Meeting Date: June 17, 2024
Location: Pocono Township
Introduction: On June 17, 2024, a heated meeting took place in Pocono Township to discuss the proposed "Firearm Ordinance." The ordinance had been a topic of contention among residents, leading to a special meeting that some felt was inadequately advertised. Notably, the township manager, earning a $130,000 salary, played a role in the proceedings. The meeting brought to light various concerns and amendments regarding the ordinance, sparking significant public comment and debate.
Key Points Discussed:
- Background and Amendments:
- The board clarified that the original document circulated was not the final ordinance but a draft copied from Stroud Township, serving as a starting point.
- Key amendments were verbally communicated:
- Striking the restriction that only property owners and their immediate family can use the shooting range.
- Removing the provision allowing police to confiscate firearms.
- Excluding BB guns and air rifles from the definition of firearms.
- Reducing the minimum acreage requirement for a private shooting range from three acres to one acre.
- No revised document or meeting minutes were provided to the audience.
- Public Comment Highlights:
- Public Speaking Concerns:
- A resident criticized the board for increasing regulations, including a ten-acre minimum to own chickens, and highlighted legal avenues to sue board members for rights violations.
- Special Meeting Advertisement:
- A resident pointed out the ineffective communication of the "special meeting" on June 12, noting it was advertised in the Pocono Record, which few people purchase.
- General Disagreement:
- Many attendees expressed their opposition to the ordinance, emphasizing hope that the board's intention to back down was genuine.
- A certified firearms safety instructor stressed the importance of gun safety but argued that the proposed ordinance went too far.
- GOP Involvement:
- Recently elected Monroe County GOP Chair Pete Begley spoke against the ordinance but faced interruptions from the commissioners and solicitor. This led to a contentious exchange, with Begley asserting the First Amendment Right to redress grievances.
- Public Speaking Concerns:
- Meeting Conduct and Transparency Issues:
- The board's bylaws were invoked to ensure a new public comment period following a motion to amend the agenda, which was acknowledged after initial resistance from the commissioners.
- Future Actions:
- Commissioner Ellen Gnandt proposed amending the agenda to include the creation of a more general "nuisance" ordinance, incorporating aspects of the firearm restrictions to mitigate controversy.
- The solicitor suggested that this new ordinance could address various commissioners' specific concerns, hinting at a broader application beyond firearms.
Conclusion: The meeting underscored significant community resistance to the proposed firearm ordinance and highlighted concerns about transparency and communication from the board. The shift towards a broader "nuisance" ordinance will likely reframe the debate, and residents are advised to stay vigilant and engaged in upcoming meetings to ensure their voices are heard.
Next Steps: Residents should prepare for the revised ordinance discussions in July and monitor township communications closely. Enhanced monitoring systems to track meeting announcements and document postings are recommended to ensure timely public participation.