| Author | Post |
|---|
NavyLT
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Apr 2nd, 2009 09:37 pm |
|
Island county 9.40.320 needs green pending!
2 April 2009
Dear Mr. Havercroft,
The Board of Island County Commissioners has had discussion regarding weapons in parks. We have routed your concerns to our legal department for interpretation and recommendation. Indeed our code is in conflict with state regulations. We have been advised to proceed with a recommendation for code revision via our Parks Board (this is the process).
Please know that your inquiries and concerns are very important to us. Our staff and programs have been and will continue to be compromised due to the financial crisis that Island County our Nation and even the world face.
Unfortunately this translates to longer response times.
We appreciate your patience and reminders.
In the mean time - our law enforcement and law and justice staff are aware of the situation and will respond accordingly i.e. it is unlikely we will have an arrest under a code we know is unenforceable; hence we do not anticipate a situation where legal expenses will be incurred.
Sincerely,
Angie Homola
Island County Commissioner District 2
(360) 679-7353 office
a.homola@co.island.wa.us
Note: All correspondence is public record
Last edited on Thu Apr 2nd, 2009 09:38 pm by NavyLT
|
Izzle
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Apr 20th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 156 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 2nd, 2009 10:03 pm |
|
Gene Beasley wrote: Izzle wrote: It's not one that is on the list but I got an email today from Wenatchee and as of January 22 they have removed their codes concerning firearms and said that they will be changing the online code shortly.
I'm not sure what they are changing. They aren't on this list because all of their local code were in line with state preemption. I wonder if this is the easy way to make sure you don't run afoul? I saw many of the newer cities just go for the adoption by reference method.
Check out Wenatchee Municipal Code 6A.18.240 at:
http://www.codepublishing.com/WA/wenatchee.html
It is still listed but they said they have a call into the company that lists their Municipal code to have them change it.
|
j2l3
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Apr 2nd, 2009 10:09 pm |
|
| I'm still not seeing the issue. That code doesn't prohibit the possession of firearms, only the discharge or firearms unless for self defense. Discharge IS permitted to be regulated. Last edited on Thu Apr 2nd, 2009 10:09 pm by j2l3
|
Izzle
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Apr 20th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 156 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 2nd, 2009 10:13 pm |
|
6A.18.240 Firearms prohibited in parks. (1) No person except duly authorized law enforcement personnel shall possess a firearm, bow and arrow, crossbow, or air or gas weapon in a city park.
|
j2l3
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Apr 2nd, 2009 10:18 pm |
|
It doesn't say that, at least not in the version in the link you provided. Must have already been changed.
6A.18.240 Firearms prohibited in parks.
(1) No person shall possess a bow and arrow, crossbow, or air or gas weapon in a city park. No person shall discharge across, in, or into any city park area a firearm, bow and arrow, crossbow, air or gas weapon, or any device capable of injuring or killing any person or animal or damaging or destroying any public or private property except for law enforcement officials acting in official capacity, or discharge of a firearm in defense of self or others.
(2) A violation of this section is a gross misdemeanor. (Ord. 2009-04 § 1; Ord. 2008-10 § 2)
|
Izzle
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Apr 20th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 156 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 2nd, 2009 10:21 pm |
|
Ah it must have just been changed earlier today because I still had the window open from last night that I cited it out of.
|
j2l3
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Apr 2nd, 2009 10:24 pm |
|
| Well cool, glad it's changed! They work fast when they need to it seems.
|
Izzle
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Apr 20th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 156 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 27th, 2009 11:39 pm |
|
Received this back from the City of Chelan so I guess there status can be updated:
Thanks for the follow-up. We did take it to committee and decided we would follow the state law as it is written. Our attorney will be drawing this up for us to be presented to full council. I hope this helps. Jim
Last edited on Mon Apr 27th, 2009 11:39 pm by Izzle
|
Gene Beasley
Regular Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 28th, 2009 04:14 am |
|
Izzle wrote: Received this back from the City of Chelan so I guess there status can be updated:
Thanks for the follow-up. We did take it to committee and decided we would follow the state law as it is written. Our attorney will be drawing this up for us to be presented to full council. I hope this helps. Jim
Is this for both the parks and alcohol by the drink or just parks?
|
Izzle
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Apr 20th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 156 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 28th, 2009 07:57 am |
|
I have addressed both of them during my email conversations so I can only assume both.
|
Right Wing Wacko
Campaign Veteran
|
Posted: Tue Apr 28th, 2009 10:06 pm |
|
Izzle wrote: Received this back from the City of Chelan so I guess there status can be updated:
Thanks for the follow-up. We did take it to committee and decided we would follow the state law as it is written. Our attorney will be drawing this up for us to be presented to full council. I hope this helps. Jim
So THEY decided they would follow State Law!
Did they have another option?
|
Izzle
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Apr 20th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 156 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 30th, 2009 05:59 pm |
|
I don't know if it is too early to change the status but I received this email from Burien stating that they are drafting a new ordnance concerning 9.50.210 and 9.50.220.
I have been informed that a draft ordinance is being worked on, and it is hoped that this will be brought before the Council shortly.
Thank you- L. Clausen
|
Richard6218
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Apr 30th, 2009 11:21 pm |
|
Izzle wrote: I don't know if it is too early to change the status but I received this email from Burien stating that they are drafting a new ordnance concerning 9.50.210 and 9.50.220.
I have been informed that a draft ordinance is being worked on, and it is hoped that this will be brought before the Council shortly.
Thank you- L. Clausen
Governments have a way of dragging their feet and taking forever to act on ANYthing. I would not suggest changing the status until you witness a city council action enacting whatever it is you want.
|
Gene Beasley
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri May 1st, 2009 09:04 am |
|
Richard6218 wrote: Governments have a way of dragging their feet and taking forever to act on ANYthing. I would not suggest changing the status until you witness a city council action enacting whatever it is you want.
It's currently listed as pending, not resolved. I don't have real strict standards for these, but generally amended or repealed statutes is good enough in my mind to be resolved (signs may still read incorrectly).
|
Richard6218
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri May 1st, 2009 04:28 pm |
|
Gene Beasley wrote: Richard6218 wrote: Governments have a way of dragging their feet and taking forever to act on ANYthing. I would not suggest changing the status until you witness a city council action enacting whatever it is you want.
It's currently listed as pending, not resolved. I don't have real strict standards for these, but generally amended or repealed statutes is good enough in my mind to be resolved (signs may still read incorrectly).
Gene:
I agree that the status would more correctly be "pending" but to me it seems classifying the item as "resolved" would mean that final action has already been taken, i.e. a resolution passed by a city or county council. Am I on track with that?
|
Izzle
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Apr 20th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 156 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri May 1st, 2009 06:00 pm |
|
Gene Beasley wrote: Richard6218 wrote: Governments have a way of dragging their feet and taking forever to act on ANYthing. I would not suggest changing the status until you witness a city council action enacting whatever it is you want.
It's currently listed as pending, not resolved. I don't have real strict standards for these, but generally amended or repealed statutes is good enough in my mind to be resolved (signs may still read incorrectly).
I also got an email today from the City Manager's office that they have informed the local PD not to enforce the two codes.
|
Gene Beasley
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri May 1st, 2009 06:58 pm |
|
Richard6218 wrote: Gene:
I agree that the status would more correctly be "pending" but to me it seems classifying the item as "resolved" would mean that final action has already been taken, i.e. a resolution passed by a city or county council. Am I on track with that?
Right on track. Because of the time and cost involved in changing out signs and republishing codes online, neither of which is cheap; if I can find find evidence that the local legislative body has taken action on it, I count that as resolved.
Izzle wrote: I also got an email today from the City Manager's office that they have informed the local PD not to enforce the two codes.
I'm kind of torn on this insofar as I don't remember if I kept others like this as pending or moved them to resolved. I think I kept them pending. In either case I would have pointed to the post (if in this thread) or thread/post discussing the latest update.
Kind of wordy; I need to get to sleep. Good job!
|
Izzle
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Apr 20th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 156 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu May 7th, 2009 06:04 pm |
|
I received a response from Chelan County that they have changed their code to conform with state law.
Here is a link to the resolution that they signed:
http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?johjkzzjtmn
|
kyle.huff
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat May 9th, 2009 06:21 pm |
|
I have one to add to this list for Longview Washington -
They are taking the stance against open-carry as a violation of RCW 9.41.270. I know this because I was physically detained while peaceably shopping - and had my firearm removed from me without my consent by the Longview police. (I was not charged, nor arrested, you can read the whole story here: http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum55/25693.html ).
I was told by the officers that the city attorney interprets RCW 9.41.270 as no open carry.
Currently I am collecting the supporting documentation regarding the event (the police report, the official written legal opinion of the city attorney, etc.) to speak with the longview city council members about. We will see where it goes from there. I will keep you up to date of any official decision.
[EDIT] Added a link to the opencarry forum topic which details the event.
Last edited on Sun May 10th, 2009 09:55 pm by kyle.huff
|
Izzle
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Apr 20th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 156 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon May 11th, 2009 10:41 pm |
|
I had a wonderful conversation with the City Attorney of Maple Valley about their municipal code 7.05.050. She informed me that she spoke with the the chief of police and they both agreed it is in violation of state law. She also said he will be informing his officers not to enforce the code until she is able to make the proper changes.
|
Current time is 11:39 pm | Page:   1 2 3 4 5 6 7   |
|
