"Aldermen asked staff to draft an ordinance banning firearms from being carried openly or concealed into city buildings."
I hope their signs only reference their own ordinance.
(See pg. 18 of the PDF of the law, 943.13 (2)(bm)1: "...a sign that states a restriction
imposed under subd. 2...")
Might create enough ambiguity that the first person charged would get them to re-do their signs.
Maybe not.
Even in Milwaukee I'm planning to vote absentee from now on, since my polling place is a school & the alternate (early) polling place is a city building that I expect will be posted. Will make interacting with city employees more difficult (phone, email, letter) or dangerous (in person, in a criminal-friendly zone).
"City Human Resources Director James Zwerlein said city department heads favored a ban and accompanying signage."
I don't give a flying you-know-what
(and how is that done, anyway?) about what these civil servants, these public employees, want. My right to self-defense is not theirs to decide.
For that matter, any alderman who votes for that bad city ordinance should be unelected.
Recalled, even.