Oak Harbor, WA rejects motion to restrict carry in city council meeting


PDA






michaelbsc
January 22, 2013, 04:03 AM
http://youtu.be/TxHnCei4wzg


Apparently on Jan. 15 of this year a guy spoke at the public comment portion of the city council meeting.

One council member got upset that the young man admitted he had a carry permit, and demanded a vote to eject him from the meeting.

The motion failed, and the Mayor apologized to the young man.

God I love this place.

If you enjoyed reading about "Oak Harbor, WA rejects motion to restrict carry in city council meeting" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Midnight Oil
January 22, 2013, 05:25 AM
what are the names of the two council members that made the motion to have this guy ejected? :fire:

joeschmoe
January 22, 2013, 05:46 AM
Rick Almberg, Joel Servatius

http://www.islandpolitics.org/?p=8732

Pointshoot
January 22, 2013, 10:45 AM
Outstanding Video ! Thank you for posting that

fanchisimo
January 22, 2013, 12:26 PM
Rick Almberg was the one who got up and left, Servatius only seconded the motion. Servatius may not have supported the motion, but he might have done so just to shut up Almberg, knowing the rest of the council would deny it. Plus since it went to motion and was denied, that sets a further precedent for any new kind of motion.

TNBilly
January 22, 2013, 12:27 PM
Mayor Dudley is an admirable man!

dbp
January 22, 2013, 12:47 PM
That was a righteous outcome!

One thing I noticed though, did most of the citizens in attendance get up and leave with the one councilman? Look at the number of people in the audience before the motion was rejected as compared to the number as the camera pans that way later on (1:58 vs 6:01 minute marks). That would be discouraging.

Fryerpower
January 22, 2013, 12:48 PM
http://www.islandpolitics.org/?p=8732

Local perspective on the issue.

Jim

Jorg Nysgerrig
January 22, 2013, 01:10 PM
Servatius may not have supported the motion, but he might have done so just to shut up Almberg, knowing the rest of the council would deny it.

If you watch this video, which isn't as heavily edited as the other one, you can hear his comments about it:
http://www.oakharbor.org/video-view.cfm?keyword=01-15-13&id=249

NavyLCDR
January 22, 2013, 01:21 PM
and the local newspaper coverage

http://www.whidbeynewstimes.com/news/187531841.html

This started on December 18 when the city council was presented with an amendment to their city parks code which would remove language that is in violation of state preemption law.

http://www.oakharbor.org/video-view.cfm?series=30&id=215

Several councilmembers stated they were "uncomfortable" following state law, and voted no to obeything the state law. This shows that every member of the council is anti-gun except for the real mayor, Scott Dudley, and Jim Campbell.

Then on January 2nd, two of us showed up and spoke to insist that the city council obey state law like the rest of Joe Citizens are required to:

http://www.oakharbor.org/video-view.cfm?series=32&id=235

Mr. Hoffmire was so frieghtened by the guns present that he forgot what he was going to say later in the meeting, but he wasn't frightened enough to stay away....instead he remains in the meeting to tell everyone how scared he was...4:55 into the following video:

http://www.oakharbor.org/video-view.cfm?series=32&id=238

This all led to the debacle in the January 15th meeting in the OP. The parks code is coming up again on February 5th where the council is expected to revise it to comply with state law, and they are also expected to pass a resolution to ask the Washington State Legislature to amend state law to allow them to ban firearms on public property, including city parks and city hall.

I was asked personally by Mayor Dudley to attend the February 5th meeting, but military orders are taking me out of state for a couple of weeks :-(. There are others lined up to attend, though.

Midnight Oil
January 22, 2013, 04:08 PM
One thing I noticed though, did most of the citizens in attendance get up and leave with the one councilman? Look at the number of people in the audience before the motion was rejected as compared to the number as the camera pans that way later on (1:58 vs 6:01 minute marks). That would be discouraging.

Lucas Yonkman (the concealed carrier) said that the people left much later. They didn't leave with the councilman. The editing of the video made it seem like it though. Mr Yonkman said during the breaks, a lot of the people were coming up to him with questions and thanks.

Jorg Nysgerrig
January 22, 2013, 04:57 PM
Look at the number of people in the audience before the motion was rejected as compared to the number as the camera pans that way later on (1:58 vs 6:01 minute marks).

As Midnight Oil said, the times aren't reflective of reality. If you watch the video I linked, you'll see that the 1:58 mark is at 13:15 in the full video. That video goes on for another half hour were the majority of the crowd is still there.

If you go to the next video (Senior Services of Island County Contract), you'll see many have left, but the chairs are still there. This remains the same for the next several videos where more people leave as their agenda items goes on.

The shot you are seeing at 6:01 is actually from 2:43 in the last video (http://www.oakharbor.org/video-view.cfm?keyword=01-15-13&id=262) which is from two and a half hours later.

The editing of the first video makes it look like this all happened in a few minutes when this isn't close to the case.

If you watch the full video, more than the two nay votes had comments. It's not as cut and dried as it looks in that video.

Ryanxia
January 22, 2013, 05:02 PM
I'm glad his Rights that shall not be infringed were not infringed this time.

idcurrie
January 22, 2013, 06:00 PM
Councilwoman Beth Munns said she also feels it isn’t appropriate for citizens to be armed in the council chambers.

“I must admit I am very uncomfortable,” she said, “and especially if we have a room of 20 people who decided to show their Second Amendment rights I would probably ask to adjourn the meeting.”

mgmorden
January 22, 2013, 06:04 PM
If you look at the full video it seems a little less "victorious" for us. Almost all the other council members said that they supported the general idea but just didn't feel that it was appropriate to tackle such a rule making in a haphazard fashion (essentially, they wanted to sit down and craft an ordinance).

The only ones in the room that seemed in full support of the CWP holder was the mayor and the city's legal counsel.

Skribs
January 22, 2013, 06:10 PM
While I disagree with their position, the fact that a city can defy the state gives me hope as counties and states are telling the federal government that if they want local cooperation enforcing federal gun laws, the feds won't get a hand...maybe just the finger.

NavyLCDR, you are doing good things for our cause. I'm not in the same city as you, but I appreciate it nonetheless. Keep up the good work!

Jorg Nysgerrig
January 22, 2013, 06:35 PM
This shows that every member of the council is anti-gun except for the real mayor, Scott Dudley, and Jim Campbell.
Jim Campbell doesn't want the guy to bring his gun, either, according to the video.

NavyLCDR
January 22, 2013, 08:10 PM
This was posted today on Lucas Yonkman's facebook:

CALLING ALL FRIENDS AND SUPPORTERS OF THE 2ND AMENDMENT!!! A reliable source has informed me that there is a group planning to flood city hall before the meeting on the 5th that concerns the 2nd amendment. Their goal is to prevent 2nd amendment supporters from accessing the building and speaking for their rights. They want to force their gun regulation agenda on the council and the city of Oak Harbor. If you would like to join me in making a difference and take a stand for our rights please PM me and let me know. We must not allow this to happen. We must be heard. Please share this information with all of your friends. Carry on Brothers!

Pointshoot
January 22, 2013, 10:19 PM
There are people who have an absolute phobia around guns. That is, - - a completely irrational & over-riding fear. Like what you see with some people and snakes. I've met a few gun phobic people like this. All but one of them were women. The 'man' had some kind of gun related experience as a kid with his harda*s military father, but would always change the subject if asked about it. If the rest of the guys wanted to do some shooting - - - plinking at cans with a .22, or shooting skeet he'd run off at the mouth and think of all sorts of excuses why we should do something else. But it was really about his own irrational fear.

NavyLCDR
January 22, 2013, 10:43 PM
But, what amazes me, is that they claim to be in fear of their life because of the presence of a gun.....but they will stay right there in the presence of the gun to tell everyone how afraid it is making them.

Pointshoot
January 22, 2013, 11:00 PM
Yes, the behavior is completely irrational.

They fear the object (which they havent even seen) for irrational reasons, and stand around for irrational reasons. - - - Some want group approval to justify their own fears. That was true with the 'man' I described earlier. The whole thing is damned pathetic.

Some are just pushing an agenda. Could be both working (paranoia and an agenda)

Such people are impossible to reach, impossible to reason with.

But it doesnt matter what they do/think. It ultimately only matters what citizen gunowners do/think.

Cesiumsponge
January 28, 2013, 04:45 PM
Dori Monson, the only non-liberal on KIRO news radio, interviewed the veteran and mayor just now. The councilman was invited but the show hasn't heard back yet.

NavyLCDR
January 28, 2013, 05:40 PM
The February 5th Oak Harbor City Council Meeting will be held in the vehicle bay of a nearby fire station to accomodate extra people. Of course the anti-gun side suggested a school building where firearms possession would be illegal.

Councilmembers:

In anticipation of larger crowd than usual, the February 5th Council Meeting will be held in the vehicle bay of the Oak Harbor Fire Department, 855 East Whidbey Avenue. (We tried the Elks Club but it is not available on the 5th.)

We will start to advertise this change via Channel 10 and our website today. It will also be announced via the Agenda Summary sent to Whidbey News Times.

Please let us know if you have any questions.

radiotom
January 28, 2013, 05:55 PM
What a debacle.

9MMare
January 29, 2013, 01:01 AM
The February 5th Oak Harbor City Council Meeting will be held in the vehicle bay of a nearby fire station to accomodate extra people. Of course the anti-gun side suggested a school building where firearms possession would be illegal.

I dont know if I can get there in time on a workday but I have a couple of friends up there....if they dont already know about it, I know they'd love to attend, cc'ing.

(And it wont be much of a secret....he wears a fishing vest all the time).

jamesbeat
January 29, 2013, 01:18 AM
But, what amazes me, is that they claim to be in fear of their life because of the presence of a gun.....but they will stay right there in the presence of the gun to tell everyone how afraid it is making them.
It's irrational, so you can't rationalize it.

I have a bottle of aspirin in my bathroom cabinet. If I took them all right now, I'd probably die. Does than mean I should be afraid of aspirin?
Why aren't these people scared of cars? Far more people die in car accidents than from incidents or accidents involving firearms, so why not be afraid of cars?

Completely and utterly irrational, yet they get an audience because they use tragic events to rationalize their fears.

I'm a little embarrassed to admit that I have a phobia of spiders. I know that my chances of being injured or killed by one are vanishingly small, yet I'm still afraid of even the non venomous ones.
Having said that, people are sometimes killed or injured by an encounter with certain spiders, so my phobia isn't quite as irrational as a phobia of, say, spoons.
Difference is, I know that the problem is mostly in my head, and I don't have any compulsion to persuade other people that they should be scared of them too.

NavyLCDR
January 29, 2013, 09:35 AM
I dont know if I can get there in time on a workday but I have a couple of friends up there....if they dont already know about it, I know they'd love to attend, cc'ing.

(And it wont be much of a secret....he wears a fishing vest all the time).
Open carry is welcome too. There will be uniformed police officers there. Nothing like a guy with a gun going up and shaking hands and be friendly with the police officers to really get the anti-s going.

NavyLCDR
January 29, 2013, 06:31 PM
http://www.examiner.com/article/oak-harbor-antis-fail-to-exclude-gun-activists-from-debate?cid=db_articles

A Democrat precinct volunteer in Oak Harbor has acknowledged to Examiner that opponents of guns in city parks are trying to pack the city council meeting next Tuesday specifically to keep gun rights activists out.

Fick also confirmed that activists had originally tried to get the council meeting moved to a local school “so they couldn’t bring guns in.” That might also have been designed to discourage attendance from firearms enthusiasts, and if that is the case, then their First Amendment rights are just as much under attack as are their Second Amendment rights.

rsilvers
January 29, 2013, 07:48 PM
Wow - that guy who walked out must pee sitting down.

rsilvers
January 29, 2013, 09:17 PM
I am just a bit extra surprised when men are afraid of tools. A woman who likes guns is impressive. A man who does not feel comfortable with guns, dogs, can't start a fire, or drive a manual transmission - that is weak.

joeschmoe
January 29, 2013, 11:33 PM
tried to get the council meeting moved to a local school “so they couldn’t bring guns in.” That might also have been designed to discourage attendance from firearms enthusiasts

That wouldn't work anyway. That's been tried before, and failed. 2 reasons. WA state open meeting law prohibits such a move (for several reasons), and the gun free school zone law exempts such public meetings from the gun free zone law.

rsilvers
January 29, 2013, 11:50 PM
"the gun free school zone law exempts such public meetings from the gun free zone law."

That is not true. There is no such exemption.

That being said, CCW holders are except from the gun-free school zone in their home state. But there may be state laws.

9MMare
January 30, 2013, 03:31 AM
Examiner quote:

"A Democrat precinct volunteer in Oak Harbor has acknowledged to Examiner that opponents of guns in city parks are trying to pack the city council meeting next Tuesday specifically to keep gun rights activists out."


That shouldnt work...Seattle tried it a couple of yrs ago and it was shot down...there was a legal challenge and it was unConstitutional per the state Constitution.

NavyLCDR
January 30, 2013, 10:00 AM
That wouldn't work anyway. That's been tried before, and failed. 2 reasons. WA state open meeting law prohibits such a move (for several reasons), and the gun free school zone law exempts such public meetings from the gun free zone law.

There is no exception for public meetings in either the Federal Gun Free School Zone law or Washington State law:
RCW 9.41.280
Possessing dangerous weapons on school facilities — Penalty — Exceptions.

(1) It is unlawful for a person to carry onto, or to possess on, public or private elementary or secondary school premises, school-provided transportation, or areas of facilities while being used exclusively by public or private schools:
(a) Any firearm;

(3) Subsection (1) of this section does not apply to:
(b) Any person engaged in military, law enforcement, or school district security activities.
(c) Any person who is involved in a convention, showing, demonstration, lecture, or firearms safety course authorized by school authorities in which the firearms of collectors or instructors are handled or displayed;
(f) Any nonstudent at least eighteen years of age legally in possession of a firearm or dangerous weapon that is secured within an attended vehicle or concealed from view within a locked unattended vehicle while conducting legitimate business at the school;
(h) Any law enforcement officer of the federal, state, or local government agency.

(6) Except as provided in subsection (3)(b), (c), (f), and (h) of this section, firearms are not permitted in a public or private school building.

joeschmoe
January 30, 2013, 02:54 PM
I was wrong then. This came up a few years ago regarding a similar issue.

Alfonse99
January 31, 2013, 12:21 AM
This post is very informative. I didn't realize Washington's preemption laws are what they are. Here, the City of Chelan has its council chambers and City Hall posted as "No Guns Zones." I'll have to bring that to their attention.

NavyLCDR
January 31, 2013, 02:09 AM
This post is very informative. I didn't realize Washington's preemption laws are what they are. Here, the City of Chelan has its council chambers and City Hall posted as "No Guns Zones." I'll have to bring that to their attention.

RCW 9.41.300
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9.41.300

RCW 9.41.300
Weapons prohibited in certain places — Local laws and ordinances — Exceptions — Penalty.

The local judicial authority shall designate and clearly mark those areas where weapons are prohibited, and shall post notices at each entrance to the building of the prohibition against weapons in the restricted areas;

Washington Court Rules, Chelean Superior Court:
http://www.courts.wa.gov/court_rules/?fa=court_rules.display&group=superior&set=supche&ruleid=superiorsupche101

LR .01
COURTROOM SAFETY


No person (except for duly and regularly commissioned
law enforcement officers of the State of Washington and
other states of the United States of America not appearing
on their own family law matter) shall be on the Fifth Floor
of the Chelan County Regional Law and Justice Center,
Juvenile Justice Center or Auditorium (when being used for
court purposes) while armed with ANY firearm or taser or
explosive device or any knife having a blade length of more
than three inches or any billyclub, blackjack, truncheon or
bat, nor shall any such person be in any of the fore-
mentioned areas while possessing any gas gun or other device
used for the spraying of tear gas, mace or other noxious
chemical substance, nor any incendiary device.

Any person found having any of the articles or devices
heretofore mentioned which are banned from the fifth floor
of the Chelan County Regional Law and Justice Center,
Juvenile Justice Center and Auditorium (when being used for
court purposes) is subject to having such articles or
devices seized by law enforcement officers, bailiffs on
court order, or as otherwise directed by the Court.

Any person violating this rule shall be subject to
punishment for contempt of court and prosecuted under RCW 9.41.300.

The locations of the "gun free" zones must be limited to the areas specified in the court rules, but there must be signs at the entrances to the building saying that firearms are prohibited in the restricted areas.

Alfonse99
February 1, 2013, 03:48 PM
Thanks for the links. In the City of Chelan (different from the county courthouse above) there are signs at the entrance for the council chambers, and I believe the entire city hall building, of it being a "gun free" zone. There are no court chambers involved.

I'm sure it will be brought up and addressed.

NavyLCDR
February 1, 2013, 07:46 PM
Thanks for the links. In the City of Chelan (different from the county courthouse above) there are signs at the entrance for the council chambers, and I believe the entire city hall building, of it being a "gun free" zone. There are no court chambers involved.

I'm sure it will be brought up and addressed.
Only if you bring it up and address it.... otherwise, they will continue to take advantage of those people who will not take the time/effort to find out what the real law is.

flip888
February 1, 2013, 07:54 PM
I live very close to Oak Harbor, im glad the mayor did what he did. I actually learned a lot from that video. Thanks for the link to the video.

Ryanxia
February 2, 2013, 10:18 PM
The good folks in that jurisdiction need to unseat those two city council members at the soonest opportunity.

NavyLCDR
February 6, 2013, 01:43 AM
http://www.oakharbor.org/video-view.cfm?series=34&id=265

Email from Oak Harbor City Council Member:
John I don't know how many were at our meeting tonight but it was about 40 to 1 Pro gun. A bunch talked in Citizen comment and by my count it was 12 pro gun 1 anti. Not everyone spoke during that period because they were waiting for the agenda item on the ordinance to come. When it did come up Bob Severns made 3 motions
1, suspend the rules
2. Declare an emergency session because we were about to be sued
3. Approve the ordinance to make it legal

The ordinance should have been approved in mid November.

One citizen during his comments demanded that Almberg and Servatias resign. After the citizens got thru I made a request that Almberg speak to the subject of him resigning. He gave a fair response. Servatias on the other hand did not speak to the question. He read a document that described how the Mayor ran the meeting. I asked again and got ignored by Servatias

We di have several TV trucks on hand.
Jim Campbell

Cesiumsponge
February 6, 2013, 06:09 PM
Local KIRO news radio's Dori Monson finally got councilman Rick Almberg to do an interview earlier today Here: http://kiroradio.com/listen/9951979

NavyLCDR
February 6, 2013, 07:15 PM
And Lucas Yonkman's reply.....

http://kiroradio.com/listen/9951982

klover
February 6, 2013, 11:20 PM
http://www.oakharbor.org/video-view.cfm?series=34&id=265

If you enjoyed reading about "Oak Harbor, WA rejects motion to restrict carry in city council meeting" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!