Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Welfare topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bertie County commissioners vote to put proposed tethering ordinance on ballot after heated public comments
Summary
After extensive public comment for and against a tethering ban, the Board voted to place the Standards of Care & Animal Tethering Ordinance on the ballot for Bertie County voters to decide; proponents cited animal welfare while local houndsmen opposed new rules.
Chair Corey Ballance, Sr. opened the Feb. 16 meeting and the public comment period drew a steady stream of remarks on animal tethering and shelter capacity. Rachel Bellis of PETA said the county should adopt a tethering ordinance to “help prevent similar situations and to protect the welfare of animals,” and Michelle Disney (via Zoom) urged a ban, arguing chaining “can lead to increased aggression” and dangerous conditions for animals and people.
Opposition came from local houndsmen representatives and others who said enforcement of existing animal-control rules — not a new ordinance — is the priority. Bobby Harris, president of the Camden County Houndsmen Association, Wayne Twiford of the Currituck County Houndsmen Association, and others told the Board they do not support a tethering ban. John Davis urged the Board to negotiate directly with the Houndsmen Association to find accommodations if an ordinance is adopted.
County discussion returned to the subject during the discussion agenda. Chair Ballance asked for a motion to put the tethering ordinance on the ballot “to let the citizens of Bertie County decide how the tethering ordinance will be carried out.” Commissioner Ronald Roberson made the motion, which Vice‑Chair Lewis Hoggard, III seconded; the Board recorded the motion as passed. The record shows three commissioners voted yes and two did not record a yea or nay vote.
Supporters pointed to shelter capacity and animal-welfare cases described by former county animal-control worker Victoria Nussbaumer, who recounted instances of severe neglect and limited shelter resources that in some cases led to euthanasia. Opponents emphasized hunting traditions and urged that the county instead enforce current ordinances.
The Board also asked that the Animal Control Advisory Board’s consideration of the matter be added to the March 16 work session agenda. Placing the ordinance on the ballot means voters, rather than the commissioners, will determine whether the county adopts the proposed tethering rules; any implementing language and enforcement details will be defined by subsequent ordinance drafting and administrative action if voters approve a measure.
