Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Control topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Union County panel tightens dangerous-dog appeals process, establishes ad hoc panel pool
Summary
Sheriff's office told the Consolidated Human Services Board it will standardize dangerous-dog declarations and appeal paperwork; the board adopted a new ad hoc dangerous dog board provision in rules and approved a pool of members and veterinarians to serve on time‑sensitive appeals.
The Consolidated Human Services Board on Monday received a presentation from the Union County Sheriff’s Office on how the county determines and handles dangerous and potentially dangerous dogs and approved new rules to create an ad hoc appeal panel when the board cannot meet within the statutory 10‑day period.
Lieutenant Jamie Grigg of the Sheriff’s Office said Animal Services investigates roughly 500 bite reports a year but found only three dogs met the statutory criteria for dangerous or potentially dangerous status in 2025. Grigg described the evidence the division relies on — police reports, witness statements, photographs and video — and outlined outcomes after a declaration: kennel confinement under strict specifications, requirements for owner compliance if the animal is returned, and the option for owners to surrender animals (which the sheriff’s office said can lead to euthanasia).
Brandon Christian, legal counsel for the Sheriff’s Office, told the board there had been no consistent appeal process and recommended owners submit written objections that identify alleged incorrect factual findings in the lieutenant’s declaration rather than triggering a full re‑investigation by the board. He said the board’s role is appellate: to review whether the investigator applied statutory criteria correctly.
To implement the appeal process and ensure timely hearings, staff proposed amending the board’s rules to add “Section 2: Ad Hoc Dangerous Dog Board,” citing Article 1A of Chapter 67 of the North Carolina General Statutes and section 6‑575 of the Union County Code of Ordinances. The change directs the chair to request that the county manager appoint three persons when the human services board cannot assemble a quorum within the required 10 days; staff also recommended the board annually endorse a pool of members (and recruit up to three local veterinarians) for the county manager to draw from.
Board members asked about fairness for individuals who may have low literacy or are incarcerated. Counsel said objections do not need to be legal briefs but should state what factual finding is disputed so the board can determine whether the investigator erred. The board approved the rules amendment and a motion to endorse a pool of members to serve on ad hoc panels.
The board did not hear or decide any pending appeals during the meeting. Next steps: staff will include the appeal notice and standardized objection form with future dangerous‑dog declarations and present the endorsed pool to the county manager for appointment when necessary.
