| Author | Post |
|---|
M1Gunr
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Dec 4th, 2008 06:03 pm |
|
Some of us in the past have been asked to leave the Stadium/Dome and or remove our weapons from them. In early November I sent an email to Mr Combs, the mayor and Tacoma City Council members (one of which is gun friendly) letting them know that those with a CPL are legally entitled to enter those facilities. As the PAFD is a city run position and funded by public funds it falls under preemption thus allowing us to carry under RCW 9.41.300. I'm missing something here... what is it??
RCW 9.41.300 (2)(b) Restricting the possession of firearms in any stadium or convention center, operated by a city, town, county, or other municipality, except that such restrictions shall not apply to:
(i) Any pistol in the possession of a person licensed under RCW 9.41.070 or exempt from the licensing requirement by RCW 9.41.060;
Public Assembly Facilities within the City of Tacoma include:
The Tacoma Dome, Cheney Stadium- home of the Tacoma Rainiers Baseball Club, the Greater Tacoma Convention and Trade Center, the Broadway Center for the Performing Arts, Pantages Theater, Rialto Theater and Theater on the Square. Please visit the specific venue's website for more information.
http://www.cityoftacoma.org/Page.aspx?nid=92
Mike Combs
Public Assembly Facilities Director
mcombs@cityoftacoma.org
(253) 593-7612
++++++++++
http://www.thenewstribune.com/front/topphoto/story/557216.html
Tacoma, Pierce County plan a bold swap DAVID WICKERT AND JASON HAGEY; david.wickert@thenewstribune.com; jason.hagey@thenewstribune.com Published: December 4th, 2008 01:56 AM | Updated: December 4th, 2008 07:58 AM In a swap of major public landmarks, the City of Tacoma and Pierce County are working on a deal that would give the city full control of Cheney Stadium and the county sole possession of the County-City Building. Under an agreement to be considered by elected officials from both governments next week, Tacoma would give the county its share of the jointly owned County-City Building downtown. In exchange, Pierce County would give up its share of Cheney Stadium, plus $2 million.
City and county officials say the deal makes sense for taxpayers and would give each government full control of a prized asset.
“It’s better to have one government in charge (of each facility) instead of multiple governments,” said County Executive John Ladenburg.
The county owns half an interest in six parcels at and around Cheney Stadium, the home of minor league baseball’s Tacoma Rainiers. The city owns the remaining share and manages the stadium property.
According to the county Assessor-Treasurer’s Office, the six stadium parcels are worth about $10.5 million.
The city owns about 44 percent of the County-City Building. The county owns the remaining share of the building, which is assessed at $115.6 million.
Despite the value difference, city leaders see sense in giving up the city’s share of the downtown building in order to get control of the stadium.
Mike Slevin, the city’s interim public works director, said the city uses only about 7 percent of the County-City Building’s floor space, but has been paying for 25 percent of the maintenance costs. That’s worked out to about $750,000 to $1 million per two-year budget. The amount can vary considerably depending on what work the building needs.
If the swap is approved and completed, the city would lease back the space it uses in the County-City Building.
With Cheney Stadium, the city would take complete ownership – and assume the obligation to remodel it, a job that’s estimated to cost up to $26 million.
Some of that money already is secured. There are about $5 million in available grants, and the county would agree to help find $5 million in matching funds, Slevin said. The private owners of the Rainiers baseball team also would contribute $5 million, he said. That leaves a shortfall of about $10 million that officials would need to find.
It makes sense for the city to own the stadium, Slevin said, noting that it’s already managed by the city.
“This puts the right facilities under the right ownership,” Slevin said.
For its part, the county has long wanted to gain control of the County-City Building. Ladenburg said the county has spent about $14 million to renovate the building in recent years. He said county taxpayers would get a good deal because the value of the building is greater than the value of the stadium.
The County-City Building opened in 1959, and Cheney Stadium was built a year later. The slab-sided building, which cost about $9.5 million, replaced the Victorian Pierce County Courthouse. It housed many city offices, including those of the mayor and City Council members, the city manager and the public works department, but over the years it’s become primarily a county building.
The city and the county have been talking about a swap of the properties for years. But it took a recent deal for the county to acquire the Tacoma Narrows Airport to jump-start the property swap.
Pierce County and the Peninsula Metropolitan Parks District initially agreed to pay Tacoma $5 million for the airport and a golf course near Gig Harbor. However, the Federal Aviation Administration nixed the sale price, saying Tacoma couldn’t sell the airport at a profit.
Instead, the FAA approved a $3 million sale price.
Now the county is pitching in the extra $2 million it had budgeted for the airport purchase to sweeten its offer in the stadium-building swap.
The County Council’s Rules Committee will consider the proposal at its meeting Monday, and the full council will take it up Tuesday.
The Tacoma City Council also will take up the proposal Tuesday.
David Wickert: 253-274-7341
blogs.thenewstribune.com/politics
|
M1Gunr
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Jan 8th, 2009 11:07 pm |
|
I got my reply back yesterday.
http://download.rbn.com/rbn/bill/download/ocdo/training-bulletins/tacoma/Tacoma-Dome.pdf
edit: to correct link
Last edited on Thu Jan 8th, 2009 11:10 pm by M1Gunr
|
joeroket
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Jan 9th, 2009 01:18 am |
|
Where in the hell did he read that according the the AG opinion that a city acting in private capacity can restrict firearms? That guy is, for lack of a better term, an asshat.
Maybe he needs to be directed to RCW 9.41.300 that states;
"(b) Restricting the possession of firearms in any stadium or convention center, operated by a city, town, county, or other municipality, except that such restrictions shall not apply to:
(i) Any pistol in the possession of a person licensed under RCW 9.41.070 or exempt from the licensing requirement by RCW 9.41.060; or" Last edited on Fri Jan 9th, 2009 01:20 am by joeroket
|
M1Gunr
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Jan 9th, 2009 01:23 am |
|
thus has been my fight since last summer....
|
MadHatter66
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Jan 9th, 2009 04:31 am |
|
All I can say to that is wow... Where do they find jokers like this? And where do they get their horrible legal advise from?
Good luck in the fight with them...
|
M1Gunr
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Feb 13th, 2009 07:19 pm |
|
I wrote a letter to the City of Tacoma in Nov 2008 about the signage at the Tacoma Dome. Since the T-Dome is a city owned and run facility they fall under preemption.
My letter as well as their response and the response of another citizen are attached. I am in the process of sending another to them after I get some input from the OCDO Community.
http://download.rbn.com/rbn/bill/download/ocdo/tacoma/CityofTacTacomaDome.pdf
http://download.rbn.com/rbn/bill/download/ocdo/tacoma/CityofTacPublicAssemblyFacLetter2008.pdf
http://download.rbn.com/rbn/bill/download/ocdo/tacoma/CityofTacPublicAssemblyFacLetterJan2009.pdf
edit: links fixed
Last edited on Fri Feb 13th, 2009 07:25 pm by M1Gunr
|
kwiebe
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 17th, 2009 01:16 am |
|
Were there any further developments on this?
|
kwiebe
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jun 20th, 2009 12:07 am |
|
I still think the City of Tacoma needs to be taken to task for their "private capacity" smokescreen...
|
M1Gunr
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jun 20th, 2009 12:15 am |
|
kwiebe wrote: I still think the City of Tacoma needs to be taken to task for their "private capacity" smokescreen...
For me, its finding the time right now. I've got letters into the US Attorney's office for Postal matters, letters to the Postal Inspection Director, wayy too much work and not enough free time to pursue the matter at this time. I haven't even been to a Rainers game or a Tacoma Dome event this year.
With the economy in the tank like it is I can't see the city hiring some 3rd party to run the 2 stadiums. As it has been pointed out, its legal to carry in both places. Enjoy your summer.
|
deanf
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sun Jun 21st, 2009 10:17 am |
|
I still think the City of Tacoma needs to be taken to task for their "private capacity" smokescreen...
Then push your chair away from your desk and go do it.
|
Current time is 08:12 am | |
|
|
|
