Sunrise Beach Park

I visited this Pierce County Park today and saw one of the old signs prohibiting firearms that should have been changed. I sent the following email to "Kent", kbasket@co.pierce.wa.us , who I believe is the contact person:

Hello Kent,

I read that you are the contact person for Pierce County Park signage regarding firearms restrictions. I visited Sunrise Beach County Park today, and saw the old sign which supposedly prohibits firearms possession within the park. Would you please ensure that the sign is changed?

What would be an appropriate amount of time before I should check again to ensure that the sign has been replaced? I will be happy to report back to you.

Many thanks,

Click to expand...

I'll post again when I get a response.

Nice work. I expect you get a "budget restrictions" response. But it can't be too expensive for them to simply paint over that part of the sign.

The Buck Has Been Passed

Here is the response I received.

Hi Bruce:
Thanks for the heads up but we no longer have any ownership of the Parks on the Peninsula as 12/31/10 they became the Property of the Peninsula Metropolitan Park District . I will list all of their contact information below for you. Hope this helpful Bruce. Thanks
Kent

Contact Information:

Peninsula Metropolitan Park District
3622 Grandview Street
Gig Harbor, Wa. 98335

253 – 858 – 3400

info@penmetparks.org

Click to expand...

This is going to be a little more difficult. It appears that local governments have turned over control of their parks to a private corporation. This could be viewed similarly to a government owned sports facility being managed by a private corporation that prohibits firearms.

On the other hand, in reading the history it appears that it is a metropolitan parks district and a municipal corporation with taxing authority.

Penmet Parks prohibits firearms on the 530 acres in the 14 parks that they manage. Here are two links:

Home page: http://tinyurl.com/46fwyoa
Park regulations: http://penmetparks.org/media//DIR_14401/Park$20Use$20Regulations.pdf

Thoughts?

"14.08.010 Title.
This Section shall constitute the Park Code of the Peninsula Metropolitan Park District (PenMet Parks) and may be cited as such. Conduct in all public parks shall be subject to all the general police regulations of this Section and not exclusively to the provisions of this Section.
14.08.020 Liberal Construction.
This Section is an exercise of the police power of the State of Washington, Pierce County and PenMet Parks, for the public peace, health, safety and welfare, and its provisions shall be liberally construed."

If they're a park district that is exercising power under Pierce County, I think they're going to have a hard time upholding that claim against preemption, especially if they're a municorp with taxing authority. Per 9.41.290 "Cities, towns, and counties or other municipalities" are exempted, I don't see them getting free from that without a very dodgy legal play, though this may end up requiring lawsuits to settle.

*edit* additionally, they're claiming misdemeanor punishment for mere violation of their code, hence are clearly in violation of preemption

Sent this:

Mr. Lee,
It has recently come to my attention that the Gig Harbor parks have been municipally incorporated under the PenMet Parks name. While investigating your use regulations, I came across 14.08.060(I), prohibiting possession of a loaded firearm on park grounds. As the park is a municipality that operates under Pierce County regulations, subject to the laws of the state of Washington, I wish to inform you that this code is preempted by Washington state law, 9.41.290, which provides the following:

The state of Washington hereby fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state, including the registration, licensing, possession, purchase, sale, acquisition, transfer, discharge, and transportation of firearms, or any other element relating to firearms or parts thereof, including ammunition and reloader components. Cities, towns, and counties or other municipalities may enact only those laws and ordinances relating to firearms that are specifically authorized by state law, as in RCW 9.41.300, and are consistent with this chapter. Such local ordinances shall have the same penalty as provided for by state law. Local laws and ordinances that are inconsistent with, more restrictive than, or exceed the requirements of state law shall not be enacted and are preempted and repealed, regardless of the nature of the code, charter, or home rule status of such city, town, county, or municipality.

Per this law, I ask that you approach the board and bring PenMet Parks into line with state preemption, as the penalty proscribed in 14.08.130 clearly indicates you are an authority under controlling guidance of state law, exercising police power as a municipality. The provision for preventing discharge of a firearm does not appear to be preempted under 9.41.300, though it would need to allow for use of a firearm in self-defense. It appears the simplest way to amend this law to comply with state law is to either strike it (as other laws prevent unlawful discharge) or to amend it to remove those portions related to the bearing of arms.

Thank you,

Go get em TAWNOS

Very nice, Tawnos. I am going to start looking for all the letters I wrote to the Kitsap County Commissioners several years ago regard their parks code. Maybe I can cobble together something from those letters to send to PenMet Parks.

Many thanks for your very well constructed email!

PenMet Parks Commissioners Meeting

From their home page:

The Board of Park Commissioners is scheduled to meet on Monday,
April 4th at 6:00 p.m. at the PenMet Parks Administrative Office,
3622 Grandview Street, Gig Harbor.

Click to expand...

I'm planning to attend. Anyone else free next Monday night?

Ajetpilot said:

From their home page:



I'm planning to attend. Anyone else free next Monday night?

Click to expand...

I can be there in spirit....

Go get em!!!

Email sent

To:
tiverson@penmetparks.org,
wsehmel@penmetparks.org,
sjunge@penmetparks.org,
chancock@penmetparks.org,
jortgiesen@penmetparks.org
ccinfo@penmetparks.org

Members of the Board of Park Commissioners:

My attention has recently been drawn to Peninsula Metropolitan
Park District PARK USE REGULATIONS section 14.08.060 (I) which, inter alia, attempts to prohibit carrying loaded firearms in any PenMet park. I am referring to the wording, "Possess a firearm with a cartridge in any portion of the mechanism..."

The Revised Code of Washington 9.41.300 "Weapons prohibited in certain places - Local laws and ordinances -Exceptions - Penalty," prohibits carrying firearms in various places, such as the restricted areas of law enforcement facilities, court rooms, public mental health facilities, and bars. However, it does not restrict carrying loaded firearms in parks. Additionally, RCW 9.41.300 permits local jurisdictions to enact laws restricting the discharge of firearms in their jurisdictions; however, it does not permit local jurisdictions to enact laws that prohibit possession of loaded firearms in their jurisdictions.

I draw your attention to RCW 9.41.290 "State Preemption," which reads in part, “Local laws and ordinances that are inconsistent with, more restrictive than, or exceed the requirements of state law shall not be enacted and are preempted and repealed, regardless of the nature of the code, charter, or home rule status of such city, town, county, or municipality.” Because section 14.08.060 (I) attempts to prohibit possession of loaded firearms within PenMet parks, it is inconsistent with, more restrictive than, and exceeds the requirements of state law. Therefore, that portion of the Park Use Regulations has already been preempted and repealed.

I request that the Board of Park Commissioners change the wording of section 14.08.060 (I) by striking the words " Possess a firearm with a cartridge in any portion of the mechanism..." to bring the regulation into compliance with Washington State Law.

Respectfully,

It's important to emphasize the safety aspect of their placing a sign that does not follow state law.

You cannot win a lawsuit against Wal-Mart if you slip and crack your skull open if Wal-Mart wasn't aware of the hazardous condition. Once someone informs Wal-Mart that someone spilled dish-washing soap in aisle three, they have a legal obligation to ensure it is removed in a timely manner.

The same is true of the park. You need to inform them that you are filing a copy of your letter with an attorney (or anyone else reliable for that matter) and then their legal obligation begins. This is what got Pierce County off the pot; I politely informed them of what could happen if someone saw their sign and called the police. If the police responded and someone was hurt, and it could be shown that the whole event stemmed from their sign, that they would hold the legal liability.

Good point, Mainsail. I'll cover that aspect in my next email. Thanks!

Response:
<>

Thank you for bringing this to my attention, I have shared your comments and concerns with the board and our attorney. I will be meeting with the President of the Board today to consider next steps and would be glad to share that information with you once a course of action has been determined.

Regards

Terry

My response:

Mr. XXXXXXXX,
I will ask our executive director to review this policy and get back with you. Thank you for your interest. Scott Junge

I'll be at the meeting tonight, and I will sign up to speak. I will be OC. I do not anticipate any problems, but you never know. If anyone else would like to attend, here is the info:

The Board of Park Commissioners is scheduled to meet on Monday,
April 4th at 6:00 p.m. at the PenMet Parks Administrative Office,
3622 Grandview Street, Gig Harbor. There will also be a study session at 5:00 p.m.

Click to expand...

Ajetpilot said:

I'll be at the meeting tonight, and I will sign up to speak. I will be OC. I do not anticipate any problems, but you never know. If anyone else would like to attend, here is the info:

Click to expand...

Too bad it's such a far distance and my bday. Else I might make it

Boy, that was easy.

I was almost through with my allotted three minutes of comments, when I was interrupted. The moderator said that they had passed my email to their attorney, and he agreed with me. They have already contacted Pierce County, and PenMet Parks will use Pierce County's wording in their parks' regulations.

It seems the more of these laws that we are able to change, the easier it is to get the next governmental body to come into compliance with state law.

Thanks Tawnos (and Happy Birthday) and any others who wrote email.

Another one bites the dust.

Ajetpilot said:

I was almost through with my allotted three minutes of comments, when I was interrupted. The moderator said that they had passed my email to their attorney, and he agreed with me. They have already contacted Pierce County, and PenMet Parks will use Pierce County's wording in their parks' regulations.

It seems the more of these laws that we are able to change, the easier it is to get the next governmental body to come into compliance with state law.

Thanks Tawnos (and Happy Birthday) and any others who wrote email.

Another one bites the dust.

Click to expand...

Nice job Bruce!

Great Job!

:banana::banana::banana::banana::banana::banana::banana: