Update on Lynchburg considering reducing CHP fees

I am not surprised that the City lies like a rug. But the city council meeting is tonight, see Item 2. I will OC to this meeting as will probably some others.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not yet a VCDL member? Join VCDL at: http://www.vcdl.org/join
----------------------------------------------------------------------
VCDL's meeting schedule: http://www.vcdl.org/meetings
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbreviations used in VA-ALERT: http://www.vcdl.org/help/abbr.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Update on Petersburg gun buy-up
2. Update on Lynchburg considering reducing CHP fees
3. Thoughts on McAuliffe, Herring, and Northam not returning their VCDL survey

*********************************************
1. Update on Petersburg gun buy-up
*********************************************

Today I talked with Brian Telfair, the City Attorney for Petersburg, about this weekend's gun buy-up (not a buy-back because Petersburg never owned the guns).

I've had good luck in working with Mr. Telfair before on an issue dealing with an outdated air gun ordinance. He is professional, courteous, and returns calls.

Mr. Telfair was aware that Petersburg cannot participate in any gun buy-ups without having an ordinance on the books authorizing such participation and that the City cannot destroy guns bought in such a program without first trying to sell them.

He told me that all the City was planning on doing was to have some officers at the event for security.

I told him that the gun-control group was most certainly planning on the City taking possession of all purchased firearms and that would mean the City would be participating in the buy-up. In turn, that would put Petersburg in violation of state law.

That struck a chord. Mr. Telfair is going to talk to the gun-control group to make sure they understand that the Petersburg PD is NOT going to take possession of any bought-up guns. The PD would only be providing security. (Any other locality whose PD accepts the guns for purposes of destruction would similarly be "participating" in the buy-up program and find themselves in violation of the law unless they had an ordinance in place allowing such a thing. The locality would still have to attempt to sell the guns before destroying them.)

I will be talking to Mr. Telfair on Thursday morning and will report back on what I learn.

There may be a dealer or two at the event offering better prices for the guns. Also, if any of you are looking to add to your collections, this might be a chance to get a nice gun at a really good price by making an offer to someone headed to the buy-up.

For now, let's see where this is going on Thursday.


*********************************************
2. Update on Lynchburg considering reducing CHP fees
*********************************************

As was mentioned in the last mini-update, Lynchburg City Council member Jeff Helgeson is leading the charge to reduce the cost of getting a CHP.

He asked the police department to justify the $35 fee that they are getting for each CHP being processed. The PD's first response was, "we are losing money on CHPs, even at the current price."

That seemed odd since with the repeal of fingerprinting, the City saves around $30 per permit from what they were paying a few years ago.

After saying he wanted to see the details of the expenses for processing a background check, suddenly there was a "mistake" in accounting! This is amazing: instead of LOSING money, it turns out the City was MAKING money! Who knew? Well, OK, anyone with an ounce of commonsense knew.

Keep this in mind. Instead of a clerk running the background checks, THEY HAVE DETECTIVES DOING IT AT OVERTIME RATES! No wonder Lynchburg needs the $50 - typical government inefficiency with YOUR money.

If you live in Lynchburg, contact your City Council member and show up Tuesday night to support reducing that fee. This is going to be a fight, but the City should not be taking more money from citizens than is required to process a CHP. Not in this economy and not in any economy.

(This has statewide implications, too. I am starting the same ball rolling here in Chesterfield and will report as things progress. This should be done everywhere else in the state where they are still charging $50 for a CHP.)

Here is the contact information for the Lynchburg City Council. Let's urge them to lower the CHP fees! and do so in big numbers!

Hunsdon “H” Cary, III
At Large
Phone: (434) 384-0495
Fax: (434) 455-6942
h.cary@lynchburgva.gov

Joan F. Foster
At Large
Phone: (434) 847-0822
Fax: (434) 455-4381
joan.foster@lynchburgva.gov

Michael A. Gillette, Mayor
Ward I
Phone: (434) 384-5322
Fax: (434) 384-0691
michael.gillette@lynchburgva.gov

Jeff S. Helgeson
Ward III
Phone: (434) 528-3530
Fax: (434) 455-4121
jeff@jeffhelgeson.com

Ceasor T. Johnson, Vice Mayor
Ward II
Cell Phone: (434) 401-0753
Fax: (434) 455-4120
ceasor.johnson@lynchburgva.gov

J. Randolph “Randy” Nelson
At-large
Phone: 434-401-0696
Fax: 434-455-2712
randy.nelson@lynchburgva.gov

Edgar J. T. Perrow, Jr., PE
Ward IV
Phone: (434) 384-5557
Fax: (434) 455-0207
turner.perrow@lynchburgva.gov

--

Here is some coverage in the media:

From news advance.com: http://tinyurl.com/pj8qy54

Update: Lynchburg issues corrected figures on concealed-carry application costs

What nearby localities charge

Here are the total concealed handgun permit fees charged by the localities in our region. The charges all include a $10 fee for the local circuit court clerk’s office and a $5 fee for the Virginia State Police.

• Amherst County: $35
• Appomattox County: $50
• Bedford County: $40.46
• Campbell County: $15
• Lynchburg: $50

Source: City of Lynchburg, Circuit Court Clerk offices

What does it cost?

Local law enforcement agencies are allowed to charge a fee of up to $35 to conduct background checks on concealed handgun permit applicants. Lynchburg charges the maximum, but says it still lost money in two out of the three last fiscal years.

Fiscal Year 2010-11

• City costs: $20,141.94
• Fee revenue: $12,444.00
• Net loss: $7,697.94
Fiscal Year 2011-12

• City costs: $14,853.47
• Fee revenue: $15,235.00
• Net gain: $381.53
Fiscal Year 2012-13

• City costs: $30,314.89
• Fee revenue: $29,399.00
• Net loss: $915.89
Source: City of Lynchburg

***Updated 11:25 A.M. Monday: ***

On Monday morning, Lynchburg issued a corrected summary of the expenses and revenues incurred by the city to handle applications for concealed handgun permits.

The corrected list indicates the city made money on the process in Fiscal Year 2010-11. Earlier reports mistakenly overstated the city's expenses and said it lost money that year.

The new list indicates the city gained from processing concealed handgun permit applications in two of the last three fiscal years. It also came out ahead for the applications processed to date in Fiscal Year 2013-14, which began on July 1.

City Manager Kimball Payne said the expenses shown only reflect staff time spent on background checks. Other expenses like overhead costs were not calculated, he said.

Here is the full set of available corrected data:

Fiscal Year 2010-11

City Costs: $11,217.21

Fee Revenue: $12,444

Net Gain: $1,226.79

Fiscal Year 2011-12

City Costs: $14,853.47

Fee Revenue: $15,235.00

Net Gain: $381.53

Fiscal Year 2012-13

City Costs: $30,314.89

Fee Revenue: $29,399.00

Net Loss: $915.89

Fiscal Year 2013-14 (To Date)

City Costs: $2,956.18

Fee Revenue: $3,465.00

Net Gain: $508.82

Sunday:

Lynchburg City Councilman Jeff Helgeson’s recent comment on concealed gun permit fees will return this week for possible council action.

Last month in a discussion on park safety, Helgeson suggested lowering the concealed carry fees to promote public safety.

Government cannot be everywhere, he said, and citizens should be able to have the tools to protect themselves.

“It would be nice to have that fee reduced so more people can defend themselves, defend their loved ones and defend their families if the situation warrants,” he said at the time.

State law allows local law enforcement agencies to charge a concealed gun permit fee of up to $35 to cover the cost of conducting background checks.

This is on top of a $10 fee charged by the circuit court clerk offices and a $5 fee charged by the Virginia State Police.

Lynchburg charges the maximum allowed local fee, making its combined fee a total of $50. In surrounding counties, the combined fees range from $15 in Campbell to $50 in Appomattox.

The permits are good for five years.

Helgeson’s comments drew no reaction from other council members when first raised last month. But now at his request, the issue is returning for formal consideration.

City administrators are opposed to lowering the fee, citing financial concerns. Although it levies the maximum charge, the city has lost money on processing permit requests in two out of the last three years, they said.

Last fiscal year, Lynchburg police reported spending about $30,300 worth of man-hours conducting background checks on permit applicants.

It recouped $29,400 in fees, creating a loss of about $900.

City Manager Kimball Payne said the department tracks the time spent on permit applications because it uses overtime labor to handle them. [PVC: WHY???!!!]

At Helgeson’s request, staff will present additional information on how those local costs were calculated when the issue is heard at Tuesday’s council meeting, Payne said.

Helgeson did not return a call for comment. Heading into next week’s meeting, it wasn’t clear how much support there was among other council members for a reduced fee.

Mayor Michael Gillette said he saw no “burning” need to change the fee levels.

“We’re already losing money on concealed carry permits. If we were to cut the fee, we’d be losing more,” he said.

Gillette, a permit holder himself, added he has no philosophical opposition to people getting concealed carry permits.

“But I don’t believe the rest of the taxpayers should subsidize that,” he said. “If citizens want a permit, they should pay a reasonable fee for it.” [PVC: And therein lies the problem - the fee isn't reasonable.]

Vice Mayor Ceasor Johnson, whose ward includes both Miller Park and Riverside Park, said he doesn’t agree that encouraging concealed carry will improve public safety.

“I don’t know where his [Helgeson’s] mind is at on issues of this matter,” Johnson said. “We’re talking about kids and kids’ safety in the parks. I’ve got a 4-year-old and a 5-year-old. You think about kids being out on the seesaws and merry-go-rounds and slides.

“If a fight or something breaks out, I don’t see how it makes the parks safer to have hotheads shooting back and forth like this is the wild, wild west. I don’t see how an elected official sitting on City Council could see that as a rational decision.”

Last month in a radio interview with WLNI’s “The Morning Line,” Councilman H. Cary said he didn’t agree with Helgeson’s take on guns and park safety.

Lynchburg does not need a George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin situation, Cary said.

“When people are taunting and cussing and so forth, I wouldn’t want to see somebody with a concealed weapon who might lose their temper and decide to use that weapon,” he said. “I think we can deal with it in another more civilized manner.” [PVC: Mr. Cary should be writing children's books with his vivid imagination.]

Cary declined to comment on the matter this weekend, saying he hadn’t yet read the full report from city staff.

The concealed gun permit issue will be considered by council during its regular business meeting at 7:30 p.m. Tuesday in City Hall, 900 Church St.


*********************************************
3. Thoughts on McAuliffe, Herring, and Northam not returning their VCDL survey
*********************************************

As Democrats, I would hope that Terry McAuliffe, Mark Herring, and Ralph Northam would heed the words of the leader of their Party and return their VCDL survey: "The only people who don't want to disclose the truth are people with something to hide" - President Barak Obama.

Of course that same quote applies to the Republicans and other Democrats who have not returned their VCDL surveys either.



-------------------------------------------
***************************************************************************
VA-ALERT is a project of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc.
(VCDL). VCDL is an all-volunteer, non-partisan grassroots organization
dedicated to defending the human rights of all Virginians. The Right to
Keep and Bear Arms is a fundamental human right.

VCDL web page: http://www.vcdl.org [http://www.vcdl.org/]
***************************************************************************

From nuc65's post:


Doesn't he know that lack of a CHP doesn't keep criminals from carrying concealed handguns? :banghead:

A Couple Of Things . . .

I have had a few conversations on the street with Ceasor Johnson while armed. He seemed apprehensive but didn't comment at the time. I now wonder if I was one of those "hotheads"? Mr. Cary should perhaps be taken with a grain of salt given that he says things and then takes them back if the political winds indicate that he should ( I am referring to his recent racial comments documented a WSET for all who care to pursue this further).

Last night was not surprising. It was irritating to see how much certain people view the carrying of a concealed handgun as a 'privilege' while paying lip service to the Right.

Magically the city manager came up with a cost per hour of a detective performing this service at just over $35/hr and, imagine this, all 'investigations' take an hour or more.

So the fee that used to be for forwarding fingerprint checks to the FBI and the electronic checks (investigations) that other localities accomplish in very little time, poor overworked, understaffed Lynchburg detectives need more than an hour. A patrolman is of course on patrol (driving around the license plate scanning car for storage and tracking of all people in Lynchburg) so is not able to perform this 5-10 minute check; not only that, they don't have the tools or the knowledge to perform this high-level special 49 page (according the chief) investigation. Renewal doesn't mean anything, its a new investigation each and everytime.

In case you are wondering the mayor stated that the fee reduction was supposedly brought up to reduce violence in Miller park where the kids play basketball.

The motion was tabled until such a time as the police chief reports that the cost can be contained. No mention was made of why the fee for non-residents remains at $100/hr for the same investigation.

The city manager then threw a hissy-fit as he cried that the cost would remain the same. Even though with his numbers he doesn't really know what the cost or revenue is. The numbers under the revenue column must be divisible evenly (no remainder, or fraction) by $35. Except for the 2013 numbers they are NOT. According to his, and the police chief statements, Lynchburg made a profit even with the high cost of a detective working overtime.

I am skeptical to say the least. This will need to be addressed at the state-level because the city level wants the magical maximum allowable in all cases.

§ 18.2-308.03. Fees for concealed handgun permits.
A. The clerk shall charge a fee of $10 for the processing of an application or issuing of a permit, including his costs associated with the consultation with law-enforcement agencies. The local law-enforcement agency conducting the background investigation may charge a fee not to exceed $35 to cover the cost of conducting an investigation pursuant to this article. The $35 fee shall include any amount assessed by the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation for providing criminal history record information, and the local law-enforcement agency shall forward the amount assessed by the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation to the State Police with the fingerprints taken from any nonresident applicant.

Update from a VCDL.org Alert..... it looks like VCDL 'may' start working on Constitutional Carry!! :banana:


***************************************************************
2. Lynchburg City Council delays vote on reducing CHP fees
***************************************************************

Tonight in the Lynchburg City Council meeting there was a lot of lip service paid to our
right to keep and bears arms, but only Councilman Jeff Helgeson was truly trying to help
gun owners by lowering the CHP fee in Lynchburg. Everyone else was playing political
games.

The PD is using DETECTIVES being paid OVERTIME with BENEFITS, to process CHP
applications! Talk about a waste of taxpayer's dollars. A clerk could do just as good
of a job for much less money. They also claim each CHP application takes an hour to
process, which sounds like total baloney (and someone who has done background checks has
confirmed to me that they take MINUTES to do.)

Initially the police gave false accounting information to City Council showing that the
police were losing money at $35 per CHP application to run background checks. (The $50
maximum fee breaks down to: $10 for the Circuit Court Clerk, $5 for the State Police, and
$35 for the locality.) Then, under pressure by Helgeson to show the details of the cost
of the background checks, suddenly new figures were provided that showed a profit by the
PD!

But at the meeting tonight, the figures presented by the PD didn't show detectives
getting overtime any more, but the new figures did include a 40% benefits package added
to the detective's $22 an hour base salary and also added 10% overhead. That magically
came out to, you guessed it, $35 dollars an hour, the most the PD can charge. What an
accounting miracle!

In the end the City Council decided to ask the fox to guard the henhouse by asking the
Police Chief to report back if he can find a way to reduce the cost of doing the
background checks so the CHP fees could be reduced. Council delayed the vote
indefinitely until such figures are presented.

This should be interesting. My money says that as hard as the PD tries, it just won't be
able to save any money on those background checks. [Eye roll]

It sure smells like a perk for detectives: run a few background checks after work and
collect a cool $33 plus benefits per hour. Hey, gun owners can afford it! :-(

We'll see what happens in a month or so. In the meantime VCDL has three other options it
will be weighing to change the $50 maximum fee allowed by law: have the General Assembly
lower the maximum fee, create lifetime permits, or make Constitutional Carry legal.
(Constitutional Carry is concealed carry without a CHP, but allows a person to get a CHP
if they want one).

From the News and Advance

"http://www.newsadvance.com/news/local/article_8fafcc7c-1a9b-11e3-a95d-001a4bcf6878.html"
[h=1]Council delays vote on lowering permit costs for concealed carry weapons[/h]Posted: Wednesday, September 11, 2013 12:35 am Alicia Petska
Finding itself divided Tuesday night, City Council put off a vote on concealed gun permit fees and told staff to take a harder look at its procedures and costs.
“This is a constitutionally protected right of our law-abiding citizens,” said Councilman Jeff Helgeson, who proposed lowering the local share of the fee from $35 to $5.


While staff argued the current fee was reasonable based on expenses incurred to process permits, Helgeson argued the city system was inefficient and noted neighboring counties charge less for the same permit.
“Is one a better permit? Is one etched in gold and the other not good?” he asked. “… Let’s lower this fee. Let’s not be the most expensive. Being the most expensive in this case doesn’t get us anything more.”
Helgeson put the permit question on council’s agenda after broaching it last month during a discussion on park safety.

He made no mention of parks Tuesday, and other council members who were supportive of him said the parks weren’t a factor in their decision.
Tuesday’s meeting was attended by about a dozen gun rights supporters who sported blaze orange stickers with the slogan: “Guns Save Lives.” Several also openly carried handguns.

State law allows localities to charge a fee of between $15 and $50 for a concealed gun permit. Lynchburg charges the maximum $50.
The local share of that — $35 — is put toward the cost of running background investigations on applicants. If granted, a concealed gun permit is valid for five years.
Council members uniformly voiced support for gun owners’ rights Tuesday, and agreed the permit fee should be reasonable and calibrated only to recoup the city’s costs. The city should not profit from it, council said.

But council split when it came to deciding what a reasonable fee was and what the true necessary costs were of processing a permit.
After more than an hour of sometimes-heated debate, it was clear there wasn’t majority support for a fee reduction Tuesday.
In an effort to keep the proposal alive, Councilman H. Cary suggested they postpone the vote and ask staff to review procedures and see if the permits can be processed with less expense.
The decision to postpone passed on a 4-2 margin. Mayor Michael Gillette and Vice Mayor Ceasor Johnson dissented because they didn’t feel a second review would produce different results.
Councilwoman Joan Foster was absent.
It was not immediately clear when the issue would return. Police Chief Parks Snead said he’ll reevaluate the department’s practices, talk with his staff and consult with the city manager.

Lynchburg News Uninformed and Anti-Gun (wants police state) #Tyranny

From the editors of the News and Advance
[h=1]Cheap Gun Permits Not the Answer[/h]Posted: Thursday, August 22, 2013 6:00 am By THE EDITORIAL BOARD
If there’s one certainty in the debate about the future of the city’s public parks, it’s that more concealed weapons are not part of the solution.
Yet, City Councilman Jeff Helgeson wants to lower the fee for concealed weapons permits so that more people can take those weapons to the park. Does adding more guns to the mix of families and others using the parks for recreational purposes make any sense? Absolutely not.


The subject came up during a proposal that the city increase park staffing in the aftermath of the Memorial Day altercations at Miller Park. The plan calls for Parks & Recreation to hire four full-time and four part-time service workers, two full-time cleaning/maintenance workers and one volunteer coordinator. The additional personnel would add some $345,000 to the existing park services budget of $524,000 a year.
While the parks continue to remain safe despite the fighting that broke out at Miller Park, usage is up, which places a higher demand for such routine management issues as bathroom cleanliness and shelter reservations. Kay Frazier, director of Parks & Recreation, said the city “just needs more staff out there. We need to clean the bathrooms more often. We need to clean the shelters more often.”
So what does additional park maintenance have to do with lower fees for concealed weapons permits?
Helgeson said it does not make financial sense to hire more full-time staff to deal with seasonal problems, such as greater use of the parks during the summer. He suggested the entire issue arose over a public safety incident and argued that a better way to promote safety in the parks would be to lower the fee for concealed weapons permits.
“Government can’t be everywhere at all times,” he declared, suggesting that the folks with concealed weapons could maintain order in the parks. Is he suggesting that the city take moves to put more guns in the parks?
You got it. Instead of trying to create a police state, Helgeson said, Lynchburg should give its citizens the resources to defend themselves.

He said the city’s concealed weapons permit fee is significantly higher than that of neighboring counties. “It would be nice to have that fee reduced so more people can defend themselves, defend their loved ones and defend their families if the situation warrants,” the councilman said.

Would it be nice to have more guns floating around the city’s parks? Is that what those who go to Miller Park for a picnic or game of basketball want? Is that what those who go to Peaks View to play softball or hike want? Is that what those families who go to Riverside Park to cool off on the sprayground or take a look at the remains of the historic packet boat want?

Do those folks want to be constantly looking over their shoulders to see who is going to pull out a concealed weapon to fend off a threat — real or imagined?
No, they don’t. The answer to the incident at Miller Park and to the other isolated arguments or disagreements is not to throw more guns at the problem. There are enough guns — concealed and otherwise — floating around the streets already.
Lowering the concealed weapons permit fee is surely not the right step toward safer city parks.
That could only add an unnecessary element of danger to life in the parks.

In letters to the editor

Gun-bearing rights
We were told at the Lynchburg City Council’s Sept. 10 meeting that a concealed gun permit is not a Second Amendment right, but a privilege. And it’s about to be a costly privilege. This issue reminds me of the “poll tax” during America’s Jim Crow days. The high cost of voting discouraged blacks from exercising their right to vote, like the high cost of a permit will discourage crime-free but low-income people from having a permit.
We were told that the higher fee is a result of the high cost of a police detective’s time spent on researching the background of the permit seeker. I’m trying to guess why it takes a lot of time to type a name into the computer for a background check. I’ll be applying for my fourth permit in January. Will it take an hour to learn that after three permits and 69 years of crime-free living, I’m still a law-abiding citizen?
Then Vice Mayor Ceasor Johnson told us he would not vote to lower the fee after making several remarks on another councilman’s insensitivity to race. An immature unfair assumption, and non sequitur. (Johnson’s hurt feelings should influence his vote on an issue affecting the City?)
Lynchburg should encourage more, not fewer, concealed permit holders. F.B.I. statistics have repeatedly proven that the concealed-carry population is the most crime-free segment of society. Any society. Of 293,000 permit holders in Tennessee, North Carolina and Virginia, there were seven non-firearm arrests and no convictions over a five year period. If the concealed-carry population were a city or a country, the record of crime-free living, and the additional safety afforded to those around them, would be nothing short of miraculous.
(I struck the published name from here, if you want to know look at the news and advance site under letters to the editor)

Lynchburg

I'm pretty sure there are way over 293,000 permit holders in those three mentioned states.

I forgot what the last known number was for Virginia, but it seems like it was more than that. Anyone recall?

TFred

ETA: The latest published number I could find is from December 31, 2011, and stands at 279,000. For Virginia alone.

http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/592552.pdf

ETA(2): Here's a webpage that reports numbers for most states: http://legallyarmed.com/ccw_statistics.htm

TFred said:

I'm pretty sure there are way over 293,000 permit holders in those three mentioned states.

I forgot what the last known number was for Virginia, but it seems like it was more than that. Anyone recall?

TFred

ETA: The latest published number I could find is from December 31, 2011, and stands at 279,000. For Virginia alone.

http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/592552.pdf

ETA(2): Here's a webpage that reports numbers for most states: http://legallyarmed.com/ccw_statistics.htm

Click to expand...

I think you are correct, but I think the editorial was probably referring to the time frame of the study that was performed. Likely before the last few years where concealed carry permits have increased. But I don't know this for sure, and since it is an editorial I wouldn't use it as a reference.