View Poll Results: What location is bestest?

Voters
16. You may not vote on this poll
  • Pier 69, Alaskan Way between Clay and Vine Streets

    9 56.25%
  • Seattle-Tacoma International Airport in the Airport Office Building, International Auditorium, Mezzanine Level South, Main Terminal

    7 43.75%
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 28

Thread: Port of Seattle Meeting

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    69

    Post imported post

    This thread is to get a roster for a Port of Seattle meeting, we should try to make a coordinated effort to get as many people from both the CC and OC community to attend.
    __________________________________________________ _________________

    Port of Seattle Meeting Schedule

    Commission meetings held at 4:00 p.m. the second Tuesday of every month are convened at:
    • Pier 69, Alaskan Way between Clay and Vine streets

    Commission meetings held at 4:00 p.m. the fourth Tuesday of every month are convened at:
    • Seattle-Tacoma International Airport in the Airport Office Building, International Auditorium, Mezzanine Level South, Main Terminal
    __________________________________________________ __________________





  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    69

    Post imported post

    Ok so I voted for the Pier, but that's because I live like 5 blocks from it lol...

    BTW which meeting do you guys want to go to? the next one I believe would be next week on the 28 if you guys want to do it then OR we could wait till the one in November... (I prefer this one since it gives us more time to prepare and get more people)


    Edit fixed to 28 didn't look at my vista calendar right.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Gene Beasley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    426

    Post imported post

    shakul wrote:
    Ok so I voted for the Pier, but that's because I live like 5 blocks from it lol...

    BTW which meeting do you guys want to go to? the next one I believe would be next week on the 27 if you guys want to do it then OR we could wait till the one in November... (I prefer this one since it gives us more time to prepare and get more people)
    If we did next week, that would be 10/28 at SEA, not 10/27. I voted for the airport in general, but there are other considerations. You mention short notice - good to factor in, I think it would be better to line up some more people and go for 11/11. Not close for me, but I'll live. I think 11/25 would be a poor choice all-round, too close to Thanksgiving.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    69

    Post imported post

    yea airport doesnt bother me either since I can just take a cab from a hotel then take a cab back (standard fare )

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
    Posts
    1,761

    Post imported post

    11/11 for me.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Lynnwood, Washington, USA
    Posts
    13

    Post imported post

    I voted for Pier 69 because I work nearby and can walk there.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Gone... Nutty as squirrel **** around here
    Posts
    753

    Post imported post

    11/11 is Veteran's Day, one of the few holidays usually observed on the actual day of occurance. May want to confirm that meeting willbe on that day...

  8. #8
    Regular Member Gene Beasley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    426

    Post imported post

    Good catch. I called and Veteran's Day is not one of their recognized holidays.

    They also take public comment on the work session days, which would open up 11/04 (Election Day) and 11/18. The day and location of those meetings appears to be less predictable based on the previously posted agendas. I think we're better off sticking with the regular meeting.

  9. #9
    State Researcher Bill Starks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nortonville, KY, USA
    Posts
    4,291

    Post imported post

    I'm for pier 69 as well since I am one block from it.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    Gene Beasley wrote:
    Good catch. I called and Veteran's Day is not one of their recognized holidays.

    They also take public comment on the work session days, which would open up 11/04 (Election Day) and 11/18. The day and location of those meetings appears to be less predictable based on the previously posted agendas. I think we're better off sticking with the regular meeting.
    That figures, POS doesn't recognize the guys who made it possible for them to even exist.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    69

    Post imported post

    love tap... keeping this post alive

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    250

    Post imported post

    11/11 Pier 69

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    282

    Post imported post

    would love to come but i am out of town for both dates :X

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    282

    Post imported post

    FWIW - my 2 cents (not that anyone asked )

    I would focus your allotted time speaking on the legality (or lack thereof in this case :what: ) of the Port's rules, instead of discussing why you choose to carry.

    The "why I carry" topic is subjective, and everyone will rat hole on it.
    The real issue at hand, which is not subjective at all, is the Port's rules are out of whack. Regardless if they agree w/ carry or not is beside the point. They cannot have these rules, and that's what should be changed....



  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
    Posts
    1,761

    Post imported post

    I would focus your allotted time speaking on the legality (or lack thereof in this case :what: ) of the Port's rules, instead of discussing why you choose to carry.
    Exactly. I have never framed my arguments to the Ports around my "god given rights" and I don't think I ever mentioned concealed or open carry. And I won't mention these things when I speak. Nor will I be OCing.

    Mentioning carry, god given rights, the 2nd amendment, what someone in the military fought for during a war, or any of the other tangential arguments will only serve to dilute the message to the Port that their regulations are illegal under Washington law and must be repealed.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Gene Beasley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    426

    Post imported post

    PUBLIC TESTIMONY PROCEDURES
    1. Any person wishing to speak at a Port Commission meeting must register on a sign-up sheet and identify the specific agenda item to which he/she will speak before the agenda item commences.
    2. The Commission does not generally take public testimony for non-action agenda items such as "Policy and Staff Briefings" or Work Session presentations, but may do so at the discretion of the Commission Chair.
    3. An individual may testify on an agenda item for up to three minutes. Organization representatives may testify for up to five minutes.
    4. Any person wishing to speak on a topic not appearing on an agenda may sign up to speak under "New Business". All testimony provided under "New Business" is limited to three minutes.
    5. In the interests of time, the Commission Chair may limit the number of persons speaking on any topic or may limit testimony to those having new information or material to present.
    6. The Commission Chair may alter the time allotments for testimony to ensure that more speakers have an opportunity to be heard.
    7. The identity of each testifier will be noted in the meeting minutes. An individual or organization representative may have the text of his/her remarks appended to the Commission minutes by submitting a written text at, or before, the meeting. The appended written text will be preserved permanently.
    8. A digital audio recording of the public testimony is on file in Port offices. Digital audio recordings are retained in Port offices for six years and then transferred to State Archives. A charge is assessed for duplication or transcription.
    9. The Commission does not engage in discussion or debate with testifiers during commission meetings. Questions and requests for information or documents may be addressed to Port staff or to individual Commissioners outside of Commission meetings. (Revised September 14, 2007)
    Depending on how many sign up to speak, we may be cut short or may not be able to speak to the issue at all. Just like Olympia. Just FYI.




  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
    Posts
    1,761

    Post imported post

    Bump. Can we get a roster going for this? Please respond if you are attending.

    Tuesday Nov. 11th, 1600 hours, Pier 69.

  18. #18
    State Researcher Bill Starks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nortonville, KY, USA
    Posts
    4,291

    Post imported post

    I plan to be there

  19. #19
    Regular Member Gene Beasley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    426

    Post imported post

    I'll be there; bringing along another from the wa-ccw listserv.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    736

    Post imported post

    It's unlikely that I will be able to make it, but I'll give it my best shot. I won't waste a speaking slot; just be there to observe and support.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
    Posts
    1,761

    Post imported post

    Well it was me, Gene Beasley, and a local firearms attorney.

    One of the agenda items for the executive session (prior to the main meeting) was OPEN CARRY under the general topic of "Legal Risk". It is pure coincidence that the meeting where we planned to make public comments was the same meeting where the Board planned to discuss open carry in executive session.

    After the call to order of the main meeting, the president of the Board moved the public comment period from the end of the meeting to the beginning. The three of us who were there spoke, I in the middle.

    That's about all there is to tell. I wish we could have had a better showing. If I'm not mistaken, we have a member of this board who is still subject to legal process for an OC incident at the airport. The issue is a topic of current discussion by and with the Port. The issue is in the news in general because of the Nickels scheme. All that and we could only muster three people? Disappointing. I sincerely hope that when the Seattle issue comes to a head, we can do better.

  22. #22
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953

    Post imported post

    deanf wrote:
    All that and we could only muster three people?
    Sometimes threewell spoken people is a louder voice than a whole crowd that are merely repeating the same topic.

    I have no doubt that you represented the group well an the point was made. Now let's see if the Port listens not only to your input but that of the Attorney General as well. If they choose to ignore, the next step should be a "Press Release" to all the major news media in the Puget Sound Area. If that occurs be sure to point out that the Port is not following the law as indicated by the AG. That should make their heads turn. Politicians can't stand the truth when it is printed in the newspaper.

    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    736

    Post imported post

    deanf wrote:
    Well it was me, Gene Beasley, and a local firearms attorney.

    One of the agenda items for the executive session (prior to the main meeting) was OPEN CARRY under the general topic of "Legal Risk". It is pure coincidence that the meeting where we planned to make public comments was the same meeting where the Board planned to discuss open carry in executive session.

    After the call to order of the main meeting, the president of the Board moved the public comment period from the end of the meeting to the beginning. The three of us who were there spoke, I in the middle.

    That's about all there is to tell. I wish we could have had a better showing. If I'm not mistaken, we have a member of this board who is still subject to legal process for an OC incident at the airport. The issue is a topic of current discussion by and with the Port. The issue is in the news in general because of the Nickels scheme. All that and we could only muster three people? Disappointing. I sincerely hope that when the Seattle issue comes to a head, we can do better.
    It's tough when this crap happens during working hours; just one of the many ways government works to keep it's citizens out of the process. If they truly wanted public input, they'd hold the damn meeting on Saturday at noon.

    But they don't.

    They aren't legitimate. The quicker people realize that, the better, but it's slow in coming.........

  24. #24
    State Researcher Bill Starks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nortonville, KY, USA
    Posts
    4,291

    Post imported post

    My intent was to be there but last minute issues took presidence. If this was scheduled on any day but Tues / Thurs I would have been at your side. It was a true shame as I was only across the street...

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
    Posts
    1,761

    Post imported post

    By request, here is the text of my remarks to the Port Commission:

    My name is Dean Fxxxxx. I live in Auburn. I’ve come before you to inform you that the Port’s rule against the legal possession of guns in the non-sterile public areas of SeaTac Airport is illegal and cannot and must not be enforced.
    It is a violation of the State’s firearms preemption statute. It is also a violation of federal law, the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986.
    Your general counsel’s office will tell you, because of technicalities, that state preemption does not apply to the Port’s rules.
    These technicalities are based on very slippery pretexts – pretexts which will likely fail if subject to the proper venue.
    The state Attorney General has recently issued an opinion that rules such as The Port’s are illegal and cannot be enforced. The attorney general also specifically addressed using trespass law to prosecute people with guns, and also found that method of enforcement to be against state law.
    I have no particular burning desire to carry a gun in the non-sterile areas of the airport.
    I DO have a burning desire to see that public officials obey the law. I’m very concerned that enforcement of this rule may subject The Port and its employees to expensive false arrest lawsuits. This is a violation of your fiduciary responsibilities. I ask you to repeal this rule as soon as is possible, and to direct the Port Police to suspend enforcement of the rule until it is repealed. I will be sending each of you a letter expanding on the depth and detail of my remarks.

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •