Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Control topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Adams County board postpones ordinance to create county 'humane officers' pending staff briefing
Summary
After extended debate about how many officers to authorize, certification and staffing costs, the Adams County Board voted 13–5 to postpone consideration of an ordinance establishing county humane officers until Director Dustin Grant can answer questions and provide details.
The Adams County Board of Supervisors on a 13–5 roll-call vote postponed consideration of an ordinance to add a county "humane officers" section to the county animal code.
Clerk read Ordinance 1, proposing an amendment to chapter 145 to provide for appointment of humane officers. Supervisor Gubarski questioned a provision that would permit the county to "appoint 1 or more humane officers by resolution," saying the language left the number of officers undefined and at odds with the precision he expects in ordinance drafting. "That last few words, ‘1 or more by resolution,’ just doesn't seem to fit what we're trying to do," he said.
Other supervisors and the chair explained the intent was to allow the board to name individual officers in a separate resolution so names could be updated without reopening the ordinance. A supervisor said the current operational plan envisions three humane officers — one in the sheriff’s department and two in planning and zoning — but that the language sought flexibility in case staffing needs change.
Supervisors also raised questions about certification and employment consequences. The ordinance text states that an appointee who fails to obtain required certification within one year "will be terminated" as an appointed humane officer; board members asked whether that meant losing county employment. The chair and other supervisors said the statute contemplates unappointment of the humane-officer role rather than a separate hiring action and said personnel and human resources would coordinate any employment consequences.
Supervisor Dozle moved to table the ordinance until Director Dustin Grant could attend to answer staffing and training questions; a second was recorded and the motion carried 13–5. The chair said the ordinance will return to a future board meeting with the requested clarifications.
No formal amendments to the ordinance were adopted at the meeting.
