Commission directs staff to prioritize animal-control ordinance update and discusses code enforcement board

Seth Collins, deputy county administrator, and Jared Wells, public protection and compliance, briefed the Camden County Board of Commissioners on the state law framework for establishing a code enforcement board and urged a comprehensive review of county enforcement ordinances.

Collins cited Georgia Code provisions that govern enforcement boards and appeals, and recommended a five-member enforcement board with staggered terms if the county chooses to establish one. “A code enforcement board member must be residents of the jurisdiction they serve,” Collins said, summarizing Ga. Code § 36-74-22. He also noted that appeals of a code enforcement board’s final administrative order go to superior court as a hearing de novo under Ga. Code § 36-74-28.

Wells and staff described recurring enforcement problems, especially in animal control. Staff recommended updating the fee structure (staff noted the current fee amount used in magistrate court review and suggested raising animal-control violation fines to about $500), creating repeat‑offender penalties, and tightening definitions and classifications for dangerous and potentially dangerous dogs. Wells said current county code sometimes prevents classifying an animal as “vicious” if the animal has attacked another animal but not a person, and that creating an intermediate classification such as “potentially dangerous” could give more enforcement options.

Commissioner discussion focused on enforcement practicality and limits of local authority. Commissioners asked staff to coordinate any fine-structure changes with the magistrate court (Judge Lewis was named in the discussion) because magistrate‑court procedures currently affect fines. Commissioners also expressed concern about adding new unelected boards; several opposed adding an additional layer of government if similar results could be achieved by updating existing ordinances. Several commissioners urged staff to identify repeat offenders and target enforcement to the small group that generates most complaints.

The board authorized staff to begin with the animal-control ordinance update as the top priority and took initial action toward establishing a code enforcement board; staff were directed to draft a proposed ordinance, a recommended fee schedule, and an intergovernmental or memorandum agreement that would clarify responsibilities for any positions funded by VOCA or other grants.

Ending: Staff said ordinance revisions will require legal review and coordination with the magistrate court, and that additional resources would be required if the county increases enforcement expectations.