1LwjabT

10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
BACKGROUND: This item was presented in similar form at the January 21, 2016 meeting by
Orange County Planning Staff as an amendment to the Orange County Code of Technical
Ordinances (“UDO”) recommended by the Planning Board.
The proposed amendments establish new regulations governing the discharge of firearms on
private property. At the January 21, 2016 meeting the Board of County Commissioners
determined the regulation of the discharge of firearms was more appropriately regulated
through Orange County’s police power and its General Ordinances rather than through the
UDO. The Board of County Commissioners, after receiving the Planning Board’s
recommendation and discussing the item, instructed the County Attorney to bring the Planning
Board’s recommended language back for consideration at the February 16, 2016 regular
meeting.
Among other things the recommended ordinance restricts the discharge of firearms to 10:00
a.m. to 6:00 p.m. daily, prohibits the discharge of firearms within designated distances of
property lines and dwelling structures, requires discharged projectiles to remain on the property
upon which they are discharged, and requires most firearms discharges to be directed into a
projectile-proof backstop. The ordinance will not impact or regulate hunting activities.
Chair McKee said regardless of the emails from Grassroots NC, there has never been a
closed meeting regarding this ordinance, and it has twice been on the Board of County
Commissioners’ agendas and twice at quarterly Public Hearings. He agreed this item should
have gone through more of a public process. He said there had never been any intent to have
a closed session or meeting about this issue, or to hide anything.
John Roberts said the language in front of the BOCC tonight is mostly from the Planning
Department’s recommended changes to the UDO. He said when the item came before the
BOCC in January 2016, he had concerns about the language as the statutory authority to
regulate this issue does not come from any land use related authority; but rather is separate
and specific under the County’s police power. He said he is uncomfortable with intermingling
those two lines of authority, as it leads to enforcement issues, and thus court issues. He said
the current language, with a few exceptions, is exactly as the Planning Department wrote it,
with a few grammatical changes and some insertions from Sheriff Blackwood from a Lenoir
County ordinance.
John Roberts said the Sheriff noted that the backstop requirement in section C-4 is
probably excessive, and noted that the National Sport Shooting Foundation recommends 15
feet in height, but makes no depth recommendation. He said the Sheriff recommended
changes to section C-6, suggesting changing the hours from 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. to 7:00
a.m. and 11:00 p.m. He said the Sheriff’s recommended changes to subsections E and F, due
to the extreme cost and effort involved in complying with them.
John Roberts said he recommended changing the initial sentence in subsection G, to be
clear that all those items would not be impacted by this ordinance. He said these items include
lawful defense of property, hunting, pursuant to directions of law enforcement officers, actions
by law enforcement officers, firearms instruction, and engaging in target shooting. He said the
Planning Board recommended that target shooting occur two or fewer days per month, which
may also be overly restrictive for rural areas.
John Roberts said the County does not have the authority to regulate hunting and this
ordinance does not regulate hunting activities.
Chair McKee referred to the potential cost of signage and noted he has 168 acres and
he would have to put up 400-600 signs.
Commissioner Dorosin asked if this same ordinance has been adopted in Lenoir
County.