• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

Redmond Code 9.12.030

Tawnos

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,542
Location
Washington
imported post

Reads, in part (edit: full link here):
After the issuance of a written proclamation of a state of emergency, the Mayor of the city, or the representative of the Mayor duly authorized to act for him as provided in Section 9.12.020, may in the interest of public safety and welfare make any or all of the following orders:
...
(7)Prohibit any person or persons from carrying or possessing upon any street, alley, highway, or public place within the city any [highlight= rgb(255, 255, 0);]firearms, knives, clubs, rocks, bricks, or other weapons, objects or contrivances susceptible for use in causing injury to persons or damage to property;

Does this exceed the authority allowed by the city, set forth in 9.41.290? For reference, the RCW dealing with civil emergencies is here: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=38.52

I see nothing about allowing this kind of limit, but before I shoot off an email I'd like to be certain I'm not missing anything :)
 

Gene Beasley

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2007
Messages
426
Location
Federal Way, Washington, USA
imported post

My take is that only the Governor has the authority granted under RCW 43.06.220(1)(e) to prohibit possession outside one's home or business. I have found nothing in Title 35, 35A, or 36 that would authorize any mayor, city manager, or county executive to usurp that power reserved to the Governor.
 

jddssc121

Regular Member
Joined
May 21, 2008
Messages
282
Location
, ,
imported post

I sent this

Subject: Code question - 9.12.020



"After the issuance of a written proclamation of a state of emergency, the Mayor of the city, or the representative of the Mayor duly authorized to act for him as provided in Section 9.12.020, may in the interest of public safety and welfare make any or all of the following orders:
...
(7)Prohibit any person or persons from carrying or possessing upon any street, alley, highway, or public place within the city any [highlight= rgb(255, 255, 0);]firearms, knives, clubs, rocks, bricks, or other weapons, objects or contrivances susceptible for use in causing injury to persons or damage to property;


Thisis in conflict with State Law. RCW 9.41.290 specifies the State preempts the entire domain of firearms, and local ordinances cannot make laws that are more restrictive than, or inconflict with,state law (local municipalities may, however, regulate the discharge of firearms as desired). Redmond code9.12.020 is more stringent than state law. RCW 43.06.220 grants the power to the Govenor to restrict the poessions of firearms in public during a delcared emergency, but makes noprovision nor delegation of power for a City/Mayor to do the same.


and got this answer back

thanks for bringing this up. I was unaware of this issue and I've asked the City Clerk to look into this issue for my satisfaction. This month's Council Ombudsman will reply on behalf of the entire council, but I wanted to let you know that I will also look into this issue as I concur with your assessment in that this ordinance (as written) is in direct opposition to state code and needs to be corrected.
 

Gene Beasley

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2007
Messages
426
Location
Federal Way, Washington, USA
imported post

Sweet. I'll edit the list when I can do it with Firefox. IE forces an extra line when adding a line and somehow Redmond got missed. Sounds like it's pending, but with a high likelihood of being resolved.
 
Top