Preemption Violation East Rockhill Twp.

[BobFromBucks]

While looking up some information about township park use earlier this month, I found that they have posted that the carrying of any firearm is prohibited in township parks. They have the same rules posted at the park entrances.

I first sent them an email hoping for a response without resorting to certified mail. However, they ignored my email so I sent a certified/return receipt letter. I got the receipt back a week ago.

My question is how long is considered reasonable to wait for a response as I ended my letter by stating:

Once you have reviewed these materials, I would appreciate it if you would respond with your plans to bring the township parks into compliance with §6120. I look forward to your response.

I know a week is not enough although it has been two weeks since the email. I'm just looking for an idea. I can wait until after the next Board of Supervisors meeting and then see what happens.

The more important question is, "What if they just ignore my letter, don't respond, and don't take action to bring the township into compliance with Title 18, section 6120, subsection (a) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statues?"

Is the next step to notify the state Attorney General? That should be interesting considering her anti-gun position? Or, should I notify both my state representative and senator who might be able to gently get the township's attention?

And, yes, based on past experience with citizens' groups working with the township, I would not be the least surprised if they take the "Ignore him and he'll go away approach."

Thank you.

[NRA Member]

This is how the York Libertarian Party handled the issue in Stewartstown.

http://yorklp.org/stewartstown-abolishes-gun-free-zone

"Stewartstown Borough Council Abolishes Gun Free Zone"

Feb 5, 02:56 PM Shared by Manuel Gomez |

"Council Unanimously Votes to Allow Firearms in Meetings

With very little comment other than a report of the solicitor’s findings, Stewartstown Borough council last night passed a unanimous motion to rescind a ban on guns in its municipal building.

The action followed an advisory presentation made by members of the York County Libertarian Party during last month’s workshop session.

Party members notified the borough council that its current meeting rules and procedures were in violation of the commonwealth’s Uniform Firearms Act. The York LP successfully prevented a similar rule from being enacted in the City of York in 2011.

No Controversy

The York Daily Record/Sunday News attempted to sensationalize the issue with a recent editorial bashing county gun owners which likened this author and York County’s second amendment proponents to a band of outlaws:

Permitting people to carry firearms in government buildings is irresponsible – a recipe for potential disaster and tragedy … They push this point despite the fact that it does their cause more harm than good and sullies the image of truly responsible gun owners, the ones who don’t feel nostalgia for the Wild West. – Exercise Gun Rights Responsibly

Despite the zealotry and extremism displayed in such rantings, the issue of Stewartstown’s gun free zone came and went in very anticlimactic fashion. This is a good thing. The cooperative tenor and tone of both the borough council and the York LP remained unmarred by local media agitation.
Thank You to Stewartstown Borough Council

The York County Libertarian Party thanks the Stewartstown Borough council and its solicitor’s office for their responsiveness and professionalism regarding this matter. We commend the borough council for its diligence and for its continued dedication to providing safe passage and decorum during its meetings."

[BobFromBucks]

Thank you for that information.

I know other people on here have experience with preemption. Any other suggestions on wait time and what to do if the township ignores my letter?

[PennsyPlinker]

Bob, if you have not received some sort of response by the time of the next meeting, I would say go. Your physical presence and speaking to them in person should reinforce the gravity of the situation. All you need to do is ask them if they got your letter and actually read it, and then say something like,

"Since the township ordinance is in conflict with Commonwealth preemption, what are your plans to bring the ordinance in line with that law?"

At that point they will have to at least acknowledge that the issue is there and it is not going away. It would be a good idea to have a copy of the law with you so you can show it to them.

You could even follow up with something like,

"Since the law is illegal, do I need to fear being arrested if I am observing the laws of PA?"

See if you can get them on record. Whatever they say, they can then be held accountable for it. Good luck with it.

[BobFromBucks]

Bob, if you have not received some sort of response by the time of the next meeting, I would say go. Your physical presence and speaking to them in person should reinforce the gravity of the situation. All you need to do is ask them if they got your letter and actually read it, and then say something like,

"Since the township ordinance is in conflict with Commonwealth preemption, what are your plans to bring the ordinance in line with that law?"

At that point they will have to at least acknowledge that the issue is there and it is not going away. It would be a good idea to have a copy of the law with you so you can show it to them.

You could even follow up with something like,

"Since the law is illegal, do I need to fear being arrested if I am observing the laws of PA?"

See if you can get them on record. Whatever they say, they can then be held accountable for it. Good luck with it.

Good suggestion, Pennsy. They had a Board of Supervisors meeting this week which means there is no excuse now not to be aware of my letter. I wouldn't think the township clerk would have held it for several weeks until the meeting but anything is possible in politics. If I haven't heard from them by next month's meeting, I'll be in attendance per your suggestion. Thank you.

[jerryg]

I wrote to Forks Township where I live about pre emption ordinance they have for the township parks. After 5 weeks and the only reply that I had received was from our Chief of Police who said I thought they fixed that. I wrote again they are supposed to fix it tomorrow at a meeting.

The City of Easton has the same violation I wrote to the mayor and he said why would you want to carry in a park. He is next as soon as Forks is fixed.

[dans]

Bob, I live in Dublin and will attend the meeting with you if I'm around. Let me know at 215-285-6867

[BobFromBucks]

Here is an update to the preemption violation at East Rockhill Township in Bucks County. I kept cordially corresponding with the township secretary who passed my letter onto the solicitor for the township. He agreed with me that they were in violation and at the board of supervisors meeting he recommended an amendment to the townships regulations to bring them into compliance.

So, a happy ending, I think. But, as always with the law...there is a little bit of a twist.

The only question I have (and maybe GunLawyer can answer it) is why do they need to, and I quote:

The draft ordinance needs to be reviewed by Bucks County Planning Commission, East Rockhill Planning Commission & advertised before adoption.

If they know they are not in compliance and therefore in violation of state law, why would they need to have the county and township planning commissions review it and then advertise it?

While that is going on someone could walk their dogs in the driving range park which is very large with a walking trail that takes you into a secluded area prime for human or coyote attack. If I walked my dogs there, I would carry my weapon. And, suppose someone made the MWAG call and one of our Pennridge Regional officers arrived not knowing that I'm allowed to carry since the signs say I can't and the amendment has not been adopted?

If this is how it has to be done, then so be it. But, if this is a bunch of hooey (as my West Virgiania relatives would say) then what can I do to cut this process and get it done now?

Thanks.

[GunLawyer001]

Here is an update to the preemption violation at East Rockhill Township in Bucks County. I kept cordially corresponding with the township secretary who passed my letter onto the solicitor for the township. He agreed with me that they were in violation and at the board of supervisors meeting he recommended an amendment to the townships regulations to bring them into compliance.

So, a happy ending, I think. But, as always with the law...there is a little bit of a twist.

The only question I have (and maybe GunLawyer can answer it) is why do they need to, and I quote:

The draft ordinance needs to be reviewed by Bucks County Planning Commission, East Rockhill Planning Commission & advertised before adoption.

If they know they are not in compliance and therefore in violation of state law, why would they need to have the county and township planning commissions review it and then advertise it?

While that is going on someone could walk their dogs in the driving range park which is very large with a walking trail that takes you into a secluded area prime for human or coyote attack. If I walked my dogs there, I would carry my weapon. And, suppose someone made the MWAG call and one of our Pennridge Regional officers arrived not knowing that I'm allowed to carry since the signs say I can't and the amendment has not been adopted?

If this is how it has to be done, then so be it. But, if this is a bunch of hooey (as my West Virgiania relatives would say) then what can I do to cut this process and get it done now?

Thanks.

I may be wrong, but it's my understanding that the ability of local municipalities to create new laws is restricted by the Commonwealth, so the public notice requirements are likely non-waivable.

You could always copy the local Chief of Police on the status of the ordinance, which I presume is a summary offense anyway. It could always get ugly, but citing someone for a summary violation shouldn't require a SWAT team and cuffs and a weekend detention. If the Chief is aware that the solicitor and others consider the ordinance to be unlawful, he could tell his officers to ignore the sign.

[flyingjunkie]

I had a similar issue to this regarding the Hopewell Twp parks. I was surfing their website and came across the "rule" for the park. I wrote the park manager an email stating that they were in violation. It took about a month or 2 (this happened around Christmas, so I wasn't all that surprised it took so long with people taking vacations and such). I never got notice or anything as I had requested, but I did look at the website about a month or so ago and the had removed the rule and replaced it with "no discharging weapons in the park" or something to that effect. My GF went down to the park and confirmed that they had changed all the signs down there as well to reflect the change. So my issue was resolved quietly and without much resistance.