fetch
Regular Member
PFD, Public Facilities District. We paid taxes to have them built, and pay taxes to have them maintained. We own them and the people that run them.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Sheriff Ozzie Knezovich told to disarm before entering Spokane Arena
- Thread starter hadji
- Start date
PFD, Public Facilities District. We paid taxes to have them built, and pay taxes to have them maintained. We own them and the people that run them.
The Spokane Public Facilities District is a municipality corporation, created in 1989 by the Washington State Legislature by virtue of RCW 36.100.
The District is a municipal corporation.
It is an independent taxing authority and a taxing district as defined in the state Constitution.
The boundaries are coextensive with the boundaries of Spokane County.
The PFD is governed by a Board of Directors, of which there are 5.
Municipalities are explicitly named as being preempted in RCW 9.41.290 in the field of firearms regulation.
Security and Crowd Management services are contracted out.
Those contract employees, per their instructions, regularly turn back patrons who are in possession of a valid and current Concealed Pistol License, as it is called in Washington State, informing them that they will not be allowed to enter with their legally possessed firearm.
If the patron insists, they are threatened with criminal trespass and arrest.
Washington State law, specifically RCW 9.41.290 and RCW 9.41.300, explicitly preempt this action, in plain and unambiguous language.
The law makes it clear that persons holding a valid and current CPL are exempt from the restrictions imposed by the PFD.
The PFD's counsel, Stan Schwartz, has informed the PFD Board of Directors that preemption does not apply to the PFD.
His line of reasoning depends on a court case in Washington State called Pac. N. W. Shooting Park Ass 'n v. City of Sequim, 158 Wn.2d 342 (2006).
In that case the court stated that it is possible for a public municipal corporation, such as the PFD is, to sometimes operate like a private business.
As such, since a private business can place restrictions upon the use of its facilities and the actions of its employees, so should a public municipal corporation be able to do the same.
So, sometimes the PFD is acting in its public capacity and sometimes the PFD is acting in its private capacity or "proprietary capacity" as the court called it.
There are several legal arguments regarding the inappropriateness of using the PNWSP case, along with arguments regarding the use of the threat of trespass with subsequent arrest.
In the PNWSP case, there is language that acknowledges that while a public municipal corporation may impose restrictions upon its employees, those restrictions do not apply to the general public.
The Washington State Attorney General wrote a formal opinion dealing with a lot of this, noting that PNWSP does not support the conclusions that Stan holds.
The Board of Directors are not attorneys, and it is not their job to interpret state law.
They depend upon their counsel to do that and advise them of any necessary actions.
Although I cannot find the citation at the moment, the PFD has publically stated that it will take a court order to force them to change their policy and their actions.
There are a few potential avenues of action.
This case seems to fit the requirements to file a Writ of Prohibition.
Alternatively, a Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief could be filed.
We are frankly unsure which course of action would be most appropriate, or best.
hadji
The District is a municipal corporation.
It is an independent taxing authority and a taxing district as defined in the state Constitution.
The boundaries are coextensive with the boundaries of Spokane County.
The PFD is governed by a Board of Directors, of which there are 5.
Municipalities are explicitly named as being preempted in RCW 9.41.290 in the field of firearms regulation.
Security and Crowd Management services are contracted out.
Those contract employees, per their instructions, regularly turn back patrons who are in possession of a valid and current Concealed Pistol License, as it is called in Washington State, informing them that they will not be allowed to enter with their legally possessed firearm.
If the patron insists, they are threatened with criminal trespass and arrest.
Washington State law, specifically RCW 9.41.290 and RCW 9.41.300, explicitly preempt this action, in plain and unambiguous language.
The law makes it clear that persons holding a valid and current CPL are exempt from the restrictions imposed by the PFD.
The PFD's counsel, Stan Schwartz, has informed the PFD Board of Directors that preemption does not apply to the PFD.
His line of reasoning depends on a court case in Washington State called Pac. N. W. Shooting Park Ass 'n v. City of Sequim, 158 Wn.2d 342 (2006).
In that case the court stated that it is possible for a public municipal corporation, such as the PFD is, to sometimes operate like a private business.
As such, since a private business can place restrictions upon the use of its facilities and the actions of its employees, so should a public municipal corporation be able to do the same.
So, sometimes the PFD is acting in its public capacity and sometimes the PFD is acting in its private capacity or "proprietary capacity" as the court called it.
There are several legal arguments regarding the inappropriateness of using the PNWSP case, along with arguments regarding the use of the threat of trespass with subsequent arrest.
In the PNWSP case, there is language that acknowledges that while a public municipal corporation may impose restrictions upon its employees, those restrictions do not apply to the general public.
The Washington State Attorney General wrote a formal opinion dealing with a lot of this, noting that PNWSP does not support the conclusions that Stan holds.
The Board of Directors are not attorneys, and it is not their job to interpret state law.
They depend upon their counsel to do that and advise them of any necessary actions.
Although I cannot find the citation at the moment, the PFD has publically stated that it will take a court order to force them to change their policy and their actions.
There are a few potential avenues of action.
This case seems to fit the requirements to file a Writ of Prohibition.
Alternatively, a Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief could be filed.
We are frankly unsure which course of action would be most appropriate, or best.
hadji
Last edited:
wickedspray
Regular Member
What I find funny is as soon as the sheriff got denied access and went public with it, the arena changed their policy. Almost like they knew the policy was violating the law. Correct me if I'm wrong but rcw 9.40.300 is the exception for law enforcement and cpl holders.
wickedspray
Regular Member
Exactly. What I can find is it is owned and operated by public funding. I'm still waiting on them to produce the case law they are using to deny cpl holders.
Last edited:
not for 'the people' but for a specific member of the 'elitist' class...
he threw a tantrum and you have no earthly idea what the stadium was threaten with if they did not capitulate.
as mentioned, since security is handled by a private group ~ commentary such as fix it or i'll hire deputies to take over security of my county's facility!! or "remember who approved your employee's security whatever?"
there is nothing being changed for Spokane's JQPublic, absolutely nothing!!
ipse
Freedom1Man
Regular Member
If I would not lose my job over the arrest, I would go there just to push the issue.
Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk