Buddy kicked out of library for OC

[Lammo]

Ran into the City Attorney this morning

Knocked him down, it was a terrible mess. Just kidding. Seriously, I happened across Howard Delaney, the City Attorney for Spokane, at the courthouse this morning. I stopped him to talk about the Park Board rules and at the time I didn't know about the recent library incident. Howard told me about the library incident himself. I have known Howard for a long time and he was genuinely amazed at what the library had done, incredulous even. He told me that he has advised the City Council and the Park Board and the director of the library that their laws and rules are 100% without question preempted by state law. He also indicated that he has advised them that they should repeal them so that no one gets arrested and sues the city.

Sadly, and this is my opinion, not a statement by Howard, there are just a few too many "liberals" too afraid of "scary guns" on the current council for them to have the intestinal fortitude to take Howard's advice and do the right thing. So, I don't know exactly where to go from here. Maybe an initiative petition to require the city to remove any and all ordinances and rules that are contrary to RCW 9.41.290 and .300? All I can say with certainty is that the powers that be are getting the correct advice from their ultimate legal advisor and what we really have here in Spokane is a serious horse and water problem. Someone needs to hold the horse's nose and make him swallow.

 

[bennie1986]

Knocked him down, it was a terrible mess. Just kidding. Seriously, I happened across Howard Delaney, the City Attorney for Spokane, at the courthouse this morning. I stopped him to talk about the Park Board rules and at the time I didn't know about the recent library incident. Howard told me about the library incident himself. I have known Howard for a long time and he was genuinely amazed at what the library had done, incredulous even. He told me that he has advised the City Council and the Park Board and the director of the library that their laws and rules are 100% without question preempted by state law. He also indicated that he has advised them that they should repeal them so that no one gets arrested and sues the city.

Sadly, and this is my opinion, not a statement by Howard, there are just a few too many "liberals" too afraid of "scary guns" on the current council for them to have the intestinal fortitude to take Howard's advice and do the right thing. So, I don't know exactly where to go from here. Maybe an initiative petition to require the city to remove any and all ordinances and rules that are contrary to RCW 9.41.290 and .300? All I can say with certainty is that the powers that be are getting the correct advice from their ultimate legal advisor and what we really have here in Spokane is a serious horse and water problem. Someone needs to hold the horse's nose and make him swallow.

Thanks for the inside information!!! I’m glad to see that we are having an impact!

 

[fetch]

Lammo,
A year or so ago in the meeting I had with the police training coordinator and the city attorney (not the one you ran into) he, (the city att.), said that it would take a lawsuit to change the codes. End of meeting.

Sorry, it was the second meeting I had, a year or so ago, with just the city att. when he told me it would take a lawsuit.

 

[jt59]

Lammo,
A year or so ago in the meeting I had with the police training coordinator and the city attorney (not the one you ran into) he, (the city att.), said that it would take a lawsuit to change the codes. End of meeting.

Sorry, it was the second meeting I had, a year or so ago, with just the city att. when he told me it would take a lawsuit.

So, the real question isn't should we have a lawsuit and prevail (the outcome is certain), the real question is recovery of damages.....if you prevail in a (civil) suit like this, doesn't the winning side get "reasonable" attn'y fee's awarded.

 

[unknownsailor]

So, the Spokane City Council is knowingly violating pre-emption?
Good enough for us, but not for them, I see. Nice.
They emulate their more coddled cousins in D.C. very well.
May the concrete of the sidewalk hurt their posteriors when they get tossed out of their jobs.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

All I can say with certainty is that the powers that be are getting the correct advice from their ultimate legal advisor and what we really have here in Spokane is a serious horse and water problem. Someone needs to hold the horse's nose and make him swallow.

Sounds like a sick horse, needs to be put out of it's misery.......( all in jest not advocating shooting politicians no matter how broken they are)

 

[Lammo]

Lammo,
A year or so ago in the meeting I had with the police training coordinator and the city attorney (not the one you ran into) he, (the city att.), said that it would take a lawsuit to change the codes. End of meeting.

Sorry, it was the second meeting I had, a year or so ago, with just the city att. when he told me it would take a lawsuit.

I think that is true, given the current makeup of the City Council and the Park Board. If Howard could make them change it I believe he would. He can't make them, he can't make them, he can't make them (cue Gilligan, dressed up like a girl) but when he tells me he's told them I'm sure he has. As someone else noted in here, they are knowingly violating preemption. They can try to hide behind, well, those rules aren't being enforced but, as shown by the library incident and Bennie's experiences at Manito that's clearly not the case.

 

[skidmark]

I'm not versed in Washington State law, so will not comment on any of your laws specifically.

But if a public official is supposed, according to the law, to do something and does not do it, or is supposed to, accordng to the law, not do something but does it, and nobody can get them to do that thing there is a method/procedure for forcing them to do that which the law requires of them.

As I said, I'm not versed in Washington State law so do not know the precise process/procedure for getting it in front of the right judge, but a petition for a Writ of Mandamus can often scare that someone into sitting up and flying straight, and if not scared into doing so the actual issuance of the Writ holds them liable to contempt proceedings for failing to comply.

Sorry about all the pettyfogging details of how I am describing this, buyt I do not want to misstate myself by leaving something out something important.

Hopefully you (collectively or select a champion) should be able to file the petition pro se. Be sure to ask for the person (office holder as official and as private citizen, to cover your bases) to be made to pay your legal fees as part of the petition's requests. Covering them as both office holder and private individual covers you if the court says the office hlder is covered by soverign immunity - you can then claim he acted not as a public official but as a private citizen when he screwed up.

stay safe.

 

[Lammo]

I'm not versed in Washington State law, so will not comment on any of your laws specifically.

But if a public official is supposed, according to the law, to do something and does not do it, or is supposed to, accordng to the law, not do something but does it, and nobody can get them to do that thing there is a method/procedure for forcing them to do that which the law requires of them.

As I said, I'm not versed in Washington State law so do not know the precise process/procedure for getting it in front of the right judge, but a petition for a Writ of Mandamus can often scare that someone into sitting up and flying straight, and if not scared into doing so the actual issuance of the Writ holds them liable to contempt proceedings for failing to comply.

Sorry about all the pettyfogging details of how I am describing this, buyt I do not want to misstate myself by leaving something out something important.

Hopefully you (collectively or select a champion) should be able to file the petition pro se. Be sure to ask for the person (office holder as official and as private citizen, to cover your bases) to be made to pay your legal fees as part of the petition's requests. Covering them as both office holder and private individual covers you if the court says the office hlder is covered by soverign immunity - you can then claim he acted not as a public official but as a private citizen when he screwed up.

stay safe.

We do have Mandamus out here in the west. The trouble is getting the natives to stop attacking the fort long enough to write a decent brief (ABSOLUTELY 100% KIDDING - - I don't think you think we're still fighting natives out here. Actually we're fighting Californication). I can/will help with the research/writing but as a public employee (prosecutor) it would actually be against the law for me to do the case. Mandamus is in the Revised Code of Washington at RCW 7.16.150 - .280 and can be found here: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=7.16

 

[amlevin]

So, the real question isn't should we have a lawsuit and prevail (the outcome is certain), the real question is recovery of damages.....if you prevail in a (civil) suit like this, doesn't the winning side get "reasonable" attn'y fee's awarded.

Perhaps an "injured party" could have an attorney send a letter to the City Council requesting that they bring their library "rules" in compliance with State Law, advising that their failure to do so will result in the "injured party" filing a lawsuit. They would most likely then contact their City Attorney who would advise them that they would loose. The threat of loss in court might well move things along. Sometimes the cost of an attorney sending this letter can bring things out of "stalemate". If so, it would be far cheaper than an actual suit.

 

[jt59]

Sorry, it's piddling minutia, but I keep seeing this....

I think it "lose" not "loose" as in "My keys are usually loose in my pocket, but I always lose them in the laundry"

Perhaps an "injured party" could have an attorney send a letter to the City Council requesting that they bring their library "rules" in compliance with State Law, advising that their failure to do so will result in the "injured party" filing a lawsuit. They would most likely then contact their City Attorney who would advise them that they would loose. The threat of loss in court might well move things along. Sometimes the cost of an attorney sending this letter can bring things out of "stalemate". If so, it would be far cheaper than an actual suit.

 

[Jeff Hayes]

Next Library Board Meeting

Tuesday Sept 21, 2010 430 PM
Regular Board Meeting.

Downtown Branch, Room 1A 430PM

906 W Main Ave.

Spokane, Washington 99201

Meeting time and date are subject to change. Only items on the agenda can be commented on so if someone wanted to comment on OC they would have to 1st get it on the agenda. One of the board members is Judge Richard B. White, Vice Chair.

 

[bennie1986]

Tuesday Sept 21, 2010 430 PM
Regular Board Meeting.

Downtown Branch, Room 1A 430PM

906 W Main Ave.

Spokane, Washington 99201

Meeting time and date are subject to change. Only items on the agenda can be commented on so if someone wanted to comment on OC they would have to 1st get it on the agenda. One of the board members is Judge Richard B. White, Vice Chair.

Any ideas on how to get it on the agenda? Maybe our meet this Saturday will help... maybe we should show up weekly until they put it on the agenda.

 

[Jeff Hayes]

Getting on the agenda may be as simple as just asking ahead of time. Here is the link, Pat Partovi or director@spokanelibrary.org. I would do it but I live in Stevens County so I dont know how much weight my complaint would have. I tried to get a Spokane Library Card and they will not give me one. I would be glad to show up to support anyone that would like to comment.

One comment I would make is why does the Board of Directors expect the public to obay the law when they refuse to.

 

[bennie1986]

Getting on the agenda may be as simple as just asking ahead of time. Here is the link, Pat Partovi or director@spokanelibrary.org. I would do it but I live in Stevens County so I dont know how much weight my complaint would have. I tried to get a Spokane Library Card and they will not give me one. I would be glad to show up to support anyone that would like to comment.

One comment I would make is why does the Board of Directors expect the public to obay the law when they refuse to.

Im going to follow up with the attorney that represents the library to see if any progress has been made. If no progress has been made I will reach out ot Mr.Partovi about getting this issue added to the agenda.

Thanks for finding the email address Orphan!

 

[aadvark]

NavyLT:

Thank you again for opting to assist me in my analysis of Washington State Law.

I find that your interpretations of both Washington Codes 9.41.290 and 9.41.300 to be much more favorable than my own.

Accordingly, your interpretaions of these two aforementioned Codes have been adopted as my interpretations as well.

I will now cite, 9.41.290, NOT 9.41.300, as the bona-fide Washington State Firearms Preemption Statute for any further correspondence on the topic.

Thank you,

aadvark

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Keep up the fight guys and good work.
I never have been hassled in Bellingham library, (only been there a few times) would have thought you folks in Spokane would have it easier than us here in hippyville.

 

[o2ryan]

We are here looking up law reference now, come on up and join us.:exclaim:

 

[Jeff Hayes]

I wish I could have made it, let us know how it went.

 

[bennie1986]

The meet went well! The lady at the reference desk even said she was looking into getting a CPL.