By a 7-1 vote, the House Government Operations Committee voted against pursuing the charter changes, which would require legislative approval. The decision came after legislative lawyer Erik Fitzpatrick warned that the restrictions raise “significant constitutional questions.”
Legislators seized on that as a reason not to launch into what surely would have been a controversial discussion. Lawmakers had just finished a difficult debate in passing gun-control legislation to restrict possession of firearms by felons and the severely mentally ill.
“I think Burlington needs to re-craft these if that’s what they really want,” said Rep. Linda Martin (D-Wolcott).
Burlington Mayor Miro Weinberger, who appeared before the committee to urge passage, said afterward that he was disappointed legislators were unwilling to work with the city. “The Burlington voters voted very strongly for these three measures,” Weinberger said. “It was clear the committee didn’t have the appetite to take them up in a detailed way.”
Rep. Joanna Cole (D-Burlington) was the sole committee member who wanted the legislature to work with Burlington to finesse the wording and act on the package.
Burlington voters sought three measures for the city: to allow police to confiscate weapons from suspected domestic abusers, to prohibit guns on the grounds of bars and to require guns to be stored in locked containers.
Fitzpatrick warned the committee that the measures would surely be challenged in court. He said that the results would be difficult to predict, but that recent court rulings suggest challenges might be legitimate.
A federal court last year ruled on a Baton Rouge, La., ordinance similar to Burlington’s proposal to ban guns on the grounds of establishments with a liquor license. The Louisiana court found that the ordinance was overly broad by barring possession of a gun in a parking lot.
Eileen Blackwood, the Burlington city attorney who helped write the charter changes, listened Thursday as Fitzpatrick critiqued her work. She said afterward she was aware of the legal perils he laid out, but she believes the measures are legally defensible. “We were hoping that Vermont would step up and be willing to be part of looking at these laws,” Blackwood said.
Ed Cutler, president of Gun Owners of Vermont, said that his group had been preparing to challenge the Burlington charter changes in court, had they passed. “I’m glad they understood that every one of those ordinances would be overturned,” he said.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
“It think Burlington need to re-craft these if what’s what they really want,” said Rep. Linda Martin (D-Wolcott).
Me think this article needs a proof-reader.
And nowhere – NOWHERE – in this article is it pointed out that these proposals not only violate, but declare Burlington to be exempt from, state law.
Pretty sloppy reporting, if you ask me.
We are a representative republic — not a democracy. In a democracy, the majority can vote your rights away. That pesky old Constitution gets in the way of the Progressive agenda once again.
Burlington charter changes H90, H91, H92 were shot down in flames!
Only ONE committee member supported them, JOANNA COLE.
Her GunSense campaign contributions:
08/22/14 $200
09/03/14 $200
10/02/14 $200
You forgot to mention these bills, plus the one the Governor says he will sign into law, all violate Vermont’s Constitution against ANY restrictions on a Vermont citizen to own a gun, not to mention that the only person who voted for it was the person who took $600 of Michael Bloomberg’s GunSenseVT money.
Of course she”ll say she it’s a “grass roots” organization and she’s never met Bloomberg, but that’s an evasion, not a denial, especially since Gun-nonSenseVt’s lobbyist said he needed to talk to their “national office” after Sen. Sears asked if they could agree to a compromise bill and Dick had to call for a recess hoping no one would notice what he had said.
There was NO “overwhelming” support for the charter changes!
Burlington statistics:
42,282 residents
29,685 registered voters
70%
Only 26% of the registered voters actually voted on these gun ordinances!
The margin of results at most was 12%.
On the safe storage ordinance there was only a FIVE PERCENT difference of the total voters!
Mayor Weinberger claims, on VPR, “that the people of Burlington overwhelming supported them”.
GunSenseVT says it was overwhelming.
Five percent of the voters is in absolutely no way, overwhelming support!
At all of the public hearings, the overwhelming support came from people whose Rights will be violated, AGAINST Bloomberg-sponsored gun control.
Imagine the outrage that would be expressed if the following local charter change story was aired:
“Town of Island Pond passes local charter banning Birth control, also requires all Muslims be subjected to ‘safe storage’ laws which prevent their unfettered access to the Koran as it has resulted in so much death.”
Yet that is exactly what these nimrods from Burlington are asking for.
Great photo-bomb Ms Hallenbeck please tell your readers: Who is that behind the Mayor?
The charter changes violated Vermont state law and the Vermont Constitution. Game over.