Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 02071984 - T.2 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on February 7, 1984 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Powers, Fanden, Schroder, McPeak, Torlakson NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None SUBJECT: Swimming Pool Fencing Ordinance The Board on January 17, 1984, having acknowledged receipt of a report from the Internal Operations Committee (Supervisors Powers and Fanden) on the proposed swimming pool fencing ordinance, and having fixed February 7, 1984 at 10: 30 a.m. as the time to con- sider said report; and Supervisor Powers having reviewed the Internal Operations Committee report of January 17, 1984; and Supervisor Fanden having summarized her position in oppo- sition to the proposed ordinance as set forth in the Internal Operations Committee report; and Supervisor Schroder having clarified that Supervisor Fanden is in support of an ordinance which would require complete fencing around a swimming pool for only those homes with children under _the_age_of _four ; and James E. Prosser , representing the California Spa and Pool Industry Energy, Code and Legislative Council, having expressed opposition to the proposed ordinance stating that there is no epide- mic of childhood drownings; there would be a negative economic impact on the County on the basis that from a survey taken by pool builders, 50% of those individuals who had pools built during the last year would have decided not to build the pool if the fencing ordinance had been in effect; that sometimes a fence is impractical because of the size and shape of the lot; and having otherwise sup- ported the position of Supervisor Fanden; and Mr. Prosser having responded to questions from Supervisor Powers regarding the value of fences in saving lives and whether or not a fence is of some benefit; and questions from Supervisor McPeak regarding the survey conducted which concluded that 50% of the indi- viduals would not have built pools had the fencing ordinance been in effect; and The Chairman having noted written comments from Deborah Tupper and Mrs. J. W. Kopcie supporting the ordinance; and Dr. Stevan Cavalier having criticized the survey conducted by the pool owners because of what he views as a distorted letter sent to pool owners, and having otherwise spoken in favor of the ordinance; and Rosalind Wofsy, on behalf of the Developmental Disabilities Council, having spoken in favor of the ordinance; and The Chairman having noted written comments in favor of the ordinance from Joseph Bethoney; and Val Toland, President of the Bay Area Pool Builders Association, having noted that the survey of pool owners conducted by the pool builders was conducted prior to the letter read by Dr. Cavalier , and that the reasons people would not have built their pool were varied depending on the individual' s circumstances, and having responded to questions from Mary Farnsworth regarding the relative cost of fences, pool covers, and alarms systems; and Nadina Riggsbee having spoken in favor of the ordinance, and having read letters of support for the ordinance from Chief Michael Blodgett of the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District and Diane Schinnerer , Mayor of the City of San Ramon; and Donnie Mitchum, pool owner in Antioch and a day care pro- vider, having suggested that the cover or fence should be required for people who care for other people' s children but should not be required for those who have no children, and having suggested that the Board does not have the right to legislate responsibility and that it will be impossible to prevent all accidents; and The Board having .unanimously voted to close the public hearing; and Supervisor Powers having moved that the Board direct County Counsel and the Building Inspector to prepare an ordinance which is not retroactive; which applies only to pools as defined in the current ordinance code (excluding spas, hot tubs and wading pools) ; which does not permit the use of the wall of the house to serve as the fourth side of an enclosure in lieu of the fence; and which allows no alternative to requiring a fence of at least 4' completely surrounding a swimming pool with self-closing and self- locking latches; and Supervisor Torlakson having seconded the motion with the comment that a fence won' t entirely solve the problem but will help; and Supervisor Powers having spoken in favor of the motion because of his concern about drownings and near-drownings and his belief that a fence will help to prevent drownings; and Supervisor McPeak having spoken in favor of the motion because while the required fence may save only a few lives, even one life makes the ordinance worthwhile; and Supervisor Schroder having spoken against the motion on the basis that he is not satisfied with the requirement for a fence, believing that other alternatives miqht work better; that the Board has not received any input from most of the incorporated cities and thus the county ordinance would be a "hit and miss" approach; The motion passed by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Powers, McPeak, Torlakson NOES: Supervisors Fanden, Schroder Supervisor Powers having moved that the Board direct the Building Inspector to design an education program which can be used with those households which already have pools and which will not be affected by the proposed ordinance, and return to the Board with that education program, and further that the Board join the City of Danville in declaring April, 1984 as "Pool Safety Awareness Month; " The Motion was adopted UNANIMOUSLY. Thereafter, the Board directed that County Counsel and the Building Inspector return the proposed ordinance to the Board on March 6, 1984, at 10: 30 a.m. , at which time the Board intends to introduce the ordinance, waive reading, and fix March 13, 1984 for adoption. I hereby certify that this is a bwandONectoopyoi an action taken and entered on the minutes of thO Board of Superviso.m on the date shown. Orig Dept: Clerk of the Board ATTESTED: cc: County Counsel J.P, C�SAO'`! '```_'�ti' ?r O'ERK Building Inspection and ex officio of the Board County Administrator fly Deputy 231