NA ,NE
Route 1, Box 16, Eflands N.C. 27243
ADDRESS
563-1292
PHONE NUMBER
1
CO.`ir�NTS:
DATE- 3 3
Submitted by:`
Bid „;-rroved by:
Proceed Order: Issued � Not Issued 0
i CO%MNTS:
I _
f
Z) ,
i 051
i
RESULTS OF BID OPENING
OWNER: Da
APPLICATION NUMBER 140
ADDRESS• Homemont Avenu COST ESTIMATE: $2,655.00
PERCENTAGE OF BID OVER 3.63 UNDER
f
CHECK ONE: JOB BID JOB NEGOTIATED L
i
COMPANY
BID AMOUNT
1.
Frank Griffin & Associates 3,350.00
2.
Gates Construction 51500.00
3. McDuffie Constrtirtjon-- 1-799; nn
4. Samuel English 2,755.00 —_—
5.
Bids opened by: Robert Wilson
Time of Bid Opening: 3:00 p.m.
Date of Bid Opening September 1, 1983
Slitnessed by: Roxanne Warren
Lowest Acceptable Bid:
Negotiated Amount: N/A
Contractor: Samuel English
NAME
Route 1, Box 16, Efland N.C. 27243
ADDRESS
563-1292
'HONE NUMBER
Co"01ENTS:
I Submitted by: �i ✓-v / GL� L� DATE•
Bid Approved by:
Proceed Order: Issued Not Issued
i
CQ%L%MNTS:
r
I
os�
RESULTS OF BID OPENING
I
OUNER. Johnny Johnson APPLTCATION NUMBER 150
ADDRESS: Harper Street COST ESTIMATE: $6,982.00
PERCENTAGE OF BID OVER UNDER
I
CHECK ONE: JOB BID JOB NEGOTIATED
AMOUNT
COMPANY a BID.
1. Frank Griffin & Associates _8,425,00— _
Z. Gates Construction _ 7,_895-nn
3. MCDuffie Construction 7 990 00
4. Samuel English 8,820.00
5.
Bids opened by: Robert Wilson
Time of Bid Opening: 3:00 p.m.
Date of Bid Openin September 1, 19$3
Witnessed by: Roxanne Warren
lowest Acceptable Bid:
Negotiated Amount: NIA
Contractor: Gates Construction Com an
NANX
Route 1, Box 8, Snow CWp, N,C: 27349
ADDRESS
376-6597
PHONE NUMBER
CO�QiENT5:
/
Submitted by: !–r DATE
�V :��
Bid Approved by:
Proca- '--Drder: Issued Not Issued
C(DL`ENTS:
i
I
i
I
7 !t-
a, �-
5
i
i
i
QMNGE Cast
i
PROPOSE
1983 - 84 BUDGET AMQ&4W
i
The 1983 - 84 Budget Ordinance of Orange County as adopted on June 27, 1983 .
and subsequently amended, is•hereby amended as follows:
{{ GENERAL FUND:
I
1) Appropriation:
Health - Family Planning 12,736.
Health - Maternal and Child 19,046.
Source:
Health - Family Planning Grant 12,736.
Health - Maternal and Child Grant 19,046.
To 'budget for supplemental grants available to -the Orange County
Health Department.
2) Appropriation:
County Commissioners 105.
Register of Deeds 1,308.
Personnel 13,
Purchasing 380.
Tax Supervisor -927,
Tax Collector 30.
Data Processing 3,575.
Planning 207.
Central Services 283,
Health 1,894.
Recreation �- 879.
Aging 1,900.
Sheriff 13,329.
Emergency Services 2,377.
Public works 5,951.
Street Surfacing 9,598.
Source:
Fund Balance - Unappropriated 42,756.
To appropriate fiords for encumberance carry forwards.
i
I
i
Avpro :,d this day of 1983.
I