Latest news with #JavierValdez
Yahoo
19-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
WA gun bill could have major implications for Grant Co. Fair
Mar. 19—OLYMPIA — A Washington State Senate bill to ban firearms in public areas where children may be present had its first hearing in the House Civil Rights and Judiciary Committee on Tuesday. More than 50 people were scheduled to testify regarding the bill during the committee meeting. Senate Bill 5098 passed the Senate on March 5 with a 28-21 vote. SB 5098, if signed into law, will prohibit the presence of weapons in locations where children are likely to be present, including state or local public buildings, parks, playground facilities and county fairs. The bill defines a "state or local public building" as any building owned, leased or used by governmental entities where public employees are regularly present. It does not include transportation properties, such as ferry terminals and train depots. The language of the bill says, "Weapons are prohibited on the premises of a city's, town's, county's, or other municipality's neighborhood, community, or regional park facilities at which children are likely to be present." The legislation builds upon a previous bill sponsored by the same sponsoring senator, Javier Valdez, D-Seattle. SB 5444, which was signed into law in 2024, prohibits firearms in libraries, zoos, aquariums and transit centers. Valdez said in a statement that SB 5098 aims to close any loopholes in the current law and strengthen public safety. The bill had its first public hearing in the House Tuesday in the Committee on Civil Rights and Judiciary. If passed by the House, it will go to Gov. Bob Ferguson for consideration. GC Fairgrounds Both Grant County Sheriff Joey Kriete and Grant County Fairgrounds Manager Jim McKiernan have concerns about the implications of the bill. Last August during the Grant County Fair there was a shooting that led to a full evacuation of the fairgrounds. The 15-year-old suspect shot the gun once and hit two other minors, one person he knew and one bystander, both minors. The suspect recently pleaded guilty to two counts of third-degree assault and illegal possession of a firearm, with enhancement, according to Grant County Prosecutor Kevin McCrae. He was sentenced to 90-144 weeks — just less than two years to a bit over 2.5 years — in a juvenile detention facility. Valdez said during the March 18 House hearing that one of the specific reasons he brought this piece of legislation forward was because of the Grant County incident. "The county fairgrounds is a little personal to me because I represent northeast Seattle, but I was born and raised in Moses Lake, east of the mountains, and last year, there was a shooting at the Grant County Fairgrounds during the Grant County Fair," Valdez said. "Which is what prompted me to further look into this bill here, this year." However, Kriete and McKiernan do not believe that the bill, if it had been in effect last year, would have prevented the shooting. "The only thing I would say is that the bill is not going to mitigate the situation we had here at the fairgrounds," McKiernan said. "A 15-year-old was illegally carrying. He was already breaking the law. Anybody that's trying to get a weapon in, when you have 187 acres and 4,000 feet of fencing, probably can. It is going to be difficult to prevent somebody that really wants to get a weapon into the venue." Kriete agreed. "The 15-year-old violated the law by bringing a gun in there," Kriete said. "If they are not going to abide by that law, I don't know why (lawmakers) think they're going to abide by the other ones in place. I just can't wrap my head around it. So, we're just handcuffing the people that are able to carry firearms; that's who we are really handcuffing here." The two have concerns on how the bill will be implemented at the fairgrounds. "It does kind of scare me a little bit if it does pass," Kriete said. "It's going to be really difficult for us to be able to abide by what that law is saying. Until we operate our fair under a dome, it is going to be very difficult to keep it secure because we have the rodeo grounds with the campground that are attached to the fair. We have an eight-foot-high fence that is very breachable by throwing things over the top of it. Metal detectors are very expensive and have to be monitored." As of now, the bill states signage must be added to these areas to state they are gun-free zones. "I don't think signage alone is going to be the answer," McKiernan said. "At some point in the not-too-distant future, I'm guessing that we're going to be required to put in metal detectors and go through that whole process." McKiernan said there isn't money in the budget this year to add metal-detecting devices, which would cost around $50,000 to $75,000 if required. "My question is, 'Do we really want to impact those that are legally carrying in the venue?' I think there's other ways of increasing safety, including patrol presence, which we are doing for 2025 anyway, and increasing cameras and increasing lighting to try to prevent that type of incident from happening again," McKiernan said. To address last year's incident, the fairgrounds is getting around $1 million in upgrades including new light towers, lighting at gates, additional cameras, a new public address system and improved fencing. "I don't think that law is going to change anything that isn't already happening on the books right now, other than eliminate the ability for people that have the right to carry a firearm safely and securely and be able to protect themselves and their family, that they are no longer able to do that," Kriete said. "That's a really scary part of it. I am hoping it dies in the (House)." There will also be increased policing staff at the fairgrounds this year with around 20 more officers on staff. "Let me emphasize — people that want to do something, will; whether it is legal or illegal," McKiernan said. "I don't think this bill is going to impact it that much. I think our increase of officers, lighting, cameras and fencing is going to be just as, if not more effective than this legislation." If the bill does go into effect, Kriete said both he and McKiernan will sit down with the Grant County Commissioners to see how the fairgrounds will abide by the new law. Proponents Advocates for Senate Bill 5098 expressed support for the legislation during the hearing Tuesday. The initiative garnered support from educators, shooting survivors and civic groups dedicated to gun violence prevention. Margaret Heldring, a representative of Grandmothers Against Gun Violence and a resident of Seattle's 43rd District, expressed concerns about the safety of children in public spaces. "These need to be safe places," Heldring said. "We cannot introduce intimidation, risk, or harm in places where children need to be to thrive." Reflecting on her experiences as a grandmother, she urged lawmakers to recognize the importance of fostering environments that allow children to explore and play without fear for their safety. "'Wherever children are likely to be.' That should be our North Star," she said, referencing the bill's language. Julie Barris, a student at Ingraham High School in Seattle, addressed the emotional toll that gun violence takes on children. "Guns are triggering, even for people who didn't go through a school shooting like I did," she said. Barris said the presence of firearms in public spaces exacerbates feelings of insecurity among youth. "Let's not give kids more of a reason to feel unsafe," Barris said. "This bill will prevent accidents and help children feel safe in our community." Supporters of SB 5098 remained united in their belief that ensuring the safety of children and families takes precedence over concerns about individual firearm rights, according to several testimonies Tuesday. Ann Madson, a school principal and child advocate, weighed in on the necessity of creating safe public spaces. "Public parks should be havens of joy," she said, pointing out the tragic instances of gun violence manifesting in such environments. "We cannot allow fear of gun violence to overshadow the joy and connection that parks are meant to provide." During the last three years, multiple shootings have occurred in Grant County parks, including one in Desert Aire and another in Moses Lake. Addressing the broader implications of the bill, pediatrician Dr. Cora Bruner highlighted the staggering toll of gun violence on children and families in Washington State. "Every year, there are 900 gun-related deaths, and the ripple effect from gun violence affects entire communities," Bruner said. "This legislation provides a common-sense approach to help prevent violence that can't be undone." Opponents SB 5098 has garnered considerable opposition from various groups and individuals who argue that it infringes on the rights of law-abiding citizens, fails to address the root causes of gun violence and ultimately leaves communities less safe. One of the opponents of the bill was Avine Klein, Washington State Director for the National Rifle Association, who referred to the legislation as a "clear infringement" on Second Amendment rights. "Since 1998, 82.8% of public mass shootings have occurred in places where guns are banned," Klein said. "The public safety argument is legally flawed, as the Ninth Circuit has ruled that the right to carry firearms for self-defense extends beyond the home." Klein urged lawmakers not to restrict where individuals can carry firearms, advocating for the rights of citizens to protect themselves and their loved ones. Concerns about personal safety in the absence of firearms were echoed by Jane Millhands, a Pierce County resident and certified firearms instructor. "Can you imagine being in your home and two men enter? Am I going to be raped? Am I going to be murdered?" she recounted, emphasizing that no-gun zones often leave law-abiding citizens vulnerable. Millhands argued that without the ability to defend themselves, women and other vulnerable populations are endangered. "I want to say that many clubs that I train at, several are on government property, where children are present training to be future Olympians. Is that one going to be shut down by you as well?" she said. Paul Jewell, representing the Washington State Association of Counties, raised substantial concerns regarding the economic implications of the bill. Jewell pointed out that the legislation would impose costs on local governments associated with the implementation of new ordinances and signage requirements. "The costs of drafting ordinances, holding public hearings and talking or taking legislative action to meet the requirements to implement this bill will cost counties money," he said. Jewell urged lawmakers to consider financial burdens on local agencies, stressing that requirements imposed on local governments should come with appropriate funding to offset these expenses. Further amplifying concerns, testimony from Kim Robert Smith highlighted the potential unintended consequences of creating more gun-free zones. "Gun-free zones do not prevent crime. They serve to disarm law-abiding citizens and make them easy targets for criminals, who have never followed the rules," Smith said. "This bill will invite and protect criminals to carry out mass shootings. A good guy with a gun is what stops a bad guy with a gun."
Yahoo
12-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
State Senate Bill has proposed restrictions on weapons in public spaces
Mar. 12—OLYMPIA — A bill to increase restrictions on firearms in public places has passed in the Washington State Senate. Senate Bill 5098, primarily sponsored by Rep. Javier Valdez, D-Seattle, passed the Senate on March 5 with a 28-21 vote. The bill aims to implement restrictions on the possession of weapons in various public spaces throughout Washington state. The legislation is now heading to the Washington House of Representatives. If it becomes law, SB 5098 would prohibit the presence of weapons in locations where children are "likely to be present," including state or local public buildings, parks, playground facilities and county fairs, according to the text of the bill. It defines a "state or local public building" as any building owned, leased or used by government entities where public employees are regularly present. It does not include transportation properties, such as ferry terminals and train depots. The language of the bill notes, "Weapons are prohibited on the premises of a city's, town's, county's or other municipality's neighborhood, community or regional park facilities at which children are likely to be present." It lists specific facilities, such as playgrounds, sports fields, water play areas, community centers and skate parks, as examples of locations falling under this prohibition. The legislation builds upon Senate Bill 5444, also sponsored by Valdez, which was signed into law in 2024. SB 5444 prohibits firearms in libraries, zoos, aquariums and transit centers. Valdez said in a statement that SB 5098 aims to close any loopholes in the current law and strengthen public safety. According to the bill summary, this legislation is a response to increased concerns regarding public safety, particularly in areas frequented by children and families. The bill is sponsored by Senators Valdez; Rebecca Saldaña, D- Seattle; Manka Dhingra, D-Seattle; Noel Frame, D-Seattle; T'wina Nobles, D-Fircrest; Tina Orwall, D-Des Moines; Jamie Pedersen, D-Seattle; Jesse Salomon, D-Shoreline; Derek Stanford, D-Bothell; Lisa Wellman, D-Mercer Island and Claire Wilson, D-Auburn. During the vote, 28 Democrats voted yes and two Democrats voted no, including Adrian Cortes from Battle Ground and Claudia Kauffman from Kent. All 19 Republicans in the Senate voted no. To enforce the restrictions, SB 5098 mandates that facilities where weapons are prohibited must post clear signage alerting the public to the weapons ban "at common public access points." This aligns with existing requirements for other restricted locations but specifies that the signage should be posted "as soon as practicable." The bill also stipulates that violation will be classified as a gross misdemeanor, carrying potential legal repercussions for offenders knowingly carrying weapons in designated areas. Committee discussions have revealed a range of opinions regarding the bill. Proponents argue that restricting weapon access in public spaces is a critical step toward enhancing public safety. Supporters testifying at Senate hearings, including public health officials and advocates for gun control, pointed to studies suggesting that imposing restrictions on firearms in sensitive areas leads to a reduction in gun-related violence. Numerous testimonials at hearings, including from parents and community leaders, expressed concern about the impact of gun violence on children's safety and public spaces. "Gun violence remains a persistent crisis in Washington, where someone is killed by a firearm every 12 hours. It is the leading cause of death for children and teens in the state," reads a statement from Valdez. Opponents of SB 5098 raised concerns regarding the implications for gun rights and personal safety. Critics of the bill argued during the hearings the legislation could unduly infringe upon the rights of law-abiding citizens to carry weapons for self-defense. Some also contend that the presence of lawful gun owners does not pose a threat and that the proposed restrictions may lead to unintended consequences, such as increased gun thefts from vehicles as gun owners may be compelled to leave firearms stored in their cars. "They just tried to make more gun-free zones, and pretty soon, you won't be able to carry a weapon anywhere," Rep. Tom Dent, R-Moses Lake, said. "I don't see where they're going to make anything any better. Nothing we've done at this point has improved anything. I think it's just an attempt to make sure that nobody can have a weapon anywhere, which kind of goes against the Second Amendment." Among the minority views expressed during committee hearings, some individuals emphasized that individuals with valid concealed pistol licenses are often trained in firearm use and safety. As such, they argue these individuals should not be barred from carrying weapons in public areas, especially in situations where self-defense may be necessary. "It concerns me that they just keep expanding places where you cannot carry," Dent said. "The thing is, laws like this, law-abiding citizens follow them. People that are going to break the law don't. This is just going to impact law-abiding citizens and not those who are not following the law anyway." The bill also includes specific exemptions. Individuals with a valid concealed pistol license are exempt from prohibitions related to firearms in public buildings, park facilities and county fairs. Additionally, the bill clarifies that it does not apply to military personnel engaged in official duties, security personnel acting in their professional capacity, or correctional officers under certain circumstances. Senate Bill 5098 had its first reading in the House Civil Rights and Judiciary Committee on March 7. The bill will now make its way through the House process. Senate Bill 5098 Restricting the possession of weapons on the premises of state or local public buildings, parks or playground facilities where children are likely to be present and county fairs and county fair facilities. How a bill becomes a law: 1. A bill may be introduced in either the Senate or House of Representatives by a member. 2. It is referred to a committee for a hearing. The committee studies the bill and may hold public hearings on it. It can then pass, reject or take no action on the bill. 3. The Committee report on the passed bill is read in open session of the House or Senate and the bill is then referred to the Rules Committee unless otherwise ordered by the House or Senate. 4. The Rules Committee can either place the bill on the second reading of the calendar for debate before the entire body, or take no action. 5. At the second reading, a bill is subject to debate and amendment before being placed on the third reading calendar for final passage. 6. After passing one chamber, the bill goes through the same procedure in the other chamber. 7. The bill's chamber or origin must come to an agreement on changes made to the bill by the opposite chamber. 8. When the bill is accepted in both chambers, it is signed by the respective leaders and sent to the governor. 9. The governor signs the bill into law or may veto all or part of it. If the governor fails to act on the bill, it may become law without a signature. SOURCE: WASHINGTON STATE LEGISLATURE.
Yahoo
06-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Guns could soon be banned from more public places in Washington
It is already illegal to have guns in libraries, bars, zoos, and transit facilities in Washington. Under a bill passed Wednesday by the state Senate, they would also be banned in parks, government buildings, and on county fairgrounds when a fair is open to the public. Sen. Javier Valdez, D-Seattle, is the bill's sponsor. 'It's pretty critical and vital that we do our best here as a state legislature to keep our residents and families and children safe,' he said on the Senate floor Wednesday. Sen. Jeff Holy, R-Cheney, who voted no, says criminals wouldn't obey this law. 'I think we kind of have been battle-hardened enough, all of us at this point, to realize that's not the case,' Holy said. 'Lawful gun owners are not the problem.' Senate Bill 5098 passed the Senate on a 28-21 vote. It now heads to the House. If it passes there and if Governor Ferguson signs it, the Seattle Times reports it would go into effect on July 26. More from MyNorthwest: Washington bill could allow juvenile killers to seek early release from prison
Yahoo
19-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Clash in WA Legislature over proposal to add rules for initiative signers
These boxes of petitions are for two of the six initiatives submitted to the Office of the Secretary of State in Washington in late 2023. Initiative 2111 was adopted by the Legislature and voters rejected Initiative 2109 in 2024. (Jerry Cornfield/Washington State Standard) A push by Democratic state senators for greater scrutiny of those circulating and signing initiative petitions advanced in the Washington Legislature on Tuesday over the objections of Republicans and the secretary of state. Opponents of the legislation argue it would impede voters' ability to engage in the initiative process, which allows citizens to propose changes in law on the ballot or to the Legislature. The bill would require those gathering initiative signatures to sign a declaration under penalty of false swearing that information written by signers is accurate and they were not paid for their signature. Senate Bill 5382 also directs the secretary of state, in validating signatures, to verify the address listed by a person on an initiative or referendum petition is the same as the one that is on their voter registration card. It passed the Senate State Government and Tribal Relations committee on a party-line 5-4 vote. Sen. Javier Valdez, D-Seattle, chair of the committee and the bill's prime sponsor, said it will bolster accountability and reduce the potential for bad actors to improperly influence the initiative process. Amendments approved Tuesday, he said, will bring Washington in line with California and Idaho in the declarations it requires signature-gatherers to sign. Republican lawmakers said the bill is a reaction to the seven citizen initiatives challenging Democratic policies that qualified for the ballot last year. The Legislature adopted three while voters rejected three and approved one. 'It's absolutely chilling,' said Sen. Shelly Short, R-Addy, a member of the Senate committee. 'I think it's a really sad day when we start taking away the ability of those who disagree with us and make it harder for them to initiate something to do about it.' Brian Heywood, founder of Let's Go Washington, which led signature-gathering for the seven measures, blasted the bill's approval. 'The legislature is showing what they really think about 3 million voters engaging in citizen advocacy,' he said in a statement. 'This bill is politically motivated to solidify the power of the majority and silence anyone who questions their authority. Secretary of State Steve Hobbs, a Democrat, added his voice to the opposition on Tuesday. In a statement, he said anything that adds barriers or impediments to the initiative process 'is not helpful to Washingtonians.' 'Adding a voter's residential address to the process of validating voters' eligibility to sign an initiative petition is unnecessary and won't help voters in any demonstrative way,' Hobbs said. Senate Majority Leader Jamie Pedersen, D-Seattle, said changes envisioned in the bill won't disenfranchise 'people from expressing their views.' He said the state has a rigorous process for verifying a registered voter is the one who actually casts a ballot. That isn't the case with determining the validity of hundreds of thousands of signatures submitted on petitions by people paid to collect them. 'What could possibly go wrong when you're paying people dollars per signature to bring them in,' he said. 'I think this would provide not the same level of accountability that we have generally in the election system, but at least a step up to be sure.' Senate Minority Leader John Braun, R-Centralia, and House Minority Leader Drew Stokesbary, R-Auburn, railed against the bill at their weekly meeting with reporters on Tuesday. 'This is a bill we refer to as the 'initiative-killer',' Braun said. 'It's not clear this bill is even constitutional.' The secretary of state is responsible for verifying and canvassing the names of registered voters who have signed an initiative or referendum petition. It uses statistical sampling to determine if enough signatures are submitted to qualify a measure for the ballot. In August, the state Supreme Court rebuffed a bid by an alliance of unions and progressive groups to force the secretary of state to redo its certification of last year's measures by reconfirming that the hundreds of thousands of people who signed petitions were legal voters. But justices left the door open for lawmakers or the secretary of state to amend the process and in a unanimous ruling in October said the state constitution 'does not require any particular signature verification procedure.' 'Whether more thorough procedures including checking of addresses should be required is a question for the legislature by statute or the secretary by rule,' then Chief Justice Steven Gonzalez wrote. The court rejected two related challenges that could have kept the four initiatives from getting on the November ballot. Those measures sought to repeal the state's capital gains tax, end its cap-and-trade program, make participation in a state-run, long-term care program optional and bar restrictions on natural gas in new construction. All but the gas measure were defeated Valdez's bill faces a difficult path from here. Because it will cost an estimated $1.2 million in the next budget, it must be considered and passed by the Senate Ways and Means Committee. With a projected $6 billion shortfall in the next budget, there may not be an appetite for this new expense. Pedersen said it is not 'a major caucus priority.' 'But then we'll pass several hundred bills that are not major caucus priorities,' he said. 'So I'll look forward to the discussion in our caucus about that.
