6/15/1983 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

JUN 15 1983 53' Fp��79 Department, and if the County takes over, she felt several more will be needed. Ass. King wished to know how these positions will be funded and filled. Administrator Wright felt that the responsibility for administering this should be with the County rather than the Sheriff and noted that the manpower problem is one that will have to be addressed at budget time. He urged the Board to adopt the ordinance -but not base it on financing. Commissioner Scurlock agreed that the manpower problem will have to be dealt with at the time of budget approval when the people indicate the level of service they are willing to support. Ms. King believed the Commission is heading in the right direction with this ordinance and favored licensing. She believed that enforcement is the biggest problem and also felt the problem of how many animals a person may have should be addressed; she noted that she has a neighbor who has 20 cats or more running at large. Mr. Ed Schmidt also spoke in favor of the proposed ordinance and only hoped it will be enforced to the fullest extent. Mr. Schmidt complained about people walking their dogs and leaving their droppings on his lawn. He felt the license fees were not high enough to provide adequate - funding in order to have sufficient enforcement officers. Attorney Paull -explained that under this ordinance there is ownership responsibility to prevent your animals from becoming a nuisance; this includes howling, whining, etc., and all this can be addressed by the Code Enforcement Board. Discussion ensued regarding "vicious" and "exotic" animals, such as ocelots, tigers, etc., and Attorney Paull felt the definition of "vicious" in this ordinance was intended to address vicious domestic animals. Wild animals come under the jurisdiction of the Fish & Game Commission. 71 � � r