Page 2— Vernonia Freedom
Thursday May 7,1981
Dog control a county problem reader says
To the Editor:
Commissioner
Sahagian’s
accusations that the County Clerk’s
office “ sandbagging” has created the
failure of the dog control program is
patently ridiculous. It underscores
abreviated form.
1) The county commissioner shall
appoint a three man board of
supervisors to issue licenses and
enforce all the dog control laws and
rule upon all claims against the dog
license fund for livestock or poultry
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••O
Public Forum
•••••••••••••••
our county commissioner's inability
to understand and conduct county
business. A malfunctioning dog
control program is not a new
development it’s just getting more
expensive.
Columbia County’s dog control
program is authorized and operated
under ORS 609, which amongst many
other details, lays out the chain of
command and duties as follows in
City Council Notes
continued from page 1
the lagoon into the Nehalem River is
stopped. An answer from IP is
expected prior to the next city council
meeting in two weeks and many hope
some accomodation between all of the
parties concerned; IP, the developers
and the city, can be reached in time to
allow construction on the new facility
to begin as soon as possible.
In an attempt to bring an end to
disagreements over sewer hookups
the , city council directed the city
attorney to draw up an ordinance
declaring a moratorium on new
construction within the city. The
proposed ordinance would not affect
building additions or construction
that would not put any new hookups
on the sewer system. In addition, the
new ordinance will not impose a halt
to the use of approved septic systems.
The moratorium is expected to be in
force until the new lagoon facility is
completed and on-line.
A bid from Vernonia Control for the
assumption of all emergency radio
communications for the city was
turned down by the council. Mayor
Anderegg explained that one of the
reasons Central Dispatch costs had
climbed was the withdrawal of a
number of participants in the effort,
thereby raising costs to those
remaining. Anderegg said that at the
meeting of Central Dispatch officials
and representatives from each of the
area users it was decided to continue
with their services at this time
because of higher staffing levels,
more complete radio equipment and
existing links to law enforcement
computers. Anderegg also pointed
continued on page 5
•••••••••••••••
killed or injured. (There is an
accomodation for the commissioners
to fill those positions themselves.)
2) The board may hire an
enforcement officer. Salaries of
enforcement officers shall be paid
entirety from money in the dog license
fund They shall be vested with full
authority to make arrests and collect
fees therefor, to impound all dogs not
licensed and do all the things
authorized by law, etc.
3) The owner of a dog shall procure,
from the County Clerk, a license by
paying a license fee. The clerk shall
keep a record of such licenses in a
special book. All funds shall be
turned over to the county treasurer to
be kept in the dog license fund.
Now, to relate how the program is
working based on my observations as
a multi dog owner, commencing with
the County Clerk’s office.
Annually, months prior to the
licensing deadline the clerk published
large ads in the local newspapers
warning of the impending deadling
and consequences of missing it. I also
receive a renewal notice in the mail
for each of my dogs from the clerk’s
office.
When I arrive to purchase the
licenses they pop open the records,
tell me the names of my dogs, the
status or their rabies shots, wrench
the money out of one of my hands,
thrust licenses and receipts into my
other hand and send me on my way
marveling at how quickly and
efficiently I handled the whole affair.
This year they even set up a table
closer to the door to decrease the
loitering and shakedown time. Pray
tell, what else does Sahagian want?
The ladies in the clerk’s office to don
sneakers and masks, run us down and
roll us for more fees?
ORS 609 clearly delegates citing,
collecting fines and impounding
unlicensed dogs to the dog control
officers. The fact that two county dog
control officers issued only ten
citations becomes more nauseous
when compared to the output of the
St. Helens dog control officers. How
poorly they are doing becomes
apparent when one realizes Columbia
County is primarily a rural county of
VernoniaFreedom
Published weekly in Vernonia Oregon, 97064, on Thursdays at 825 Bridge St.
Serving The Upper Nehalem Valley. Phone 129-8111. Subscriptions, $8per year.
Deadlines for copy and classified advertising: Monday at a pm for the
following Thursday's paper.
Deadline for display advertising: Friday for normal material and Monday for
after-weekend copy.
Second-Class Postage Paid at Vernonia, OR 97064, Publication No. 474-690.
POSTMASTER: send address changes to Vernonia Freedom, 825 Bridge St..
Vernonia, OR 97064.
Dennis Dobson................................
publisher-editor
Ann Dobson.......... .. .^............................
publisher-business manager
Correspondents:
Sandy Welch
member
about 12,000 mailing addresses. The
odds are good that more of those
addresses contain two dogs than
contain none. That formula would
indicate a probable county dog
population of 10,000 to 12,000, of
which less than one half are licensed.
The dog control officers should not be
faulted for their lack of diligence.
Under 609 it is the responsibility of
the Board of Supervisors, or in our
case the commissioners, to give the*
officers a clear-cut policy and
direction and see that they pursue it.
The commissioners obviously haven’t
done that. I find it intriguing the
commissioners would double the
enforcement officers during the rapid
decline of fee collections to pay them
with in accordance with 609., and now
Sahagian wants to add two more
people.
A brief scan of funds expended and
budgeted and actions taken by the
commissioners in dog damage claims
indicates they have reduced the
process to an exercise in chiseling.
The appalling part of all this is ORS
609 is neither a secret document or
difficult to read. The taxpayers have
bought the commissioners their own
office copy and shell out in excess of
$30,000 annually for a county
attorney to read for them. And I
personally guarantee they know 609
exists.
The commissioners management of
dog control is in keeping with their
apparent policy of ignoring laws,
rules or votes that do not conform to
their Reliefs or desires.
0h4well, at is only $35,000 to
$70,000 of public funds shot down the
tube annually.
Now who’s sandbagging who?
Dan Sprague
Clatskanie, Ore.
Chamber of Commerce
invites business community
OPEN CHAMBER MEETING
All of Vernonia businesses are
urged to attend the next Chamber of
Commerce meeting to discuss their
reaction to the new industrial
development proposal, according to
Bill Hansen, chamber president.
Hansen stressed that all local
businesses are urged to send a
representative whether they are
chamber members or not.
The meeting will be held at the
West Oregon Electric building at 1
pm Monday, May 11. After this
meeting a special committee of the
chamber will develop a resolution on
the issue, according to Hansen. Due
to the possibly serious impact on
Vernonia’s busmess community it is
vitally important that all views be
heard before the chamber takes a
position on the issue, he added. For
more information call Hansen at 429-
2355.
OF COLUMBIA
Probate Department
In the Matter of the Estate of
WILLIAM R. FITZMAURICE
Deceased
No. 4994
NOTICE TO INTERESTED
PERSONS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that
the undersigned has been appointed
personal representative of the above
estate. AU persons having claims
against the estate are »required to
present them to the undersigned
personal representative at Jon S.
Henricksen, Attorney at Law, High
Rocks Town Center, Suite 47-B 82nd
Drive, Gladstone, Oregon 97027,
within four months after the date of
first publication of this notice.
Gary W. Fitzmaurice
Personal Representative
13856 S.E. 180th
Boring, Oregon 97009
LEGAL NOTICE
NOTICE OF MEETING OF
COUNTY BOARD OF
EQUALIZATION
Notice is hereby given that on
Monday, May 11, 1981 the Board of
Equalization of the County of
Columbia, Oregon, will meet at the
County Courthouse in St. Helens,
Oregon, to pubUcly examine the
assessment rolls for said County of
Columbia, for the year 1981, and to
correct all errors in valuation,
description, or qualities of land, lots
or other property assessed by the
assessor.
The
assessed
valuation
of
homesteads assessed by the county
assessor’s office in Columbia County,
as entered on the assessment roU for
January 1,1981, is 816 percent of the
true caSh (market) value of such
property.
The assessed valuation of all other
taxable property assessed by the
county assessor’s office in Columbia
County, as entered on the assessment
roll for January 1, 1981, is 844
percent of the true cash (market)
value of such property.
It shall be the duty of the persons
interested to appear at the time and
place appointed.
Petitions
for
adjustment of assessments must be
filed with the board not later than
Monday, May 18, 1981, except when
the filing of the petition at a different
time is permitted under ORS 309.026
(for homestead property only),
309.035 or 309.103.
Dated at St. Helens, Oregon this
21st day of April, 1981.
Henry T. Hudson
Columbia County Assessor
4-30, 5-7
State of Oregon
I Please renew my subscription to Vernonia Freedom □ ।
I
Please enroll me as a new subscriber to
I
One year —$8
□
Vernonia Freedomü
I
I
I □ Two years —$15
I □ One year senior citizen — $5
I
I
Name______ ___
1
I
I
I Pi o' ss
‘
I
1
I
r, .. o. Send to: Vernonia Freedom or Call 429-8111 I
I oZo DHage ot.