thx997303
Regular Member
imported post
So, I got a response from a Mr. Tsakalos about the illegal signage, as well as a few pieces of correspondence about the situation.
Here it is.
Mr. (THX):
Your email to the folks at recreation has made its way to me. I appreciate your observations and we are retooling our ordinances and that process should alleviate any concerns you have raised. Our approach is not limited to the signs that you have complained about but encompasses a county-wide review. It will take some time, but you may contact me directly with any specific questions. Thanks for bringing this matter to our attention.
[align=center] [/align] From: Jeff Thorpe
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 12:49 PM
To: Tyke Tsakalos
Subject: FW: park sign prohibiting firearms
[size= ]
TJ,
Here is the email we discussed. The original complaint is from (THX).
Jeff
Jeffrey H Thorpe
Deputy District Attorney
Office of the District Attorney
2001 South State Street S3600
Salt Lake City, Utah 84190-1210
(801)468-2645
jthorpe@slco.org
http://www.districtattorney.slco.org
CONFIDENTIAL: This electronic message, including any and all attachments, is confidential. This message is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not use, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply electronic mail and delete the original message. Thank you.
[align=center] [/align] From: Wayne Johnson (P&R)
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 10:04 AM
To: Jeff Thorpe
Subject: FW: sign.jpg
[size= ]
Jeff
Your thoughts on the issue below?
Wayne
From: Glenn L Cox
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 8:43 AM
To: Wayne Johnson (P&R)
Subject: RE: sign.jpg
[size= ]
Wayne,
From my basic understanding of laws and ordinances, if an ordinance contradicts a state statute then the statute is the predominating rule of law. I would have to concede the point to Mr. THX.
My question, however, is why does he (Mr. THX) have his panties in a bunch about the signage and the ordinance? What’s his purpose in contesting the applicability of the ordinance?
Glenn
From: Wayne Johnson (P&R)
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 5:14 PM
To: Michele Nekota ; Kristin Riker ; Martin Jensen; Glenn L Cox
Subject: RE: sign.jpg
[size= ]
Glenn
Your thoughts on the contradiction between County and State code? (See below)
Wayne
This is the most recent county ordinance
13.04.230 Firearms and explosives prohibited--Exception.
No person within a park shall carry or discharge any firearms, firecrackers, rockets, torpedoes, powder, or any other fireworks or explosives except persons who have obtained a special permit from the mayor to put on a fireworks show, in which event the person conducting the display shall be trained in fireworks pyrotechnics. (For other events, see Section 13.04.270.)
(Ord. 1473 (part), 2001: prior code § 17-2-11)
From: Wayne Johnson (P&R)
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 5:07 PM
To: Michele Nekota ; Kristin Riker ; Martin Jensen; Hollis Robison
Subject: FW: sign.jpg
[size= ]
Whoops………….the rest below
From: Wayne Johnson (P&R)
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 4:52 PM
To: Michele Nekota ; Kristin Riker ; Martin Jensen; Hollis Robison
Subject: FW: sign.jpg
[size= ]
This a picture of standard park regulation signs. It states no archery or firearms. It should say “no discharge of…..” This will be a problem due to the number of signs installed . The intent is to prohibit shooting, not carrying of. To my knowledge, there have been no attempts to prohibit carrying firearms by law enforcement or anyone else. This is the first complaint regarding the wording and the signs have been up for over a year. If necessary, we could place a “no discharge of” sticker above the offending verbiage if necessary.
Wayne
So, I got a response from a Mr. Tsakalos about the illegal signage, as well as a few pieces of correspondence about the situation.
Here it is.
Mr. (THX):
Your email to the folks at recreation has made its way to me. I appreciate your observations and we are retooling our ordinances and that process should alleviate any concerns you have raised. Our approach is not limited to the signs that you have complained about but encompasses a county-wide review. It will take some time, but you may contact me directly with any specific questions. Thanks for bringing this matter to our attention.
[align=center] [/align] From: Jeff Thorpe
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 12:49 PM
To: Tyke Tsakalos
Subject: FW: park sign prohibiting firearms
[size= ]
TJ,
Here is the email we discussed. The original complaint is from (THX).
Jeff
Jeffrey H Thorpe
Deputy District Attorney
Office of the District Attorney
2001 South State Street S3600
Salt Lake City, Utah 84190-1210
(801)468-2645
jthorpe@slco.org
http://www.districtattorney.slco.org
CONFIDENTIAL: This electronic message, including any and all attachments, is confidential. This message is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not use, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply electronic mail and delete the original message. Thank you.
[align=center] [/align] From: Wayne Johnson (P&R)
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 10:04 AM
To: Jeff Thorpe
Subject: FW: sign.jpg
[size= ]
Jeff
Your thoughts on the issue below?
Wayne
From: Glenn L Cox
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 8:43 AM
To: Wayne Johnson (P&R)
Subject: RE: sign.jpg
[size= ]
Wayne,
From my basic understanding of laws and ordinances, if an ordinance contradicts a state statute then the statute is the predominating rule of law. I would have to concede the point to Mr. THX.
My question, however, is why does he (Mr. THX) have his panties in a bunch about the signage and the ordinance? What’s his purpose in contesting the applicability of the ordinance?
Glenn
From: Wayne Johnson (P&R)
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 5:14 PM
To: Michele Nekota ; Kristin Riker ; Martin Jensen; Glenn L Cox
Subject: RE: sign.jpg
[size= ]
Glenn
Your thoughts on the contradiction between County and State code? (See below)
Wayne
This is the most recent county ordinance
13.04.230 Firearms and explosives prohibited--Exception.
No person within a park shall carry or discharge any firearms, firecrackers, rockets, torpedoes, powder, or any other fireworks or explosives except persons who have obtained a special permit from the mayor to put on a fireworks show, in which event the person conducting the display shall be trained in fireworks pyrotechnics. (For other events, see Section 13.04.270.)
(Ord. 1473 (part), 2001: prior code § 17-2-11)
From: Wayne Johnson (P&R)
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 5:07 PM
To: Michele Nekota ; Kristin Riker ; Martin Jensen; Hollis Robison
Subject: FW: sign.jpg
[size= ]
Whoops………….the rest below
From: Wayne Johnson (P&R)
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 4:52 PM
To: Michele Nekota ; Kristin Riker ; Martin Jensen; Hollis Robison
Subject: FW: sign.jpg
[size= ]
This a picture of standard park regulation signs. It states no archery or firearms. It should say “no discharge of…..” This will be a problem due to the number of signs installed . The intent is to prohibit shooting, not carrying of. To my knowledge, there have been no attempts to prohibit carrying firearms by law enforcement or anyone else. This is the first complaint regarding the wording and the signs have been up for over a year. If necessary, we could place a “no discharge of” sticker above the offending verbiage if necessary.
Wayne