Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 53

Thread: Chelan County PUD Parks

  1. #1
    Regular Member Stretch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Pasco, WA, ,
    Posts
    489

    Chelan County PUD Parks

    I was looking for some park information in Chelan County tonight and stumbled across this.

    http://www.chelanpud.org/documents/P...8012512%29.pdf

    Section 9:
    No person shall openly display a firearm or weapon in any park area, nor shall any person discharge or
    propel across, in, or into any park area, a firearm, bow and arrow, spear,
    spear gun, harpoon, sling shot, BB gun, 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. Provided however that it is permissible to possess hunting equipment secured in a vehicle or transported across Chelan PUD property and gear used for fishing that would otherwise be in violation of this policy,(i.e.relocating a firearm from a vehicle to a boat in preparation to duck hunt, or possessing a fillet knife for the purpose of cleaning fish)
    Last edited by Stretch; 04-17-2013 at 02:20 AM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Difdi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    996
    I notice it was last revised 1/25/2012. This is after Chan v. City of Seattle, so they certainly have no excuse for it.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Stretch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Pasco, WA, ,
    Posts
    489
    I noticed that too, but that could be the last, "new or updated" rule/regulation they changed. I'm betting this is an old rule they may not recall having in here, I have found that is the case in some situations. I suppose an email is in order to bring their attention to this preempted rule.

    *email sent to board members*
    Last edited by Stretch; 04-17-2013 at 02:53 AM.

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran MSG Laigaie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Philipsburg, Montana
    Posts
    3,135
    Quote Originally Posted by Stretch View Post
    I'm betting this is an old rule they may not recall having in here, I have found that is the case in some situations......

    I suppose an email is in order to bring their attention to this preempted rule.............

    *email sent to board members*
    1. There is still a good deal of "old" law out there. When you are neck deep in paper it takes a while to get thru it.

    2. An attention getting email as a reminder.

    3. " email sent". Citizenship is a Verb. Good on you Stretch
    "Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the people's liberty teeth (and) keystone... the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable... more than 99% of them by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference .When firearms go, all goes, we need them every hour." -- George Washington

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    East Wenatchee, Washington, USA
    Posts
    132
    I attempted to tackle this awhile ago when I was relatively new to OC. Sorta dropped the ball back then (obviously) as nothing has changed.

    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...-to-preemption

  6. #6
    Regular Member Stretch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Pasco, WA, ,
    Posts
    489

    Re: Chelan County PUD Parks

    Response received:


    Mr. Xxxxxx,

    Chelan PUD commissioners notified me of your recent email regarding our current policy on the open display of weapons in PUD parks.

    I wanted to let you know that we are in the process of reviewing this policy and will take your comments into consideration. In the meantime, please don't hesitate to contact me directly with any comments, questions or concerns.

    Sincerely,

    John Janney General Manager Chelan County PUD 327 N Wenatchee Avenue Wenatchee, WA 98802

    (509) 661 - 4602



    Sent by Droid

  7. #7
    Regular Member hermannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Okanogan Highland
    Posts
    2,332
    I have never had any problems on Chelan PUD property...I think that is because "display" is used in the same manner as "display" in RCW 9.41.270. I know it does not have the "intent to intimidate" part, but I've never had a problem...yes, I have talked to a Chelan Sheriff's deputy (this was 25 to 30 years ago) when I was OC, and someone had called in MWAG...his response was "nothing illegal here", did not ask to see the weapon, did not ask for a CPL. That encounter was not specifically on PUD property, but it did go to show the Sheriff's Deputy did know the law.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Stretch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Pasco, WA, ,
    Posts
    489
    Well, here is a response received just a few minutes ago. Also including the attached "revision."

    Hi Xxxx,



    I wanted to let you know that we have completed our review of Chelan PUD’s park regulation restricting the open display and discharging of weapons in PUD parks. After careful consideration, we believe the restriction on the open display of firearms is reasonable and consistent with RCW 9.41.270. The Chan case and RCW 9.41.290 do not apply.



    As I’m sure you can appreciate, the patrons of our parks expect to feel safe in our parks and the open display of firearms in a park could be intimidating and/or warrant alarm for the safety of other park patrons. As you know, this policy does not prohibit persons from carrying a concealed weapon when properly permitted under state law.



    As a result of our review, we revised the language under Section 9 – Firearms and/or Weapons. Our goal was to better describe the reasons for the restrictions and to clarify both prohibited and allowed activities. The revised language is attached for your information.



    I hope this clarifies our position on this and that you will agree that it is a reasonable approach that accommodates the varied interests of our park customers.



    Sincerely,



    John Janney
    Attached Files Attached Files

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Moscow, ID
    Posts
    384
    Sounds like an opportunity to go have a get together there

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran slapmonkay's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    1,267
    I called and left a message with his secretary for him to call me back. I will also craft an email.

    John Janney (General Manager)
    Phone: (509) 661-4602
    Email: John.Janney@chelanpud.org

    Carnan Bergren (President)
    (509) 661-4313
    (509) 679-9416 Cell
    carnan.bergren@chelanpud.org

    Ann Congdon (Vice President)
    (509) 661-4239
    (509) 679-1711 Cell
    ann.congdon@chelanpud.org

    [Edit]: Email sent
    Last edited by slapmonkay; 05-16-2013 at 12:26 PM.
    I Am Not A Lawyer, verify all facts presented independently.

    It's called the "American Dream" because you have to be asleep to believe it. - George Carlin

    I carry a spare tire, in case I have a flat. I carry life insurance, in case I die. I carry a gun, in case I need it.

  11. #11
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,666
    Therefore....law enforcement must now conceal in PUD parks....
    Live Free or Die!

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    WA State
    Posts
    33
    Quote Originally Posted by Stretch View Post
    Well, here is a response received just a few minutes ago. Also including the attached "revision."

    Hi Xxxx,



    I wanted to let you know that we have completed our review of Chelan PUD’s park regulation restricting the open display and discharging of weapons in PUD parks. After careful consideration, we believe the restriction on the open display of firearms is reasonable and consistent with RCW 9.41.270. The Chan case and RCW 9.41.290 do not apply.



    As I’m sure you can appreciate, the patrons of our parks expect to feel safe in our parks and the open display of firearms in a park could be intimidating and/or warrant alarm for the safety of other park patrons. As you know, this policy does not prohibit persons from carrying a concealed weapon when properly permitted under state law.



    As a result of our review, we revised the language under Section 9 – Firearms and/or Weapons. Our goal was to better describe the reasons for the restrictions and to clarify both prohibited and allowed activities. The revised language is attached for your information.



    I hope this clarifies our position on this and that you will agree that it is a reasonable approach that accommodates the varied interests of our park customers.



    Sincerely,



    John Janney
    So, call rapgood and see if he'll sue them for injunctive and declaratory relief.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    Quote Originally Posted by Stretch View Post
    Well, here is a response received just a few minutes ago. Also including the attached "revision."

    Hi Xxxx,



    I wanted to let you know that we have completed our review of Chelan PUD’s park regulation restricting the open display and discharging of weapons in PUD parks. After careful consideration, we believe the restriction on the open display of firearms is reasonable and consistent with RCW 9.41.270. The Chan case and RCW 9.41.290 do not apply.



    As I’m sure you can appreciate, the patrons of our parks expect to feel safe in our parks and the open display of firearms in a park could be intimidating and/or warrant alarm for the safety of other park patrons. As you know, this policy does not prohibit persons from carrying a concealed weapon when properly permitted under state law.



    As a result of our review, we revised the language under Section 9 – Firearms and/or Weapons. Our goal was to better describe the reasons for the restrictions and to clarify both prohibited and allowed activities. The revised language is attached for your information.



    I hope this clarifies our position on this and that you will agree that it is a reasonable approach that accommodates the varied interests of our park customers.



    Sincerely,



    John Janney

    Who does John Janney think he is?

    RCW 9.41.290 does not apply ROTFLMAO.

    What RCW prohibits open carry because that is the only way they can do this.

  14. #14
    Campaign Veteran slapmonkay's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    1,267
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Hayes View Post
    Who does John Janney think he is?

    RCW 9.41.290 does not apply ROTFLMAO.

    What RCW prohibits open carry because that is the only way they can do this.
    They are trying to play the game of 9.41.270, saying that an individual would 'warrant alarm' by openly carrying a firearm.

    They must have missed the part of State v Spencer where it “only prohibits the carrying or displaying of weapons when objective circumstances would warrant alarm in a reasonable person.” and “the Legislature’s use of the word ‘warrants’ in the statue implies that there must be a sufficient objective basis for the alarm, i.e., circumstances must be such that a reasonable person would be alarmed.”
    I Am Not A Lawyer, verify all facts presented independently.

    It's called the "American Dream" because you have to be asleep to believe it. - George Carlin

    I carry a spare tire, in case I have a flat. I carry life insurance, in case I die. I carry a gun, in case I need it.

  15. #15
    Regular Member Thor80's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Spokane County, WA
    Posts
    299
    I'd send him some links to Oak Harbor's debacle to give him a look at what happens when elected officials attempt to defy state law.....

    -Thor
    Let me make a short, opening, blanket statement. There are no good guns. There are no bad guns. Any gun in the hands of a bad man is a bad thing. Any gun in the hands of a decent person is no threat to anybody - except bad people.

    - Charleton Heston

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    Quote Originally Posted by slapmonkay View Post
    They are trying to play the game of 9.41.270, saying that an individual would 'warrant alarm' by openly carrying a firearm.

    They must have missed the part of State v Spencer where it “only prohibits the carrying or displaying of weapons when objective circumstances would warrant alarm in a reasonable person.” and “the Legislature’s use of the word ‘warrants’ in the statue implies that there must be a sufficient objective basis for the alarm, i.e., circumstances must be such that a reasonable person would be alarmed.”

    I sent him an email pointing out the error of his ways but forgot to mention Spencer.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Bothell
    Posts
    586
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Hayes View Post
    Who does John Janney think he is?
    A short-timer and doesn't care: http://www.chelanpud.org/11404.html Likely he won't change the policies while he's in office.

    How many court cases have decided carrying isn't warranting alarm nor probable cause for a stop? Which can be dumbed down to the courts saying, "hey, gun possession is A-OK!"
    Last edited by mikeyb; 05-16-2013 at 01:02 PM.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    WA State
    Posts
    33
    Quote Originally Posted by mikeyb View Post
    A short-timer and doesn't care: http://www.chelanpud.org/11404.html Likely he won't change the policies while he's in office.

    How many court cases have decided carrying isn't warranting alarm nor probable cause for a stop? Which can be dumbed down to the courts saying, "hey, gun possession is A-OK!"
    This jack leg is just trying to be cleaver. He thinks that they can establish what is "reasonable" and articlate the circumstance into the rule.

  19. #19
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763

    so?????

    Half of the parks in Kitsap County are still signed "no firearms", the sheriff and Port Orchard police will not enforce it.

    let him ramble all he wants, you're not breaking any law so carry anyway. 10 bucks is on they'll realize they can't do anything about it.
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Wa, ,
    Posts
    2,769
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    Half of the parks in Kitsap County are still signed "no firearms", the sheriff and Port Orchard police will not enforce it.

    let him ramble all he wants, you're not breaking any law so carry anyway. 10 bucks is on they'll realize they can't do anything about it.
    No, Eric, not that they won't enforce it, but they CAN"T enforce it.
    This will be part of the discussion on Saturday.

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran slapmonkay's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    1,267
    I just got off the phone with John Janney and due to my email and the several emails and phone calls, they are going to continue to review this section of code and get back with me.

    He did inform me that they do have a legal department that reviewed the previous request, and the legal department in fact was the ones that gave the recommend changes. I asked if there was any public documentation regarding the legal departments recommendation and he did not know (might need to submit FOIA, to get full disclosure on the legal departments reasoning).

    I ask that you continue to email/call them with feedback as it seems like they are at least tracking the response.
    I Am Not A Lawyer, verify all facts presented independently.

    It's called the "American Dream" because you have to be asleep to believe it. - George Carlin

    I carry a spare tire, in case I have a flat. I carry life insurance, in case I die. I carry a gun, in case I need it.

  22. #22
    Regular Member Stretch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Pasco, WA, ,
    Posts
    489

    Re: Chelan County PUD Parks

    Thanks for those who've stepped up and sent emails. I hope to have time tonight to reply.

    Sent by Droid

  23. #23
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by Trigger Dr View Post
    No, Eric, not that they won't enforce it, but they CAN"T enforce it.
    This will be part of the discussion on Saturday.
    still the point remains, they physically type whatever they want on a sign. They can type "big purple flies gazelle" on the sign..... it doesn't matter. they have no legal authority to enforce. so carry away.
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Bothell
    Posts
    586
    They are fear-mongering people, exploiting this section: "in a manner, under circumstances, and at a time and place that either manifests an intent to intimidate another or that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons."

    Walking in a park, on a sidewalk, in a store, etc., supports no evidence towards being dangerous. Regardless of their reasoning, it still contradicts state pre-emption, since it is more restrictive than what state law allows.

    RCW .290:
    The state of Washington hereby fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state"
    RCW .300:
    (2) Cities, towns, counties, and other municipalities may enact laws and ordinances:

    (a) Restricting the discharge of firearms in any portion of their respective jurisdictions where there is a reasonable likelihood that humans, domestic animals, or property will be jeopardized. Such laws and ordinances shall not abridge the right of the individual guaranteed by Article I, section 24 of the state Constitution to bear arms in defense of self or others; and

    (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

    (ii) Any showing, demonstration, or lecture involving the exhibition of firearms.
    They're going up the river De Nile. Without a paddle.

  25. #25
    Regular Member hermannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Okanogan Highland
    Posts
    2,332
    Email sent.

    Comment...I have enjoyed Chelan Co PUD parks within the last year. I have also (as always) OC'd in those parks with no problems. I will say that the Chelan Co Sheriff's Deputies I have encountered do know the law, to include RCW 9.41.060(8). To quote one Chelan Co Deputy..."I see nothing illegal going on here"

    My email:

    Mr. Janney!

    It has recently come to my attention that Chelan Co parks has a firearms policy (9) that is inconsistent with state law. May I quote a snip: (BTW: There is nothing in the following snip that is “consistent” with WA state law”)

    “Consistent with state statute and to ensure that all park patrons feel safe and secure in a park area, no person shall openly display, exhibit, brandish or draw any firearm or other weapon in a park, except as specifically provided in this section. This provision does not restrict persons from properly carrying concealed weapons with appropriate permits as allowed by law enforcement.”

    Point number one: You do not allow the Sheriff’s deputies in your parks? Of course you do. I know you do allow the deputies to open carry their weapons in your parks, I have seen them there, while I was there...Therefore, I must assume a properly holstered, open carried, pistol must not be what you mean in you “openly display” statement. Otherwise it would against policy for a deputy to carry his pistol on your property. This is a very blatant attempt to discourage what is legal, and will result in nothing good for anyone if someone tries to enforce an illegal interpretation of this policy, especially nothing good for Chelan Co PUD. It could become quite expensive for you. BTW: same goes for a rifle or shotgun, loaded, or not (as long as the long gun is not loaded while in a vehicle) I think that if someone were to call in to 911 that there was “a man with a gun” for a legal carry, Chelan PUD could be shown liable for the cost of that call, and abuse of the system because of the way this policy statement is written.

    Point number two: The state of Washington has no “brandish” law and has not defined the term. As the state has not defined “brandish” you are already outside the bounds of what is allowed by RCW 9.41.300 if for no other reason. It is obvious you either do not know the law, choose to ignore the law, or you are from some other state. Try Washington state law, and follow it. Do not try to impose some other states law. BTW: you so do not understand the statement on “Exhibit” I will not even address it here. You might want to read some of the WA AG opinions, they might help you understand.

    Point number three: I need no “permission”, or permission slip, from anyone, under any circumstances, to carry openly or concealed, in your park. The state of Washington constitution, Article 1 Section 24 states it is my personal, individual, right to carry arms for my own self defense. RCW 9.41.060(8) states that while going to, coming from, or participating in, any outdoor recreational activity, (I would assume I was participating in an “outdoor recreational activity” if I was to be in one of your parks in the first place) “any person” is exempt from the provisions of RCW 9.41.050 (and also exempt from several other provisions in other sections of RCW 9.41.)

    I would seriously suggest that you obtain legal council and revise your policy statement to reflect current state law before you have an expensive law suit on your hands. You might take your blinders off when you do so. the open carrying of a pistol for your personal self defense is legal in the state of Washington, no nanny slip required. Chan V Seattle was very expensive for Seattle. I do not think Chelan PUD would really want to repeat that futile effort and waste even more money on a law that has already been settled.

    RCW 9.41.300 allows you to restrict the discharge of firearms within your park, except for self-defense RCW 9.41.300(2)(a)

    “(2) Cities, towns, counties, and other municipalities may enact laws and ordinances:

    (a) Restricting the discharge of firearms in any portion of their respective jurisdictions where there is a reasonable likelihood that humans, domestic animals, or property will be jeopardized. Such laws and ordinances shall not abridge the right of the individual guaranteed by Article I, section 24 of the state Constitution to bear arms in defense of self or others;”

    Try reading OUR Washington State law, and utilizing legal council, before you try write your policy statements.

    Sincerely yours:

    My name:
    Tonasket, WA 98855


    Not in this email, but for the forum...BTW: Tonasket 9.22, 9.24, and 9.50 have been officially changed. It is not reflected online yet, but it was done at last town council meeting.
    Last edited by hermannr; 05-16-2013 at 10:15 PM.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •