Denton, Maryland

The regularly scheduled meeting of the County Commissioners of Caroline County, Maryland, convened at 7:30 PM in the Hearing Room, Courthouse, Denton.

John W. Cole, President

Franklin W. Prettyman, Vice President

John S. LeGates, Member

Charles C. Cawley, County Administrator

On motion by Mr. LeGates, the minutes of January 19, 1999 were approved. Vouchers #44591 – #44678 were approved for payment. Bi-weekly direct payroll was approved for release.

The Commissioners signed State Assessment Change Reports #1246, #1248, #1249.

On individual motions indicated, the following purchase orders were unanimously approved and signed:

On motion by Mr. LeGates, the Commissioners unanimously approved and signed Provident Leasing Corporation Incumbency Certificate for the equipment lease/purchase agreement.

On motion by Mr. LeGates, the Commissioners unanimously approved and signed the grace period amendment for rental payments from 10 days to 15 days as outlined in the equipment lease/purchase agreement with Provident Leasing Corporation.

Tammy Holden, agricultural planner, submitted to the Commissioners the 1999 Rural Legacy applications for the Maryland Eastern Shore Agricultural Security Corridor – Tuckahoe River Plan Area and the Marshyhope River Plan Area. Ms. Holden said that the State has designated significant funds for rural legacy and that last year was the first year for allocations. Sufficient area around the towns of Denton, Federalsburg and Hillsboro were excluded from the plan areas to allow adequate future growth of these municipalities. According to the changes made to the Rural Legacy Program Guidelines, Procedures and Policies for 1999 applications, the County is required to state the recommended priority when more than one application is being submitted. Although both plan areas are of major importance to Caroline County’s preservation efforts, the application recommends the Tuckahoe River Plan Area be priority one and the Marshyhope River Plan Area be priority two due to soil quality, development pressure and farm size in the Tuckahoe area compared to the Marshyhope area. On motion by Mr. LeGates, the Commissioners unanimously approved and signed the applications as submitted.

At 7:50 PM, the Commissioners convened an advertised public hearing regarding Legislative Bill #98-2, Animal Welfare and Control. Leigh Sands, executive assistant, read aloud a summary of the advertisement. She stated that there is already one provision to be included on the amendment consideration list, which involves hitting of animals and notifying the appropriate officials. The third reading the of the bill is tentatively scheduled for February 9^th ,but may need to be set back. Ms. Sands said the third reading is not a continuation of the public hearing but those interested are welcomed to stay in touch with the Commissioners’ office regarding scheduling.

ANNE OGLETREE: I have eleven (11) horses, two (2) dogs and one (1) cat. This bill needs work. It catches situations that are not meant to be caught. The language needs an overhaul. Many concepts need to be looked at. A police officer should be able to shoot a horse that has been hit by a car and is down, if necessary. Many of the sections as they apply to large animals need to be rethought. Section 6 is too broad. I just violated it because I gave my grandson a turtle without his mother’s permission. Section 9 - Is this a rebuttable presumption? Am I going to be able to defend someone by saying that yes, the horse is loose, but it’s because a tree fell on the fence and knocked it down? As I have noted in the past, County policies seem to conflict with each other. We just heard about preservation of our rural heritage, but this bill would prevent fox chasing or foxhunting, a tradition in this county. There may need to be restrictions, but this needs to be rethought. No one argues with the concept of Section 11, but under B(2), a horse is a dangerous animal if he steps on your toes. It is not practical to require that riders pick up their horse’s manure when they are riding down a public road or in a park. These are just some of the problems with this bill. I would be willing to volunteer my services to revamp it.

TOM IRELAND: I concur with Anne Ogletree. This program should be run by the County. How will the money collected get back to the County if it is contracted out? I have a major concern about the duties of the animal control officers. We need qualifications and skills assigned to them. There should be a committee appointed to look at this bill. [TRANSCRIPTION BEGINS]... by the County Commissioners and at least have one sportsman on here that would be an owner of some type hunting dog. It wouldn’t necessarily have to be a fox hound. It could be a beagle. But there’s not much consideration given to a hunting dog and you can’t classify a hunting dog as a house pet and several of the things in here are meant for house pets and particularly the "at large"... That really needs to be reconsidered and I think you have to have someone that has a knowledge of hunting dogs so that you better understand some of these things. I think the animal at large, like I said, needs to be, it needs to be understood. I know what the intent is, it’s to keep dogs from running into people’s yards, but if a beagle is returning to where he was cast, he’s probably going to take the shortest route back to the truck. That may be through somebody’s yard. He has no malicious intent. He’s trained to come back where you turned him loose and that’s where he’s going to go, the same way with a hound or a coon dog or a bird dog or any type dog. But the way this is worded now, it would be just like the neighbor’s Shepherd from down the road that you’ve been aggravated with for many years and the law would probably get that done for you but in the same instance it’s going to cause problems for a lot of others. One of the things that I think really needs to be talked about is the meaning of "nuisance". I think that’s one of the problems that we have with fox chasing in the County. What some people consider to be a nuisance, other people tend to see it as a pleasure. It’s one of the things that we really need to talk about because a nuisance can be something that’s happening near your property but may not be happening on your property. When you call in and you complain, you may be complaining because you hear something going on and it’s really not on your property. That’s one of the problems that we run in with fox chasing and we try to explain to people what that is and how they can handle that, but that... The nuisance thing needs to be discussed some more. Having to buy a dog license is a good idea. Having to have rabies shots is a good idea. I think all the sports owners, sport dog owners in the county are already doing that because we know that our dogs are exposed to the animals in the wild. We also know that if our animals do get around somebody’s house we want that protection so we have no problem with that. I think we’ve had a dog license here in Caroline County for a long time. It’s not been enforced, but I think if you look back probably the sport dog owners in the county have historically supported that and have bought licenses. I think some people would be better satisfied if they, if they understood the law that we’re going to do away with before we brought this one in. I think a lot of people really don’t know what the existing law says. I think another thing that we’ve been working on for a couple of years now, is having fox hunting regulated by the Department of Natural Resources just like other hunting is done. I guess one of my questions was if that indeed happens, what are we going to do to, to have this taken out of our County law if it is passed as such? I think one of the things that I would like to address too, we know that there are citizens in the county that have suffered abuse by fox chasers. What I would ask them to do is, is work with us and work with the Sheriff’s Department a little bit better because some of those people are abusing the citizens, but we don’t need to change the law and we don’t need to put more restrictions on. What we need to do is to work with the Sheriff’s Department and search out those individuals and try to get them to be better citizens. A hunt doesn’t start in the County road. Sometimes it can stop in the County road. But most of the time you have to walk your hounds and you have to start a fox chase on somebody’s property. You always need to have permission on those properties. If you don’t have permission to start a chase on that property and you call the Sheriff’s Department then they can do something about it. The fact that they tell you there’s nothing that they can do about it is not true. When you trespass, you trespass. I think we need to just address the two or three problems that we’ve had. We haven’t had any problems this year that I know of. I try to keep up pretty close tabs on what’s going on. But I think we need to deal with the issue at hand and not try to create something to tighten the web on a situation that’s going to affect a lot of people and probably the few people that we need to address that with won’t change anyway. So we need to address the few people and the rest of us need to keep on doing what we’re doing and that’s working with the citizens of the County. Thank you.

JOHN COLE: Thank you Tom. Next, Jack Woods.

JACK WOODS: This will be a lot shorter. My reason for coming here tonight was because I got second hand information that it was going to be an agent of the government or the County that would be authorized to come on people’s private property without a warrant. Now I haven’t found that in here.

NUMEROUS VOICES: It’s there.

JACK WOODS: It’s there? It’s there. That’s a violation of everybody’s Fourth Amendment rights and that’s my biggest concern tonight. There’s lots of other things in here that bother me. I’ve got a dog that I spent over eight hundred dollars ($800) on, came out of the Caroline County pound, best dog I ever had. This thing is going to cost me one fine after another. I’m not going to continue to be dog owner in this county. Hell, I might not even live here. That’s about all I’ve got to say. It’s my Fourth Amendment rights I’m worried about most.

JOHN COLE: Thank you. Al Groniger?

AL GRONIGER: My name is Al Groniger and I am here from Caroline. I live in the area from Denton and I have had quite bit trouble with the Humane Society. I think the Commissioners know and especially Chuck Emerson knows it. I heard a lady talking about fencing. I saw horse fencing with baling twine. (Inaudible) Recently I called up for a couple cats that were taking in my dog pen, eat the dog food, nobody is around. So I do not know, I think that it is not, this one is not too early here for especially for Caroline County. I’ve got here the pictures and (inaudible) it’s made in Indiana. I (inaudible). [submitted photograph to Commissioners] One morning I wake up and it’s sixteen thousand in the field. One morning I wake up and I see two dogs running the ducks. Six hundred fifty of them, six and a half pounds each about, on the average. I had the job to pick them up in the field and bury them. I did not get help from the dog owners. We went with the Humane Society around. I found the dogs with the feathers on their mouths and he couldn’t do nothing. I hope that will change here. That is why I’m here tonight. For the people who mistreat the animals and they don’t take care of if, I think that is necessary that we do more here and that’s it. Thank you.

JOHN COLE: Thank you sir. Connie Cook.

CONNIE COOK: I think I’m outnumbered.

JOHN COLE: You’re among friends.

CONNIE COOK: Good. My name’s Connie Cook. I’m from Ridgely and I read the proposed Animal Welfare and Control Bill and I thought that it was important for me to come here tonight in support of this bill. I understand what Ms. Ogletree said. Maybe some wording needs to be changed. Maybe there’s some fine points that need to be worked out, but my feeling is that in a perfect world we wouldn’t need to have to write laws to have people treat animals properly and humanely. But the fact is that we do desperately need a law or a bill in Caroline County because of the abuse that does occur. And people are talking about hunting and things like that... My concern is about the animals that people are abusing every day. And it just seems to me that everyone who believes in the humane treatment of animals and everyone who cares about ending suffering and preventing suffering of animals should want to see this bill, maybe some wording changed, but a good bill to prevent abuse of animals, it should be in effect. And that was why I came tonight to ask that this bill or some form of this bill get passed as soon as possible because the animals can’t speak and we have to do that for them. Thank you.

MR. COLE: Thank you very much. The next speaker, Dr. Mitchell Arion.

DR. ARION: Good evening. I’m Dr. Mitch Arion of Bridgetown. I own the Caroline Veterinary Clinic. I also serve on the Board of the Humane Society. I would like to thank the Commissioners for giving all of us the opportunity to speak about the Animal Welfare and Control Bill. First of all I would like to say that I think it is unfortunate that we even need to pass a bill for the humane treatment of animals but these are the times in which we live. Based on the cases and the emergencies that I see in my hospital I think it is very important that we pass this bill. In fact the only problem I see with this bill is that my business will be hurt if everyone abides by the laws in this bill and that would be fine with me. There’s not a week that goes by where I don’t see some tragedy unfold in my hospital because of the mistreatment of animals, whether it’s by the hands of truly malicious people or just careless pet owners. Keeping animals on your own property I think is a very important part of this bill. It not only reflects respect for the property of others but also protects pets from any dangers. I routinely see animals that are hit by cars, caught in traps or are shot when they wander from their owner’s property. Just this weekend I had to put a beautiful German Shepherd to sleep because he wandered off his owner’s property and his neighbor shot it through the spine and paralyzed the dog. And with this law in place maybe the neighbor would have thought twice about shooting a dog that wasn’t threatening him. Maybe the owner would have thought well maybe he should keep better track of his dog. There are many people who still believe that the open acreage in our county provides a safe haven for pets, but this is not the case. I hear the same line over and over again when people bring their injured animals to me. They say, "Doc, this is the first time he’s ever run off." But that, they may even believe that, what they really should say is, "Well Doc, this is the first time he hasn’t come back." I also see people who bring their dogs to me in the back of their pickup trucks running loose and I tell them, "You know, you’ve got to tie that dog in the truck. You have to tie him on both sides of the truck or put him in a kennel." And then I get the next great line, "Well Doc, he never jumps out of the truck." At least five times a year I see dogs that jump out of the backs of pickup trucks. Sometimes they’re barely hurt but most of the time they break their legs or pelvises and sometimes they never even make it to my hospital alive. Now if common sense is lost on some people in the community then we have to pass a law to protect the innocent animals. Then there are some people who say well licensing dogs is just another intrusion of government into our lives. But there are two important reasons for licensing dogs which only cost $3 to $5 per dog with a maximum of $15 per household. First we have a significant problem with rabies in our county and if every dog is licensed that means every dog has to have a rabies shot and this not only protects the dogs but it also protects our families as well. Secondly the money raised by licenses will go to Animal Control and the Humane Society and this will help them improve their services, which are in great demand. And who better to pay for these services than the people who own pets. Many studies have shown that pets have a healthy effect on owners and we must try to educate the citizens that taking proper care of their animals benefits them as much as the animals. Caroline County has lagged behind neighboring counties in the passage and enforcement of animal welfare laws. This bill provides a safety net for our furred partners and hopefully will lead to better care for pets in the future. Maybe one day we’ll all wonder why it was necessary to pass laws to protect animals but until that day we need to pass this animal welfare and control bill. Thank you.

MR. COLE: Thank you. Now, my eyes are not so good. It looks like the next name is Irene Mullins?

IRENE MULLINS: Well, Mr. Cole, I think this is fabulous. I think it should be managed by the County with our people, but my biggest concern... I live in Hillsboro and I live in a residential housing development and in April I had another gentlemen that lives in our development in my backyard with his shotgun and his rabbit dogs, rabbit dog hunting in my backyard. Now, my backyard backs up to 404. If he shot this gun, I have little children that live next door to me. The highway’s right there. We have had a passenger shot before on that road and that’s a very dangerous area of highway for just normal traffic accidents without the animals being in the road. I tried to call Animal Control. They were open Mondays through Friday. This was on a weekend. I spoke to the man. He informed me he was going to hunt on my property when he wanted to, whenever he wanted to. I don’t think so. Finally I called the County Commissioners and Mr. LeGates did get me some help, finally. The problem we are having now over there is there is a farm off of Alternate 404 that abuts up to our residential development. I’ve chased two horses, an old sow, a black lab and a rabbit beagle out of my yard. Now this little rabbit beagle, he sounds like he’s going to take your leg off. I work at a hospital. I get home at two o’clock in the morning. Sometimes I leave at four o’clock in the morning. I don’t know if I’m going to get from my front door down my sidewalk to my car or from my car to my front door without getting bitten. I shouldn’t have to put up with this. My grandchildren are afraid of the dogs and in the summer time when it’s hot and humid, I have asthma, I can’t go outside with them. So therefore they can’t go outside. That’s not right either. That’s not what I pay taxes for. I mean I can appreciate the hunters, yes. They want to hunt the farm country out, you know, if they have the owner’s permission, fine. I was told to put up a "no trespassing" sign. I have yet, in forty-nine years seen a dog, a horse or a pig yet that could read a "no trespassing sign". And there’s no one out there. Fences do break, I realize this, but not week after week after week. And I think we need to be able to get someone seven days a week and when we need them they need to be able to get there. We’ve had a problem with dogs before and the animal... It was a gentleman at that time, he was even afraid of the dog. At that time it was a German Shepherd. That dog’s now gone. But I have dead rabbit carcasses in my yard. That’s a health factor right there and we shouldn’t have to put up with this. I mean, yeah, in the country fine, you hunt and you do whatever, but in a residential area, where you’ve got thirteen, fourteen houses, we shouldn’t have men in our yards with guns hunting. I’m sorry. And I think... I agree some of the wording does need to be changed, but for them people that live in residential areas I think we need some kind of help. Thank you.

MR. COLE: Thank you. Kevin Watson.

KEVIN WATSON: Mr. Watson. I’m here on behalf of the Town of Greensboro. We had in our situation... I’m in favor of the bill, completely. I’ve had in the past two Dobermans running loose. One chased my wife up around the house. She’s got all the dates and times. I’ve pretty much took this as a common sense bill and you’re trying to protect the responsibility of the ownerships and the people in these jurisdictions that you govern. I honestly couldn’t believe that there was nothing that Animal Control or the town officers could do legally. I mean I went, for six months we couldn’t go in our backyard and for six months the dogs got loose and for six months Animal Control came out there and there was nothing they could do. That’s why I’m in favor of the bill. Thank you.

MR. COLE: Thank you. Joyce Watson.

JOYCE WATSON: Joyce Watson. As my husband said, we live in the Town of Greensboro. Caroline County desperately needs this, especially for dangerous dogs. As my husband said, they were actually pit bulls. They had three of them. Time after time they got out of the pen. Animal Control was never there. It seem it happened on Mondays. They are closed on Mondays. They are closed at four-thirty. We’ve had, luckily Police Kibler, Mr. Kibler, and they did as much as they could, but we kept being told time after time their hands are tied. It finally took a criminal summons on the owner when one of the dogs actually attacked me. The baseball bat did no good when it comes to a pit bull. My neighbor shot at it, so I know that this also states no shooting at animals. When you have a pit bull coming at you, you do whatever it takes. As my husband said, our children could not use the backyard. I have a day care. I couldn’t even let the children outside. When it came to time for Court of course they did get rid of the animals, poured a cement slab, which was one of the things that desperately needs to be needed as well. So we’re definitely in favor of this and I would love to see Animal Control’s hours twenty-four (24) hours a day or somebody on call that can help us in this situation. But we desperately need something to protect us and our children. Thank you.

JOHN COLE: Thank you. Again, the eyes fail me. It looks like Richard Chance? Is that somewhere close?

CINDY BERKEY: He’s sitting out in the other room.

UNKNOWN: He’s coming.

JOHN COLE: Oh good.

RICHARD CHANCE: Good evening.

JOHN COLE: Good evening.

RICHARD CHANCE: I’m not like your other people. I’m a resident of Talbot County. I’m also the Director of Delmarva Driving Club, based in Seaford, Delaware. I’m a regular driver of a horse and carriage in Caroline County and I would like to know if your ordinance, or this was my question earlier, I responded to you by letter, whether it affected me in any way or our club in any way as thoughts of safety and the droppings that horses produce on the roads. Knowing that our State has an ordinance 21-104, that tells me that "every person riding or driving an animal or a horse drawn vehicle has all the rights granted to and subject to the duties required of a driver of a motor vehicle, except those provisions by their very nature which do not apply," and I would like to state after reading your thing that the foul air odor, we certainly could be penalized for that and we don’t wish to have our animals impounded should they be struck by a vehicle or a truck or something of that nature while we are driving them on your Caroline County roads, which it says we cannot take immediate care, we cannot destroy or really do any first aid... I think what I would like to have you know, I’ve been, was a resident of this County for thirty-five (35) years. I consider it my home as well as living in Talbot County and I think I want you to know that you’re being looked at with outside of Caroline County for this and I’m very concerned over the fact that what I have read thus far limits our horses coming to your homecomings, to your parades and such as that and that’s about all I have to say. Thank you.

JOHN COLE: Thank you. There are a considerable number of blank spaces before we get down to two people that I think wanted to have the last word this evening, but is there anyone else who would like to have the opportunity to speak? Oh yes...

PAT GUIDA: Mr. Cole, Pat Guida. One question that came to mind during this hearing is are the police on the weekends, in the absence of having an Animal Control Officer whose duty is to enforce this ordinance, on the weekends would the police be the proper people to call or at night when the Animal Control Officer isn’t on duty. I’m talking about dogs roaming at large in the Denton neighborhood and barking all night and keeping people awake.

JOHN COLE: If I may, before... I should have, when the Watsons spoke, mentioned it and it struck me at the time that perhaps it should be mentioned, this law only affects the unincorporated areas of the County. It would have to be adopted by the municipalities in order to become law within the various towns. Obviously, if a, if this or a form of this law are passed, it would have to be adopted by your respective town councils or boards of commissioners. Okay?

PAT GUIDA: Yes, thank you.

JOHN COLE: I think that... Then your local law enforcement perhaps could enforce some of the provisions.

PAT GUIDA: Could it be broadened then to the Sheriff’s Department if you are outside of the incorporated towns? Would the Sheriff’s Department be the proper people to call to pick up nuisance animals or to see about complaints about dogs constantly barking? That’s not addressed in here and should it be, is my question.

MR. WATSON: They can’t do anything right now. It’s like calling your brother and telling him to do something. Their hands are tied.

PAT GUIDA: Why can’t they?

MR. WATSON: Don’t ask me. I don’t know.

PAT GUIDA: Okay. Let’s put it this way.

JOHN COLE: Right.

PAT GUIDA: Could the law, could this ordinance address my question?

JOHN COLE: If adopted, the town could enforce it but there are already certain provisions...

PAT GUIDA: No, I meant, I meant out in the, we’re talking about the Sheriff now and the unincorporated areas. A law enforcement officer, can he be incorporated into the enforcement of this ordinance?

JOHN COLE: At this point, probably he potentially could, but that’s...

PAT GUIDA: I think that that (inaudible).

JOHN COLE: I think that we will have to get back to you on that one.

PAT GUIDA: (inaudible) say we can’t do anything and maybe that should be addressed (inaudible). Thank you.

JOHN COLE: Right. I’m sorry. I see our attorney had her hand up.

JANICE DAVISON: If you look at Section 17(f). Emergency situations will be dealt with on a twenty-four (24) hour day, seven (7) day a week basis and it’s up to the Animal Control Director to determine what is and what isn’t an emergency. But it’s not intended to be a situation that ends at four-thirty in the afternoon.

PAT GUIDA: Okay.

UNKNOWN: And it also addresses nuisance barking (inaudible).

JOHN COLE: I don’t think we’re going to get more people to sign up. I do have two who have signed up and that will conclude our testimony.

TOM FLEMMING: (Inaudible).

JOHN COLE: Yes.

TOM FLEMMING: My name is Tom Flemming. I live on Pealiquor Road. I think the goal of the law is pretty good. It should be commended for trying this out but I agree with Mr. Ireland. We need the existing law, what it says, and also I would like to know how much income do we get now in the county from dog licenses? Can you tell that...

CHARLES CAWLEY: Very little, but I can give you an exact number if you...

TOM FLEMMING: (Inaudible).

CHARLES CAWLEY: We’re talking about less than a thousand.

TOM FLEMMING: How much?

CHARLES CAWLEY: Under a thousand dollars.

TOM FLEMMING: This combining balance sheet of the County Commissioners shows assets of fifty-six dollars ($56.00), is that all we get for licenses?

UNKNOWN: Very little. One reason is this hasn’t been enforced.

JOHN COLE: That’s the reason.

CHARLES CAWLEY: But I can give you an exact number if you want that.

TOM FLEMMING: And also I think we need to address the skills of the Animal Control personnel as Mr. Ireland pointed out, especially the standards of the Department itself. Even though you may be moving into a new facility, would it end up looking and being like the existing facility and what standards do we have for that? Also, there’s a Section 12 that addresses the educational aspect. I was wondering, has anyone given thought with (inaudible)? There’s a campaign in the United States called a "no kill" policy. There’s a two hundred million dollar fund that’s being tossed around for any shelter of animals that would adopt a policy of like a five year program where there would be no animals killed and they would receive a reward from these people for one million dollars. And I think for us to be... We should have an opportunity as a public to look at this as an ongoing matter besides just when a law is passed. Thanks.

MR. COLE: Thank you very much. I’m going to call the last two that were on here... Oh, Mr. Chapel?

ROBERT CHAPEL: My name is Robert Chapel. I live north of Ridgely. Basically I’m in support of this ordinance. It’s a pretty basic ordinance as far as it goes. There is some wording that could be tweaked and you’ve had some good comments, I think basically, pointing out some areas that need adjustment. Animal Control is certainly one of the basic police powers that government, what will (sic) government has to engage in. I would suggest that you... I’ve got some rather minor wording changes that I would give you. Under paragraph One (1), the "Statement of Purpose", the first word should be changed from "this" to "the". "The purpose of this act" sounds better than "This purpose of this act". Paragraph Two (2), I would move in the third line, you see the word "benevolent" I would move it to the right side of "animal welfare" instead of in front of "animal welfare". When you get to "Definitions", under "Dogs" on page three (3), it excludes wild or exotic canines. I’m not, I can’t understand why you would want to exclude exotic canines from the dog problem by giving them a special category which basically exempts them from this ordinance. The definition, if you look further down, exotic is defined and it includes "any animal that is not indigenous to the State of Maryland". Well indigenous means native, and therefore that would exclude a great many animals that basically weren’t here at the beginning of nature. So I think you can see that that might create problems with enforcement. Whoever’s going to enforce this ordinance some day would, I mean any lawyer would use that to discredit the ordinance I think. The definition of "domestic animal" includes mice and reptiles. I know some people keep snakes as pets. Somehow... This one was hard for me to understand why... It just doesn’t sound right. It doesn’t seem right that mice should be a species that is bred and raised to live in or about the habitation of humans when most people are trying to eradicate mice, but that’s minor. I guess that’s a minor point. On page four (4), the definition of "restraint", typically verbal means of restraint is considered restraint as well as a leash or physical restraint. In other words if a person has their dog trained to respond to commands then it can be considered a means of restraint and so I would add instead of "by physical or other means", I would say "by physical or verbal means." Some dogs are actually trained to sit and stop and all that sort of thing. Page 6, paragraph 9(b), I would suggest adding "effective verbal restraint" to the end of that paragraph. "Such that the animal must be controlled by leash or other similar restraining device, or effective verbal restraint". Now it’s important to say effective because some people would say well, my dog’s always under my control but we all know that that isn’t...

KEVIN WATSON: I wouldn’t want my kids walking around with some guy that’s got his dogs under verbal restraint. I’m sorry. It would have to be under a chain, you know.

ROBERT CHAPEL: On Page Seven (7), item number 4, it says "to bark or make other harsh or excessive noise." I would suggest adding "whine and howl" as... I mean it’s often a problem that dogs whine and howl and they don’t bark. On page 13, Section (h), on 13(h) it says the second line, "and shall development" I would suggest changing "development" to "develop".

LEIGH SANDS: Where is he?

ROBERT CHAPEL: 13(h). "The directors shall develop educational partnerships with the school system." It’s just a...

UNKNOWN: Typo.

ROBERT CHAPEL: Little typo. Now on Page Thirteen (13), paragraph 18(d), I think the intent here is that an Animal Control Officer may enter upon private property. First of all an Animal Control Officer is an officer of the law with limited police powers. Otherwise he couldn’t perform his or her function. And if the intent is that they have to enter upon private property to carry out their job, I think it should say "private property". And further down, "This access does not include homes or businesses." That’s kind of vague. I think you should say it "does not include interiors of homes and businesses" if that’s the intention. I could understand not allowing the person to go inside your home, though there are some really bad things that happen to animals confined inside houses. We’ve read about these sorts of things in the paper. They do happen. They do exist, but if you want to decline to allow them into a home, I think you should say "in the interiors", because otherwise it’s vague. And then further down in that paragraph I would add "to enter upon private property" in the last sentence. You really can’t expect them to perform their function if they can’t set foot on private property. On Page 15, paragraph 22(a), we get to the fines. A $500 fine per violation is pretty severe. I realize it says that’s the maximum penalty in this paragraph and that you will set a schedule of fines. I just wanted to comment that $500 per violation, that would include the first violations and therefore you might want to start at $100 for the first violation and scale it up from there. $500 does seem pretty severe. And that’s my comments. Thank you.

JOHN COLE: Thank you. Other comments? Sir?

SKIP DULD: I have one comment.

JOHN COLE: Please come forward.

SKIP DULD: Alls (sic) I wanted to know is as far as the pit bull regulation is like over in Anne Arundel County has, that to have a pit bull you have to have $1,000 in secured (sic) to the County of Anne Arundel. It doesn’t say anything about here in this, in this thing here about having any type of, secured to the County, of any type of money for having a vicious type dog that already exists, like pit bulls, or Rottweiler or whatever. Are you planning on putting anything into the bill as such as that?

JOHN COLE: There’s been no provision for that in the bill.

SKIP DULD: Okay.

UNKNOWN: Greensboro’s got the protection.

JOHN COLE: I know they have it under consideration.

LEIGH SANDS: Yeah, we have a (inaudible) copy of the Town of Greensboro which is a very detailed...

UNKNOWN: We need your name for the record.

SKIP DULD: Oh. Skip Duld, 522 Vaughn Avenue, Greensboro, Maryland.

JOHN COLE: Thank you.

UNKNOWN: Spell your last name.

SKIP DULD: D U L D, sir.

JOHN COLE: Okay. Are there other comments? Yes? Would you please come forward?

SHIM GRAHAM: My name is Shim Graham and I live in the Tuckahoe Neck on Fisher Road. I don’t have a problem with the bill as a whole in the sense that I think that it was created by people that were concerned with dogs and problems with dogs. And like these people in town and the gal that lives out off of 404 that feel they can’t go out of their home. Mr. Ireland makes a good point and I would like to see or at least request that a committee be drawn up and that on the committee there should be someone that is a hunts person, not necessarily fox hunting, I am horse related, but you know, field dog oriented. I’d also like to see a horseman be involved. There are phrases in here about containers, horse trailers seem to comply with that definition. That’s a concern to me. It’s not uncommon that I stop to fill up my gas tank on a sweltering hot day on the way to an activity and that animal is containerized. Is someone going to come up to me and say that this is a problem? It comes to my mind when I read about animals that are in heat. Does this mean that I can’t turn my mare out because she’s in season? I’d also like to know what the standards are going to be for things like fencing. The gal that’s on 404, whereever she is, if these horses repeatedly are in her backyard then the people that have those horses have some fencing problems that do need to be addressed. I don’t personally have those problems. I’ve got good fencing. On the other hand I could come under the hammer of this bill because of people who don’t have a minimum standard set forth in front of them and who are not made to comply. I think that the nature of this is good in that there are the needs for rules and regulations to keep certain people that are ridiculous in order. On the other hand, I don’t think that whoever created this had too much to do with a horse. And that concerns me directly because that’s what I keep on my property. I also trail ride and my horses move their bowels along the way. Am I to go out with my pooper scooper and pick it up when I’m done? I mean this is reality for me. I also have a dog, but that is not a hunting dog so I think that there are many phases to this whole bill, not all of which are being addressed properly. That’s it.

MR. COLE: Thank you.

KEVIN WATSON: Can I relate something just for a minute? Do I have permission to do that?

JOHN COLE: Sure.

UNKNOWN: Give us your name first.

KEVIN WATSON: Kevin Watson, Greensboro.

JOHN COLE: Same name.

KEVIN WATSON: I have a little pickup truck that four of us were in the little truck with a little trike on the back to go riding, okay? I’m going through town at twenty-five (25) miles an hour. A State Policeman came right outside of town, fishtailed, caught me before I was half way through town doing about seventy-five (75) miles an hour. Of course, needless to say he was worried that my daughter wasn’t in a safety restraint. Needless to say I was not too happy when he pulled me over. I didn’t think the ends justified the means. I think everybody in here has a good point. My point is to protect the citizens and their point is to have their rights and like they say I think we should have a committee for the horses, horseman and the fox chasers. And I don’t think that any responsible horse owner or fox chaser here that are here tonight has any problems with anybody calling in and complaining which they would like to know so they can route those certain individuals out that’s giving them a hard time. I believe its a common sense bill. Basically that’s where you’ve got to put it. I can’t see a policeman out on the street trying to worry about somebody, you know, your horse on the road. And if it is then we need to get rid of that policeman. Thank you.

JOHN COLE: Thank you. Ma’am?

JAN CHANCE: My name is Jan Chance. Talking about the manure on the roads and all. If we have to get off and clean the horse manure off as we are riding down the road, what about the safety there? Even riding in Talbot County when I’m riding down the road, people come by and they try to hit you. We have just as much right on the road as the cars do and I don’t think that, you know, even in Caroline County here, it’s unfair for us not to be able to, you know, be on the road and for our horses to do their thing too and us having to stop and clean it up. I mean after all the cars and trucks, they pollute the air with a gas.

JOHN COLE: Very good. Were there other comments? Let me ask that, so that your comments are on the record could you... Yes, and here’s someone that can address the professionalism too.

UNKNOWN: Well, I’ll try.

JOHN COLE: One of the things that I did want to point out is when you are out there, your comments are really not going on the record, that’s why I did ask that you come forward. This is being recorded.

JAN CHANCE: I’ll say mine again.

JOHN COLE: And also I should point out any written comments will be received and will be part of the record also. I also don’t think we mentioned that.

UNKNOWN: (Inaudible) is there a deadline for the...

LEIGH SANDS: Not really until we have our third reading, and we can’t do that before February 9th.

UNKNOWN: Great.

JOHN COLE: So any written comments will also be considered.

GLENN USILTON: Thank you. My name is Glen Usilton and I’m the Director for the Caroline County Humane Society. I’ve been with Talbot County. I was with Talbot County for nine (9) years. This is a catch up bill, basically, with all the counties, all the surrounding counties. It is a common sense bill and we’ll work with everybody here, fox hunters... And it basically is a common sense bill. We want to make sure that everyone’s rights are protected under the law. I have several things that I am going to talk about that I think need to be changed. Under "Definitions of Owner", it reads "any person or entity feeding or sheltering one or more animals for three or more days," I think that that should read "thirty days" at least. I don’t see how you can become an owner in three days. Under number 6(a) as far as, no sorry, (b) on Page 5, as far as going on private property, any case of cruelty or neglect is already a Maryland State law and any officer has the right to go upon private property without permission. That’s one of the few times that officers, animal control officers or humane officers can do that and like I say, it’s already a State law.

UNKNOWN: Strictly for that reason?

UNKNOWN: You can do that without a warrant?

GLENN USILTON: Without a warrant. It’s already a Maryland State law. Not inside your home, but if it’s on your property and they have reason to believe that there’s neglect, mistreatment of an animal then they can go inside of a fence...

CINDY BERKEY: Can a Sheriff’s Deputy do that?

GLENN USILTON: Yes.

SHIM GRAHAM: Can they go inside of a building?

GLENN USILTON: You have to be careful with buildings, but certainly...

SHIM GRAHAM: Either they can or they can’t.

GLENN USILTON: ... Its not inside your home or your... They can’t go inside your home. All right, as far as Maryland State law in buildings, I wouldn’t go in a building unless I was pretty sure that something was wrong so...

UNKNOWN: Is that in response to a complaint or just because you...

GLENN USILTON: A complaint. No, no. It’s got a complaint first.

UNKNOWN: Has to be a complaint first.

GLENN USILTON: That’s right. That’s right.

CINDY BERKEY: Can it be an anonymous complaint?

GLENN USILTON: You have to have probable cause. Pardon?

CINDY BERKEY: Can it be an anonymous complaint?

GLENN USILTON: Anonymous complaints you have to always take seriously because if you don’t and then there’s an animal that’s really suffering then you’ve not done your job. But, certainly, you know, you get to a point in this job where you know what anonymous complaints are, you know, really legitimate or they’re not.

CINDY BERKEY: How do you know that?

GLENN USILTON: Well it’s just something that you learn after doing this for so long, but you...

CINDY BERKEY: Oh, it’s like ESP.

GLENN USILTON: You really want to check every single, you want to check every single call that you get, even if it’s anonymous.

UNKNOWN: Just like the police.

GLENN USILTON: That’s right. I mean you can’t, you just can’t say that well this is a non-legitimate call. You’ve got to check it out. Let’s see and I think there was just one more thing that I haven’t talked about. Okay. On Page 13(d), once again, anonymous complaints. If they are in regard to cruelty or neglect or may be if it’s regarding a dog that’s already been deemed vicious, for the health and safety of the animal or the public you would want to go ahead and enter the premises and I have one more place here...

LEIGH SANDS: Were you making a change there? If so, where?

GLENN USILTON: I’m just saying, yeah, well that’s something that I think should be added to (d) on page 13 as far as the private property.

LEIGH SANDS: Private? Okay.

GLENN USILTON: Okay. Because everyone seems to have a, be concerned about that. And there was one more place, let’s see here.

UNKNOWN: How about repeating what you just said on (d) what you thought should be added.

GLENN USILTON: Page 13, right? I would add "in response to anonymous complaints, if those complaints regard cruelty, neglect or even a vicious dog that you know has already been deemed vicious, for the health and safety of the animal or public. And I’m going to back track here back to Page 9(1) for a dangerous dog. Above ground or underground fencing. I think as far as the underground fencing you may not want to include that as adequate restraint for a dog that’s been deemed dangerous. I’ve seen those systems fail too many times for power outages or whatever. Thank you.

JOHN COLE: Thank you. Is there other testimony? There are two who did sign up and I’m going to call now on Dr. Michael Schriver. I think I saw him a moment ago.

UNKNOWN: He’s right here.

JOHN COLE: Oh.

DR. MICHAEL SCHRIVER: Yes, I’m Dr. Michael Schriver. I operate Denton Animal Hospital and am a resident of the Town of Denton. And I would just have to, like to add my voice to encourage the Council to adopt this ordinance. I’m in favor of it. I think that listening to a lot of the comments that have been made tonight, that a lot of people are interpreting this bill, or this law a little too narrowly. I would, I have been a resident of Talbot County in the past and am familiar with their animal control facility down there and basically what Mr. Usilton was saying was that it is, Animal Control Officers are, it’s a responsive organization rather than a pro-active. They’re going to respond to complaints. They’re not going to be cruising the streets looking for people who are having their horses poop on the side of the road, or that sort of thing. Basically they’re responding to problems and this particular, this law is, just provides for a legal recourse that has not been available before for problems that were, have been well illustrated, especially by Dr. Arion. I think if you talk to any veterinarian in the county we can all tell you the same story after story of animals that are sick or injured simply through neglect or cruelty, and perhaps by having something on the books that provides for some type of recourse we can get some people to take better care of their animals. But I think, you know, a common sense approach to all this is what we should be addressing right now. I don’t... I read the bill and I don’t see anything in there that talks about, actually it excludes hunting, hounds and things like that. Any hunter who knowingly allows his dogs to run through private property without, without the permission of the owner, that they’re just acting irresponsible. And if they make a habit of that they should be, you know, they should be (inaudible) for it. But if you run a beagle or a pack of hounds, then they occasionally run through somebody’s yard just to get back to where they started, I don’t think you’re going to find too many complaints and they’re not, certainly not going to be a complaint that’s going to necessitate legal action in that case. So that’s basically all I’ve got to say. I think just as an example of what I’ve seen again, just like Dr. Arion was talking about, the dogs that are hit by a car or fall out of the pickup truck, we had a situation this weekend where I was called in on a Sunday afternoon. I actually had to bring my kids in with me because I was taking care of them, to see a dog that was hit by a car and the neighbor brought this dog in because the owners weren’t around. The owner’s apparently just left this dog outside. The neighbors half the time took care of it. It would just run back and forth and was never restrained. It finally got hit by the car, by a car. The neighbors brought it in. The dog had a broken pelvis, a shattered pelvis and some injuries that necessitated having to put the dog to sleep and it took forty-eight (48) hours and the owner would not come in to even sign the euthanasia form on that dog simply because they didn’t want to be responsible to pay any amount of money for that dog. And this was a dog that, you know, that they had accepted responsibility for when they first got it but as soon as it was injured, they couldn’t be found. They basically could not be found. The step-father, or whatever, came in and signed the euthanasia form finally. So as far as I’m concerned, people like that should be, you know, prosecuted, strung up and whatever we could do because, you know, they’re not hurting but a helpless animal that’s been put in their care. My only change or recommendation as far as amending this would be that I would like to see the bill more strongly worded that the withholding of adequate veterinary care for the prevention of illness or treatment of injury should be considered cruelty and subject to a penalty. Because often times we do see animals that come in there that are sick and they are on their last legs basically. They’ve never seen a veterinarian before. They’ve never been vaccinated. They don’t have heartworm prevention. They’re just, they’ve got parasites and they owners finally bring them in when there’s, you know, when the dog’s not getting up to, you know, can’t get up basically. I’ve seen this time after time, and I think Dr. Arion probably has too and these people should be responsible for their animals.

JOHN COLE: Thank you.

DR. MICHAEL SCHRIVER: Thank you.

JOHN COLE: Cindy Berkey.

CINDY BERKEY: It’s a height discrimination thing again. I never thought, what can I say? I’m here trying not to get diapers put on horses in Caroline County. That’s pretty sad. But my biggest problem with this piece of legislation, I think, two biggest problems, is the authority to contract out enforcement. And I have a concern maybe about an Animal Control officer that is working for a subcontractor for the County instead of the County, instead of that officer working for the County. I think a lot of things that you want to accomplish can be accomplished through our Sheriff’s Department. If you have to give them a little extra money, I don’t have a problem with that. I don’t think most people do. Not that they should spend the majority of their time chasing animals around the county, but I think they should be a big part of the enforcement. Giving that enforcement authority to someone who doesn’t have extensive background training could lead to more problems than the County would want to deal with. I think a lot of people that have talked tonight, and you two live in town?

UNKNOWN: Yes.

CINDY BERKEY: You don’t have a town ordinance?

UNKNOWN: We just had one passed as of January 1st.

CINDY BERKEY: Has that helped?

UNKNOWN: Well, we haven’t had to use it yet actually.

CINDY BERKEY: Is it similar to this?

UNKNOWN: Very similar, yes. It mainly pertains to dogs. Just dogs.

CINDY BERKEY: Uh huh. Which is the main problem in town because you can’t keep a horse in town. You can’t keep a cow in town, as far as I know, in most towns. Is that correct for all the towns in the County, do you know?

JOHN COLE: That’s my assumption, but I’m not sure.

CINDY BERKEY: Okay. Because I think, you know, Caroline County has the heritage and hopefully a future of being a farm county, a rural county. If it’s the only one left on the Eastern Shore, that wouldn’t hurt my feelings a bit, but a lot of the discussion that I’ve heard about this piece of legislation is that, you know, we’re becoming more urbanized and we’re a suburb and we’re this and we’re that and that people move here from metropolitan areas and expect to have the same animal control support that they had in the area that they came from. I don’t think they moved here because they wanted to move to a big city. They moved to Caroline County because they wanted to be in a rural setting which we are and hopeful we will stay. So I think a lot of the problems that you are trying to address could be done through the individual towns very easily. Of each, a similar ordinance to what you have was passed in each town, there may not be a need for this. One of the reasons I saw and I approve of these ordinances in town, because I don’t live in town, because we have a farm with horses and dogs and whatever else might wander up, but I don’t have next door neighbors that can keep an eye on my backyard. I don’t have a security system because that would be a little ridiculous for this area, it’s fairly low crime, but I do have a dog. And he’s not a trained guard dog, but he is a guard dog and he will protect his property. By that I mean he will chase cars if they slow down. A lot of people slow down because they think they are going to hit my dog. Well when they slow down is when he chases them, because he thinks they are going to turn in the driveway. Plenty of people, now you know we live on Camp Road, where the Wesleyan Camp is. People from the camp, hundreds of people walk up and down that road all the time without incident because they’re not, he doesn’t bother them because they’re not intending to do harm or they’re not afraid of dogs. And there have been some people that are just scared to death of dogs that come by and he has gone after them because he feels... the adrenaline rush for that is the same adrenaline as somebody’s going to rob your house. Correct me if I’m wrong, Dave Dinkle, but last night or the night before, his father’s truck, sitting in his driveway, which is three doors down from me was robbed and cleaned out. Now my husband’s in Myrtle Beach this week and I’m sitting here, I didn’t know that until I got here tonight, but I’m thinking the guy could have come to my house and done the same thing in my barn and maybe because of my dog he went down to Mr. Dinkle’s. And I think that’s a good way for people in farm country to protect their property without causing a whole lot of hassle for any reason. I guess, that’s a lot of statistics I’d like to go through in here. My big one is to contract out and we... Do we contract out of the County, is that a regular thing for us to contract out, subcontract services similar to this?

JOHN COLE: (Inaudible) No.

CINDY BERKEY: Because I think it’s a fine idea. I think the Humane Society is a great idea because you need people that are trained in just specific animal treatment, care, that kind of thing, because the Sheriff’s Department may not be. But if you have the Humane Society taking care of unwanted animals, euthanasia, whatever, adoption... Education programs, I think, are definitely important. We try to do that with horses, you know, the clubs that are with us. I think there’s a great purposes (sic) for them. As far as becoming a pseudo law enforcement officer and having certain official enforcement rights, I have a problem with that. I don’t have a problem with a Sheriff’s Deputy coming on my property. I might have a problem with somebody else. And this legislation opens up a big door on that end specifically. Cages listed under definition, and I marked that because under this definition my horse trailer is a cage. If I’ve got a 1200 pound horse that doesn’t want to get in my horse trailer, and I’m not going to tell you how much I weigh, but I’m going to tell you I weigh a lot more with a whip in my hand than I do without one. And with one smack on the butt I can get that horse in the trailer. Now if my new neighbor or somebody riding by deems that to be harmful, under this legislation he can turn in an anonymous complaint and I can be fined $500 for doing what I’m taking as acceptable farm practices. Now on some farms a cattle prod is an acceptable farm practice. On my property it’s not, but a whip will do. And to tell you the truth, once you use it once, all you have to do is show it to them the next time. So, I think that’s a bit extreme. The, Anne brought out a good one. Can’t give anything to a kid under eighteen (18) years of age. We do have State code. I did someone in the County that was going get me a copy of that to review, but I haven’t seen it yet, Mr. Cole. Do you have one available?

JOHN COLE: I finally got one this week.

CINDY BERKEY: Does it do a lot of what is in this?

JOHN COLE: From what I’ve seen there is some duplication, but not a good deal.

CINDY BERKEY: So it’s basically we already have the law? Outside of subcontracting the Humane Society to do all of the work for us, right? Okay. Inflict unnecessary suffering or pain upon any animal. That’s a relative term. What’s your definition of pain and suffering and what mine is may be totally different depending on who liberal you and how conservative I am. Now a gentlemen I know in Queen Anne’s County has a horse that’s 30 years old out in the field and when this legislation similar passed in Queen Anne’s County, the County Animal Control Officer came to his farm and told him that he was abusing the horse because he was out in the pasture with no shelter and that my friend would have to build a shed and put it in that field for that horse. So I’ve really got to ask you, the horse has been in the same field with the same trees and the same (inaudible) and the same fence for thirty years and he’s perfectly healthy. By saying that he’s lived to be 30 years old. So what inhumane part of the law did my friend break to allow this Animal Control Officer to come in and tell him he wasn’t taking care of his animal properly? So what you think may be proper may be a lot different than what I think may be proper. And having worked in a veterinary hospital in management for several years, I understand what both of the veterinarians are saying, but I do understand that veterinarians think that if you don’t give your dog heartworm medicine you’re being cruel to him. There’s just some people out there that don’t know about heartworm and don’t know about the accepted medication. They’re just ignorant to the fact, which is a big time for the humane society to come in and educate people about those types of services and give your dog quite a few more years of life to live. You’ve already talked about coming on to the property. And there’s one part in here where it says they may be accompanied by Sheriff’s Department Deputy. I think you might want to change that to "shall" in certain cases. I think it’s kind of funny that you contend that the government can train their dog anywhere they want, but a private citizen can’t. It seems that I read that part of the law. And that our exempted agencies in the county (inaudible) from the same law that we have had to abide by. I love it... I mean when I read this thing I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry during most of it or just get mad, but "it shall unlawful for any owner or custodian to allow their animals to defecate or urinate on the property of another without the consent." Now, but however you, give us a break, animals may urinate in a right of way or easement of County roads. Now, how many people in this room know where the right-of-way and the easement area of the County Road is when you are riding your horse down the road to make sure you shit in that part? I worked in a law office for four years and I couldn’t tell you exactly where it would be proper and legal and I think all these people here are law abiding citizens and they want to stay that way. Overall there’s a lot of talk in here, but realistically I don’t see how you can enforce any of this without costing the County a bundle, whether you did it through the humane society or through the Sheriff’s Department, but I’m a strong believer in not passing laws that you don’t intend to enforce, because usually what that means is selective enforcement. That some people would have to abide and some people wouldn’t. But I will tell you that I think in Caroline County, 99.9% of the problems that arise from dogs or horses, or loose animals, or whatever, is taken care of without your knowledge at all. Whether it is two neighbors getting together and talking the thing out, or somebody sending the dog to training school or somebody taking a shotgun or BB gun and taking care of the problem, there’s a lot of control going on out there by the citizenry that by passing this, you’re going to be taking on the County. As soon as you know there’s a Humane Society Department to deal with this stuff and yada yada (sic), you don’t call your neighbor and try to work it out. You call the government agency that’s going to handle it for you. Now if you don’t think something like that can grow and cost you money, you’re wrong. I think that’s about all I have to say.

JOHN COLE: Thank you.

DICK RHODES: Mr. Cole?

JOHN COLE: Sir.

DICK RHODES: You don’t have to write this down, but I have a remedy...

JOHN COLE: Please step up to the mike.

DICK RHODES: No, I don’t need a microphone.

JOHN COLE: Your name sir?

UNKNOWN: We’d like to know your name.

DICK RHODES: Dick Rhodes is my name.

JOHN COLE: Okay.

DICK RHODES: I live on Route 317 between Oil City and Burrsville. About this thing about horse manure, if your horse’s bowels move and somebody raises cain about it, say it wasn’t my horse. Just wasn’t my horse and try to lie out of it as best you can. And I’m going to tell you another thing, after it rains the evidence is destroyed. It’s destroyed.

JOHN COLE: Thank you. Any other comments? Chief? Chief Nagel?

DONALD NAGEL, CHIEF OF POLICE: Well I guess I’m here to defend the Sheriff’s Department and the rest of the police. In the town of Federalsburg we do have our own ordinance and the only benefit we have by towns, we pay double the taxes as you people in the county for the same services, okay? And what we do, the police the work, okay? We’re not trained. That’s like taking Mr. Usilton out here and tell him to go lock up somebody that robbed a bank. He needs the training. We need the training. Everybody talks about tax dollars, okay? To equip each Sheriff’s car with the proper equipment to detain an animal and carry that animal to a shelter, do you realize what your tax dollars are going to cost? Very, very high. The County has, on their own, taken care of animal control. I’ve been associated with it probably twenty (20) years. What the dog do... We pick up a dog in Federalsburg. They take it to the kennel. Within five (5) days, that dog’s euthanized. That’s all. That’s the animal we’re talking about, not the idiot, and I do say idiots that leave the dogs out. People in this day and time in Caroline County, not the majority of them, but a small minority of them can’t even take care of their kids, let alone their dogs. We have to pass laws to take, make parents responsible for their children. What do you think they are going to do with their animals? They let them loose. We don’t have the problem with the people that ride the horses. We don’t have the problem that do the hunting. We have the problem with the idiots that do not care about their neighbor, will not talk to their neighbor, let their dogs out and they have "guard dogs" that run loose on their property but when a child wanders up, like happened down to Federalsburg, it was mutilated by the dog. What do you do then with your so called guard dog? We have a canine dog in Federalsburg, which would be exempt to this, I think. We paid $6,000 for it, trained in Germany. I heard a gentleman say well you can do verbal commands. That dog was trained and cost us over $8,000 to train him, per person, but that dog still has a mind of it’s own and there’s a chance that that dog sees another dog in heat, he’s going to go after it. So you need a restraint and you need to restrain by chain because we’re talking, we send this dog to school more than we send our officers almost and animals are the blunt of cruelty in this county. People don’t care about their animals. People get pets. They get tired of them, they turn them loose. In Federalsburg we’re catching the dogs. Now we’re overrun with cats, so we’re catching cats. The town spends its own money to set up traps. And another thing, you can’t set a trap in somebody’s yard unless they take responsibility for it. We can’t even get people to sign responsibility to keep a trap so we can catch the animal because they are afraid somebody will tear the trap up. The police cannot do it. I mean there’s no way that we can equip all the police cars with the loop leashes, with the cages to transport, when on the other hand everybody’s saying they do not see police officers. I worked this county for ten (10) years. I know it’s a big county and it’s very hard to have police officers where you want them, but do you want, when your daughter is trying, somebody’s trying to assault her, do you want that deputy tied up carrying a dog to the kennel? Don’t think so. That’s where you people are going to be wrong. You cannot involve law enforcement in animal control. The Humane Society, since it’s been working is working a lot better, but we suffer the same thing you do. We had to build our own pens. We had to hold the dogs over the weekend because you can’t get animal control, because the County has tried to do it on their own, but it doesn’t work. And those animals are killed. They’re not saved. They’re not given back to society. They don’t have the accommodations and you can’t blame these gentlemen. It was done before they were here. So as taxpayers, look at which would be the most costly to you as a County. I know the Towns do have their ordinance. We have a very strict ordinance and we’re picking up dogs every day but we have to put them in a cage. We have to borrow a pickup, take them to the pen and it ties us up. Federalsburg is looking for another way also. So just think about the reality of the animals and I don’t think anybody here is, or the Commissioners are talking about horses or talking about of the (inaudible) problem, just like the gentleman said, there’s good hunters and there’s bad hunters. There’s good people and there’s bad people. Some people can work it out. The more influx of people we have, they don’t care about you as neighbors. They don’t care about you as a friend, but respect... If you could get everybody to respect everybody else’s property, in another words, if it’s my property I don’t want a dog going to the bathroom on my property unless it’s my dog and in turn if I have a dog I don’t walk it over to my neighbor’s to go to the bathroom, unless I pick it up. And that should be, it’s respect that is gone from today’s society. People... There’s very few left that care and you have to have laws for the people that don’t care and the sad fact is the people that do care get penalized. But I do think Caroline County is going to be sensible enough to know where it’s culture came from for hunting, the horses, the whole nine yards and I don’t think they’re after that. And the Humane Society is a great step forward because (inaudible) Caroline County. Go ahead (inaudible) to me?

ANNE OGLETREE: The only thing I’d like to say is that I think everybody agrees that we need an ordinance and that as the veterinarians said, that there are animals out there who are suffering out who are suffering every day. All I want to make sure as a lawyer is that you get an ordinance that works. Okay? And one that doesn’t catch everybody that it doesn’t intend to. I think Donald has a good point. We know what the problems are. Let’s write something that’s specific to the problems that not something that does what you don’t need to do.

CINDY BERKEY: Not fifteen (15) pages that covers everything in God’s green earth.

JOHN COLE: If I may, that is the precise purpose of a public hearing such as we’re having this evening is to get this comment, public comment and it is being listened to.

CINDY BERKEY: Well, Donald, what, my question is wouldn’t it make sense, because I don’t want you delivering a dog to Denton from Federalsburg if my child needed assistance in Federalsburg, you’re on a dog call, no that doesn’t make any sense. But it would make a lot of sense if you went on the initial call and called in an animal control officer to handle the disposition of the animal would make a lot of sense, and take that off of your shoulders as far as a duty. But, still, you know, and there were problems in Talbot County with an animal control officer... We had, when I worked at the veterinary hospital, I’ll give you a short story, we had animals coming in Monday that were tore up and ripped up over the weekend, mainly pit bulls and fighting type dogs, sport dogs. And we called the Sheriff’s Department suspecting some people of running a dog ring, a fighting ring. And we called the Sheriff’s Department and they said it’s an Animal Control problem and they passed if over and an Animal Control Officer was sent out on the call. She got down to the St. Michaels to the property, went in the back yard found a trash can about this big, this tall full dead cats and kittens, because that’s how they start out fighting dogs. You give them the scent of blood and wanting them to eat each other. She was put, herself, in a potentially dangerously situation with the people running the gambling ring being in the house with the dogs. If the Sheriff’s Department had gone on that call first, straightened everything out and then called in the Animal Control Officer to dispose of the animals in whichever way it went, that makes perfect sense. And as a matter of fact, now in Talbot County, I found out last week, they’re starting to do calls like that. So Talbot County, having enacted this type of legislation years and years and years ago, is now going full circle coming back giving those duties to the Sheriff’s Department. But I think the town departments can do a lot with animal control and I’d go back to say it again that I think that if these ordinances were enacted in municipalities, because that’s where you want growth to be anyway, that’s where people that expect to live jammed up next door to each other go to live because they like it that way, that’s where we need to concentrate the efforts. But I agree with you, you should not be out on a call hauling an animal from one end of the County to another.

DONALD NAGEL: The only problem that I have...

CHARLES CAWLEY: You tore our mike up, Donald.

DONALD NAGEL: I’m sorry. The only problem I have with that is looking at it from a taxpayer’s standpoint and I am a taxpayer. What I’m saying is if you’re then tying up a, at any given time, in the county, I’d say after eleven o’clock at night, you have three (3) Deputy Sheriff’s on and two (2) Maryland State Policemen, total the whole county. This county’s a very long county. If you have an animal complaint down to Federalsburg and let’s say a deputy’s tied up on another call then he’s going to travel all the way to Marydel and if something happens down there... See what I’m saying? You’re pulling your resources that are already slipped up for one reason. If they can handle the call... It depends on what restrictions you put on your Animal Control Officers, their training and their responsibility. And if you get a respectable officer that is a human being that understands Caroline County they are going to be okay with the citizens if they go and if it’s a fox...

CINDY BERKEY: But that’s a big "if".

UNKNOWN: Big "if".

DONALD NAGEL: Right. But I can’t... But it’s just like law. There’s a lot of laws that I can come on your property for, without a warrant, even though... Just like the IRS, they can come in your house, it don’t matter. But what I’m saying is, it’s how you effect those laws and I think anybody from any government, or any citizen here can pretty well speak for the police in this county that most of them are homebred and they understand this society. Of course if you get a hotdog that’s going to run rampant, you as citizens are going to voice your opinion to the County Commissioners and they’re going to put a hotdog in hot water. So... I’m not saying all these laws are good.

CINDY BERKEY: (Inaudible) contract situation (inaudible)...

DONALD NAGEL: I’m not (inaudible).

CINDY BERKEY: .... A County employee as an Animal Control Officer that’s a whole different ball game.

DONALD NAGEL: Right.

UNKNOWN: Like I called the County for a rottweiler and a beagle that attacked me seven (7) times.

DONALD NAGEL: And they couldn’t do anything right?

UNKNOWN: Yes, they did. They took it to County and Judge Brown here in Caroline County threw it out even though it is a State law that you can officiate that.

DONALD NAGEL: Yeah, we had that case...

UNKNOWN: DNR has to answer one of the calls because you guys were busy. I didn’t care. I didn’t care, he had a gun. I didn’t care who answered it.

DONALD NAGEL: Right. And we... There is that State law about dangerous animals, just like it’s worded in here.

UNKNOWN: That’s right. Uh huh.

DONALD NAGEL: But you have to send the people in writing.

UNKNOWN: Judge Brown threw it out. Yeah he did.

DONALD NAGEL: The first time... You get bit the first time then you send them something in writing saying your dog bit me and it’s declared a dangerous animal.

UNKNOWN: (Inaudible) dead dog.

DONALD NAGEL: Then if he bites you again, then you can do something about it. All laws are not good. All laws are...

CINDY BERKEY: The more you’ve got the....

DONALD NAGEL: (Inaudible) it’s common sense. Yes sir?

SKIP DULD: What is your position on either a horse gets lame and falls in the middle of road, he’s out of town, he’s in town, a dog, any type of animal, what is your position on using deadly force to put that animal down?

DONALD NAGEL: As a last resort.

SKIP DULD: What is your position as far as rules and regulations and the police policy in town, out of town? Can you use a gun to shoot that horse to put him down or a dog...

DONALD NAGEL: I never want an officer to discharge... And I run into this situation, discharge a weapon in town because of ricochet or whatever. It’s dangerous, period.

SKIP DULD: Okay. Okay.

DONALD NAGEL: If I have to move that animal, I’m going to do everything I can do to get a veterinarian there to start with because I’m not... I can tell when a person’s dead. I can tell when an animal’s dead, but I don’t feel myself totally qualified to say well, I should be God and kill this dog, because I think as much of animals as I do people, okay? But what I’m saying is I need somebody there. Just like if... I have EMTs come to the scene if somebody’s dead. You know, I don’t... My rules and regulations say "only at the last resort when unable to obtain the services of a vet" or somebody qualified to do that, period.

SKIP DULD: Okay.

DONALD NAGEL: I do not want a gun discharged in town. Now, if the officer is being threatened and there’s no other out, and mace doesn’t work, they have to protect theirselves (sic) or another citizen. Okay? But that’s, you know, that’s a matter of life and death. I mean you’re talking a whole different rules and regulations there.

SKIP DULD: Okay. Thank you.

JOHN COLE: Is there any additional testimony relating specifically to 98-2? If not, I want to thank you all for coming tonight and participating in the process and I am really impressed with the excellent turn out. Thank you very much.

HEARING ADJOURNED

The Commissioners designated Helen Spinelli, economic development director, as the overall coordinator for the annual "Maryland’s Most Beautiful People" Volunteer Awards project sponsored by the Governor’s Office, with request to contact Wayne Cole regarding his willingness to continue to serve as chair of the Caroline County committee.

The Commissioners instructed staff to schedule on the agenda for the Commissioners’ meeting of February 23^rd the issue of north county water and sewer and notify the appropriate towns to be present.

The Commissioners instructed Leigh Sands, executive assistant, to schedule a meeting with Mid-Shore Mental Health Systems, Inc.

On motion by Mr. LeGates, the Commissioners unanimously approved and signed the telephone long distance renewal contract with the provider, RCN, which provides discounted long distance rates.

At 10:00 PM, and as authorized by 1995 Maryland Code, State Government 10-508(a)(3) and (7), as amended, the Commissioners, on motion by Mr. LeGates, seconded by Mr. Prettyman, adjourned into closed session to meet with Janice Davison, deputy County attorney to discuss a proposed economic development land acquisition.

The meeting reconvened in open session at 10:15 PM. President Cole reported that the Commissioners, in closed session, discussed the possible acquisition of a particular parcel of land for economic development, and that Mr. Cawley will be looking into it and reporting back.

Mr. Cawley updated the Commissioners on the status of the Sheriff’s Annex Building adjacent to the Detention Center on First Street, Denton, where the Department of Emergency Management will be relocating once renovations are complete. The building is currently under construction for renovations. It will cost an approximate $30,000 additional to complete the project. Bryan Ebling, director of emergency management, will be asked to present to the Commissioners the details regarding the completion of the project so the Commissioners can make an informed decision.

There being no further business, the meeting of the County Commissioners was adjourned by unanimous consent.

Vivian L. Anders

Acting Executive Assistant