19.03.2016 Views

1LwjabT

1LwjabT

1LwjabT

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

32<br />

1<br />

2<br />

3<br />

4<br />

5<br />

6<br />

7<br />

8<br />

9<br />

10<br />

11<br />

12<br />

13<br />

14<br />

15<br />

16<br />

17<br />

18<br />

19<br />

20<br />

21<br />

22<br />

23<br />

24<br />

25<br />

26<br />

27<br />

28<br />

29<br />

30<br />

31<br />

32<br />

33<br />

34<br />

35<br />

36<br />

37<br />

38<br />

39<br />

40<br />

41<br />

42<br />

43<br />

44<br />

45<br />

46<br />

47<br />

48<br />

49<br />

50<br />

Efland, NC 27243<br />

Scott Tutor<br />

Orange Grove Community<br />

Bingham Township<br />

Earl I heard this weekend that the county has had the county Attorney start working on a new<br />

law that will not let anyone in the county that owns land fire there guns on there own property<br />

more than once a month and only between the hours of like 10: 00 am and 3:00 pm is there any<br />

truth to this. Please Reply Thanks Jerry<br />

Jerry Baity<br />

To: Earl McKee, Chairman, Orange County Board of Commissioners<br />

From: F. Paul Valone, president, Grass Roots North Carolina<br />

Re: Amendment to Orange County Code Of Ordinances Regulating Discharge Of Firearms<br />

Dear Commissioner McKee:<br />

We have been advised by several members that Orange County intends to change its<br />

ordinance regarding discharge of firearms. They have also advised us that the board of<br />

commissioners intends to do so in a meeting closed to the public.<br />

In fact, one member forwarded the attached image of the Action Agenda Item Abstract which<br />

appears to show it as item 7–a, for action on February 16, 2016. I also note that the public<br />

hearing block contains an “N”, presumably indicating no public hearing on the issue.<br />

As you are no doubt aware, NCGS § 143-318.9 (our "open meetings" law) stipulates:<br />

“Whereas the public bodies that administer the legislative, policy-making, quasi-judicial,<br />

administrative, and advisory functions of North Carolina and its political subdivisions<br />

exist solely to conduct the people's business, it is the public policy of North Carolina that<br />

the hearings, deliberations, and actions of these bodies be conducted openly.”<br />

In fact, public bodies may go into closed session only for the purposes enumerated in § 143-<br />

318.11, which also says:<br />

“A public body may hold a closed session only upon a motion duly made and adopted at<br />

an open meeting. Every motion to close a meeting shall cite one or more of the<br />

permissible purposes listed in subsection (a) of this section.”<br />

I would also urge you to become familiar with another modification of North Carolina statutes<br />

which became effective on December 1, 2015 when N.C.G.S. § 14–415.23 was modified under<br />

Section 15 of Session Law 2015–195 (formerly H.B. 562) to include a new subsection (e), to<br />

wit:<br />

“A person adversely affected by any ordinance, rule, or regulation promulgated or<br />

caused to be enforced by any unit of local government in violation of this section may<br />

bring an action for declaratory and injunctive relief and for actual damages arising<br />

from the violation. The court shall award the prevailing party in an action brought

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!