Contra Costa

[lambo9mm]

My timeline:

Application submitted on July 7th
Background cleared on Aug 6th

-- Pending interview to be scheduled.

[Ron Jeremey]

Originally Posted by lambo9mm

My timeline:

Application submitted on July 7th
Background cleared on Aug 6th

-- Pending interview to be scheduled.

If you haven't been given a decision by October 7th they will be in violation of PC26205. Reach out to https://crpa.org/ccw-issues-in-california/

[canadagoose]

What's the going rate for livescan? I just paid $138 at my local UPS store.

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk

[Richmonder]

Originally Posted by canadagoose

What's the going rate for livescan? I just paid $138 at my local UPS store.

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk

I paid $128 at UPS store in Pleasant Hill back in August.

[MFG328]

I paid 138 in Pinole for my Livescan at a small package store.

[BananaTyrant]

I paid $115 at IdentaGo. Plus the woman working the machine in Fairfield was super cute, so that was a plus.

[Ron Jeremey]

Originally Posted by BananaTyrant

I paid $115 at IdentaGo. Plus the woman working the machine in Fairfield was super cute, so that was a plus.

That’s a double win.

[325inthe510]

Originally Posted by wdwight

I was the 11am today.
5/25 - application
6/07 - livescan (CCSO)
8/03 - livescan complete
9/20 - interview

Was told to bring approx 100 rounds to the range qual.

Was told to bring both guns you plan to register. I have to swap one out on the application as I just put a Holosun red dot on it and they won't qualify any firearms with red dots, laser sights or lights. Luminescent or glowing hard sights are acceptable.

Was told by my buddy who just renewed last month, to bring holsters for both and a 2 mag belt clip for both as the qualification is 6 rounds at 5yds in 5 seconds, drop the mag, load a new mag and rack the slide, decock and holster before the next round at 7yds (6 shots in 5 sec), repeat mag drop/swap/holster, followed by 10yds (6 rounds in 10 sec). From his description, everyone is firing simultaneously.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

Seriously? No red dots or lights? I’m guessing it would be an issue if one were to qualify without them and add them on later? A CCW without a light is straight up dangerous…

My timeline so far,
7/5/22 - USPS delivered application to the Contra Costa Sheriff's office
8/29/22 - CA livescan completed
8/29/22 - FBI livescan completed
8/29/22 - Firearms livescan completed

I’ve sent a few polite emails since mid September asking for an update, no response.

[bonzai272]

^ Im probably slightly ahead of you, but in the same boat, sadly. Sent app late June, cleared all Live Scan 8/11, have not heard anything back. I've sent some emails to check status, no reply.

[Ron Jeremey]

I sent this to my contact in the County Supervisor's office:

Thank you again, for your effort. Since we last traded messages, I have moved forward in the process. I was interviewed on September 20th, but the Sheriff has still not met the requirements of PC26205 to approve or deny my application in a timely manner.
I understand that they are overwhelmed. On the day of the interview, the backlog was over 1,000. It grows every day.
I suppose you could take some comfort in knowing that Contra Costa's Sheriff isn't considered the "worst" offender with respect to slow rolling the CCW process. Alameda County is. Today the California Rifle and Pistol association announced that they will be suing Alameda County. Contra Costa can't be far behind.
As your office manages the finances of the county, you should be concerned about the liability of a civil rights lawsuit. The county is exposed here, and it's easily avoidable.
There are two bottlenecks in the Sheriff's process. One is the interview process, as there is one person, the Internal Affairs Lieutenant, doing the interviews, and his time is limited. This function could be handled, however, by several lower ranking officers.
That's not the biggest bottleneck, though. That bottleneck is at my next stage, which is the training class and qualification. As of now, the Sheriff does this in-house. Classes are limited to approximately 15 people, and they happen one day per week. I don't know when I'll be scheduled, but someone who interviewed just after me was told that it would not happen until early 2023.
The Supreme Court was clear in the Bruen decision, this process cannot be dragged out. It's abusive (that's the term used in the decision). Processing 1,000 applications at the rate of 15 per week is dragging out the process. Should the county be sued, the litigation cost alone will be expensive, and a loss in court would be probable. And it's easily avoidable.
Many counties outsource their training and qualification process. Private contractors follow a State DOJ approved curriculum and proctor the required live-ammunition firearms shooting test. Applicants that pass are given a certificate which they turn into their respective Sheriff's office, and they get their CCW.
I know of two vendors who have reached out to Sheriff Livingston's office. They currently train and qualify CCW applicants for our neighboring counties. They have been told no, that Contra Costa will continue to process its CCW applicants in-house.
This is, as the Supreme Court says, abusive. As a citizen of Contra Costa County, my civil rights are being denied, and to make matters worse, I (as a taxpayer) will have to pay the cost of the inevitable lawsuit. As the Supervisors hold the purse strings, I hope they are aware of this liability, and they urge the Sheriff to mitigate the problem. He needs to delegate the interviewing process to the Sergeant level and outsource the training a qualification to the many vendors who already do this for many other departments in Northern California.

[serper3]

Originally Posted by Ron Jeremey

I sent this to my contact in the County Supervisor's office:

thank you for sending and posting on here. nicely worded!

[bonzai272]

Agreed, nicely done!

[lambo9mm]

Originally Posted by Ron Jeremey

I sent this to my contact in the County Supervisor's office:

Thanks for sharing and pushing it forward.

Would love to meet and thank you in person. A gathering in Concord shooting range any of these days would be fun. In the end, beers on me!

[joseph3724]

re: Ron Jeremey's Letter to theCounty Supervisor's office

Well done! Respectful and to the point. Thanks.

[AustinV510]

I’m officially past my 90 days....

I have been sheriffs posse member for years, which I was hoping would somehow help my application move along, But so far, has not.

I brought application into CC sheriffs office in person 7/6

CA Completed - 08/09/2022
FBI Completed - 08/09/2022
Firearms Completed - 08/11/2022

[Gator15]

Agreed that Ron's letter is good and states the salient points. But government doesn't care. If this was a 1A issue this would have been over in July. This whole process is abusive (that's the point though), but there is no consequence to the government actors, that is why they keep doing it, and this sadly is why our country is doomed.

[Ron Jeremey]

Originally Posted by Gator15

Agreed that Ron's letter is good and states the salient points. But government doesn't care. If this was a 1A issue this would have been over in July. This whole process is abusive (that's the point though), but there is no consequence to the government actors, that is why they keep doing it, and this sadly is why our country is doomed.

I don't disagree that if this was an issue that they support, this would have been cleared up a long time ago.
That's why we need to tell them why they should care.
They should care because it will cost them money that they want to spend on their pet projects. That's why I sent that email. And I received a response, from my contact. She said that she had passed my message on to Supervisor Mitchoff.

Here's a link to the "who is my Supervisor" page. It can't hurt to reach out.
If you feel so inclined, your message should be about the risk to the county of being sued. The Sheriff doesn't report to them, but they have some influence, as they do control his budget. If he loses a lawsuit, it's the County supervisors who have to come up with the money.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/5715/...-Represents-Me
Again, you're right that they don't care about our rights being trampled. But they do speak money. Focus on how this will cost the county money.

[TheNinja]

I think I know the answer already....but if I am wanting to get a 2nd gun to add to my CCW, should I get the gun first and wait the 10 days, or file CCW ASAP and add it later?

I have Glock 17 but want G26 or Shield for summer CCW. Or maybe Springfield but love the thought of the Shield.

Anyway - Wanted to say a huge thanks to @Ron Jeremey for that email he sent. Perfectly worded. Polite yet demanding of our rights!

[TheNinja]

Originally Posted by Ron Jeremey

I don't disagree that if this was an issue that they support, this would have been cleared up a long time ago.
That's why we need to tell them why they should care.
They should care because it will cost them money that they want to spend on their pet projects. That's why I sent that email. And I received a response, from my contact. She said that she had passed my message on to Supervisor Mitchoff.

Here's a link to the "who is my Supervisor" page. It can't hurt to reach out.
If you feel so inclined, your message should be about the risk to the county of being sued. The Sheriff doesn't report to them, but they have some influence, as they do control his budget. If he loses a lawsuit, it's the County supervisors who have to come up with the money.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/5715/...-Represents-Me
Again, you're right that they don't care about our rights being trampled. But they do speak money. Focus on how this will cost the county money.

Would it be OK if I used part of your letter (not word for word or anything) to send to my district supervisor? The more noise we make (like you said, focus on costing the county money!) the more movement we hopefully get.

[Ron Jeremey]

Originally Posted by TheNinja

Would it be OK if I used part of your letter (not word for word or anything) to send to my district supervisor? The more noise we make (like you said, focus on costing the county money!) the more movement we hopefully get.

Absolutely! My Supervisor is Mitchoff. The more they hear from us, the better. One angle that you could take is to question Livingston's motives. Why is he resisting the idea of outsourcing the training/qualification? The only thing I can think of is that he sees this as an opportunity to expand his own facility. If that's the case, the Supervisors should know right now that he's about to hit them up for a multi-million dollar capital project and the budget to staff it. If they suspect that is the case, they are going to start asking questions. While they don't have any direct power over his policies, they control his budget. If nothing else, the Supervisors should demand a report on the fiscal impact to the county of complying with Bruen.

The more I think about it, the more motivated I am to go to a Supervisor's meeting and ask that question in an open forum. That might even get the attention of the press. Please tell me where my assumptions are wrong. I'm assuming that there is a demand for about 8,500 CCWs in Contra Costa County. I base that on the fact that we're a county of 1.1 million people, with a similar demographic profile as Sacramento County, with 1.4 million, and over 10,000 active CCWs. Sacramento outsources their training and qualification. Neither their, nor our Sheriff's training facilities have the physical capacity or staff to handle a CCW population that is ten times the size of their department that they need to train and qualify.

[Ron Jeremey]

Originally Posted by TheNinja

I think I know the answer already....but if I am wanting to get a 2nd gun to add to my CCW, should I get the gun first and wait the 10 days, or file CCW ASAP and add it later?

I have Glock 17 but want G26 or Shield for summer CCW. Or maybe Springfield but love the thought of the Shield.

Anyway - Wanted to say a huge thanks to @Ron Jeremey for that email he sent. Perfectly worded. Polite yet demanding of our rights!

Thanks.

I got the impression from the Lt. that they could be flexible up until the day of qualification. You have to qualify with the guns on your permit. I think if you were to send them an email ahead of that date and say "I want to add XXXXX" to the permit and then you qualify with it, you'd be fine. As long as it meets their requirements, of course. The application allowed for three guns, so I put a .22 as my third. They scratched that off the list in the interview, as they only allow two and the .22 wouldn't qualify anyway.

[Gator15]

Originally Posted by Ron Jeremey

I don't disagree that if this was an issue that they support, this would have been cleared up a long time ago.
That's why we need to tell them why they should care.
They should care because it will cost them money that they want to spend on their pet projects. That's why I sent that email. And I received a response, from my contact. She said that she had passed my message on to Supervisor Mitchoff.

Here's a link to the "who is my Supervisor" page. It can't hurt to reach out.
If you feel so inclined, your message should be about the risk to the county of being sued. The Sheriff doesn't report to them, but they have some influence, as they do control his budget. If he loses a lawsuit, it's the County supervisors who have to come up with the money.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/5715/...-Represents-Me
Again, you're right that they don't care about our rights being trampled. But they do speak money. Focus on how this will cost the county money.

Frankly I don't think any of them care about the cost. The State certainly does not, and that is where most of the problems here lie. The County will just blame the State (and at least partly counties would be right). Ideology is what drives this and they'll use taxpayer money to deprive the taxpayer of his/her rights until they are stopped. The Court's are slow-walking this too--if this was a 1A issue about a permit for a protest, the courts would intervene and force the issue in a matter of a couple of days. And the courts would not "stay" their order pending appeal. This is insane.

[Gator15]

Guns have to meet "their requirement"--we need to qualify to get a permit every two years--we have to hand over serial number on the gun carried---we have to qualify with each gun we may want to carry--we have to wait for CA DOJ Firearms check---we have to interview. Someone please tell me in Bruen where it says that we have to jump through all these hoops to get a permit to exercise a right?

Per Bruen, the only question is: Did you pass a NICS background check? Yes? OK, here's your permit. That is Bruen. That is a constitutional right (still burdened BTW)

[TheNinja]

Originally Posted by Ron Jeremey

Thanks.

I got the impression from the Lt. that they could be flexible up until the day of qualification. You have to qualify with the guns on your permit. I think if you were to send them an email ahead of that date and say "I want to add XXXXX" to the permit and then you qualify with it, you'd be fine. As long as it meets their requirements, of course. The application allowed for three guns, so I put a .22 as my third. They scratched that off the list in the interview, as they only allow two and the .22 wouldn't qualify anyway.

Thanks! I actually have my Shield 9mm sitting in 10 day waiting period (purchased today) now so I'll just wait and be able to add it to my original app.

Oh man....no .22. If I could have 3 on my list it would be awesome to have my rough rider revolver as a potential CCW

[Ron Jeremey]

Originally Posted by TheNinja

Thanks! I actually have my Shield 9mm sitting in 10 day waiting period (purchased today) now so I'll just wait and be able to add it to my original app.

Oh man....no .22. If I could have 3 on my list it would be awesome to have my rough rider revolver as a potential CCW

Nice gun! I have one too.

[Big Chudungus]

anyone actually gotten CCW from CCC sheriff's dept recently that is a regular "civilian" citizen?

Seems process is hitting a brick wall at "interview".

I'm guessing there is a legal hang up where politically the Sheriff is being told to deny everyone due to Interview because anything else is too cut and dried, but the guy tasked to do that are asking "How?" and boss says "that part is your job" and the guy is like "but the SCOTUS....." etc.

[Ron Jeremey]

Originally Posted by Big Chudungus

anyone actually gotten CCW from CCC sheriff's dept recently that is a regular "civilian" citizen?

Seems process is hitting a brick wall at "interview".

I'm guessing there is a legal hang up where politically the Sheriff is being told to deny everyone due to Interview because anything else is too cut and dried, but the guy tasked to do that are asking "How?" and boss says "that part is your job" and the guy is like "but the SCOTUS....." etc.

I don't know of anyone who has moved past the interview. There are a few of us here now that have had the interview, and now we're waiting.

Your instincts are good. I know a guy who knows a guy whose ex wife used to date the next door neighbor of someone high up in the department. The word is that everyone is telling Livingston that he has to start issuing permits one way or another, but he's digging in his heels for some reason. I have friends who have defended him for years, telling me that "he's really a good guy, but he's a Republican in a Blue county, blah blah blah, and his hands are tied". Now he has the political cover to issue CCWs, and he's still holding on. I don't understand it.

Prior to Bruen, Santa Cruz County was also a "yellow" county, issuing CCWs only for employment related reasons. Yes, they are smaller, but so is their demand. And Santa Cruz residents are now picking up their CCWs, having applied after Bruen. I applied in January, and I'm still waiting in line.

[Big Chudungus]

Originally Posted by Ron Jeremey

"he's really a good guy, but he's a Republican in a Blue county, blah blah blah, and his hands are tied". Now he has the political cover to issue CCWs, and he's still holding on. I don't understand it.

GOP in Dem County elected several times in a row unopposed and I've never heard of him, much less him enacting any policy that ruffles any feathers = thoroughbred RINO.

Obviously his real job is to cock-block any legit candidates. Many such cases. Sounds like he is exactly what the SCOTUS just ruled against. Worst sort of weasel. He'll pretend he is on your side, sort of, but always let you down with some lame excuse, leading you down a dead end. Looking up his bio the only thing missing is WEF Young Global Leader grad.

Thats been pretty much my experience with CCC Sheriffs. They come across as pretty smart helpful guys, but as soon as there are presented with actual clearly proven bad guys that could certainly be "contacted" for at least trespassing, the deputies just kinda fade away, with "We've got the info we need" or something.

[L84CABO]

Originally Posted by Big Chudungus

GOP in Dem County elected several times in a row unopposed and I've never heard of him, much less him enacting any policy that ruffles any feathers = thoroughbred RINO.

Obviously his real job is to cock-block any legit candidates. Many such cases. Sounds like he is exactly what the SCOTUS just ruled against. Worst sort of weasel. He'll pretend he is on your side, sort of, but always let you down with some lame excuse, leading you down a dead end. Looking up his bio the only thing missing is WEF Young Global Leader grad.

Thats been pretty much my experience with CCC Sheriffs. They come across as pretty smart helpful guys, but as soon as there are presented with actual clearly proven bad guys that could certainly be "contacted" for at least trespassing, the deputies just kinda fade away, with "We've got the info we need" or something.

This may all be true but do not give up on pursuing your CCW permits. He's got to issue based on Bruen although it may take some time and a lawsuit to force him. Stay in touch with the appropriate 2a groups (FPC, CRPA, etc.) as they pursue the legal side of this.

If you scroll down at the linky, there is a copy of the letter CRPA sent to Sheriff Livingston on June 29th. If your sheriff is stalling you may want reach out to CRPA and see if they can offer any help.

https://crpa.org/nysrpa-v-bruen-supr...n-information/

[TheNinja]

Originally Posted by Ron Jeremey

I don't know of anyone who has moved past the interview. There are a few of us here now that have had the interview, and now we're waiting.

Your instincts are good. I know a guy who knows a guy whose ex wife used to date the next door neighbor of someone high up in the department. The word is that everyone is telling Livingston that he has to start issuing permits one way or another, but he's digging in his heels for some reason. I have friends who have defended him for years, telling me that "he's really a good guy, but he's a Republican in a Blue county, blah blah blah, and his hands are tied". Now he has the political cover to issue CCWs, and he's still holding on. I don't understand it.

Prior to Bruen, Santa Cruz County was also a "yellow" county, issuing CCWs only for employment related reasons. Yes, they are smaller, but so is their demand. And Santa Cruz residents are now picking up their CCWs, having applied after Bruen. I applied in January, and I'm still waiting in line.

This is really interesting. Is our country just giving lip service to the law? Are they basically just taking everyone's money and not actually giving an CCW permits?

So nobody here has actually made it through the entire process and got their permit? Does anyone know anyone who got their's in the last 3 months or so? I don't know, this just seems really really fishy to me. I'm not even sure it's worth applying at this point if it's just going to cost me a bunch of money to get denied or have to wait 2 years.

[Ron Jeremey]

Originally Posted by TheNinja

This is really interesting. Is our country just giving lip service to the law? Are they basically just taking everyone's money and not actually giving an CCW permits?

So nobody here has actually made it through the entire process and got their permit? Does anyone know anyone who got their's in the last 3 months or so? I don't know, this just seems really really fishy to me. I'm not even sure it's worth applying at this point if it's just going to cost me a bunch of money to get denied or have to wait 2 years.

They (the County) aren't taking anyone's money. You don't pay them anything until you pick up your permit. You do have to spend the money to have your livescan done. That money goes to whomever administers it.

You will eventually get your CCW. The only question is if Livingston will start issuing them before or after he gets sued. Alameda will get sued first, as CRPA deems them to be "the worst" (they are actually taking people's money).

I would encourage you to apply. The bigger the backlog, the better it is for everyone. The media can't ignore this forever, and the bigger the backlog, the bigger the story.

[TheNinja]

Originally Posted by Ron Jeremey

They (the County) aren't taking anyone's money. You don't pay them anything until you pick up your permit. You do have to spend the money to have your livescan done. That money goes to whomever administers it.

You will eventually get your CCW. The only question is if Livingston will start issuing them before or after he gets sued. Alameda will get sued first, as CRPA deems them to be "the worst" (they are actually taking people's money).

I would encourage you to apply. The bigger the backlog, the better it is for everyone. The media can't ignore this forever, and the bigger the backlog, the bigger the story.

Ahh, gotcha. Thanks for the clarification. I totally didn't look that closely at it. So you don't pay to submit the application (obviously you pay the livescan to the place that does the livescan for you).

So if I go through the process and get denied I'm not charged the money? I will definitely apply, just waiting on my 2nd gun so I can put it on my application. I can pick it up on the 18th.

Like you said, I think the bigger the backlog the better it is. I mean, imagine it gets a few thousand people long! Eventually something has to give. I feel like this can't just be ignored and the list can't just keep growing and growing every single day!

[Ron Jeremey]

Originally Posted by TheNinja

Ahh, gotcha. Thanks for the clarification. I totally didn't look that closely at it. So you don't pay to submit the application (obviously you pay the livescan to the place that does the livescan for you).

So if I go through the process and get denied I'm not charged the money? I will definitely apply, just waiting on my 2nd gun so I can put it on my application. I can pick it up on the 18th.

Like you said, I think the bigger the backlog the better it is. I mean, imagine it gets a few thousand people long! Eventually something has to give. I feel like this can't just be ignored and the list can't just keep growing and growing every single day!

I suggest that you apply ASAP. It's going to be a while before your interview, and you can add, delete, or change info on the application then.

The backlog is in the thousands when you add Contra Costa, Alameda, Santa Clara, Marin, and San Francisco together. That's what makes this a newsworthy story. There are a couple of counties that are honoring the Supreme Court ruling. Reading the San Mateo and Santa Cruz forums is incredibly frustrating. Those counties turned on a dime. People are posting they they applied in August and now have their permits. I applied in January and I'm stuck in the que. Santa Cruz has a population that is a small fraction of ours. They hired a lieutenant and gave him a staff to manage CCW. Livingston dumped this on his Internal Affairs lieutenant, who has one person assigned to manage the process.

The more we add to the pile, the more compelling this story becomes. We should be demanding that the Bay Area media cover this story. If it was about any other Constitutional right, they would be all over it.

[serper3]

Originally Posted by Ron Jeremey

I suggest that you apply ASAP. It's going to be a while before your interview, and you can add, delete, or change info on the application then.

The backlog is in the thousands when you add Contra Costa, Alameda, Santa Clara, Marin, and San Francisco together. That's what makes this a newsworthy story. There are a couple of counties that are honoring the Supreme Court ruling. Reading the San Mateo and Santa Cruz forums is incredibly frustrating. Those counties turned on a dime. People are posting they they applied in August and now have their permits. I applied in January and I'm stuck in the que. Santa Cruz has a population that is a small fraction of ours. They hired a lieutenant and gave him a staff to manage CCW. Livingston dumped this on his Internal Affairs lieutenant, who has one person assigned to manage the process.

The more we add to the pile, the more compelling this story becomes. We should be demanding that the Bay Area media cover this story. If it was about any other Constitutional right, they would be all over it.

I think more media coverage could be harmful, honestly. This is the bay area, in the state of CA.. people around here like to vote in gun control. guns are scary and only bad people have guns, remember? more attention/coverage = more stores with signs outside saying no guns, etc.

I think livingston is probably worried about the opposite if this will be covered on the news - he is just trying to get reelected and 100% is going to do whatever he thinks will increase his chances in doing so. If he thinks he has more support being an anti.. thats what he will do. its not about anyone's rights, allowing people to protect themselves, etc.

also possible - he just doesnt care and/or has what he thinks are bigger issues to deal with and address. so what a few thousand people can't get their permits? he knows most in the county would be anti anyway. even if there is maybe one tenth of a percent of the population waiting to get a permit - i think as far as he is concerned it might as well be 0%.

[Ron Jeremey]

Originally Posted by serper3

I think more media coverage could be harmful, honestly. This is the bay area, in the state of CA.. people around here like to vote in gun control. guns are scary and only bad people have guns, remember? more attention/coverage = more stores with signs outside saying no guns, etc.

I think livingston is probably worried about the opposite if this will be covered on the news - he is just trying to get reelected and 100% is going to do whatever he thinks will increase his chances in doing so. If he thinks he has more support being an anti.. thats what he will do. its not about anyone's rights, allowing people to protect themselves, etc.

also possible - he just doesnt care and/or has what he thinks are bigger issues to deal with and address. so what a few thousand people can't get their permits? he knows most in the county would be anti anyway. even if there is maybe one tenth of a percent of the population waiting to get a permit - i think as far as he is concerned it might as well be 0%.

He just got re-elected. He has 3 years of not worrying about it. He's already had the job for 12 years.

My theory is that he sees this as an opportunity to build a Taj Mahal of a facility out on Marsh Creek. Right now they have a facility that is designed and staffed to train and qualify about 1,000 law enforcement folks. They can accomodate about 45 CCW holders per month. If Contra Costa is like Sacramento County, we'll eventually have 8,500 CCW holders. They will have to qualify every two years. He's probably standing in front of his bathroom mirror right now practicing his speech to the County Supervisors, who control his budget. He'll be telling them that the ruling forces him to do this, and to comply, they will have to build this facility. The David O. Livingston Law Enforcement Academy will be his legacy.

[serper3]

Originally Posted by Ron Jeremey

My theory is that he sees this as an opportunity to build a Taj Mahal of a facility out on Marsh Creek. Right now they have a facility that is designed and staffed to train and qualify about 1,000 law enforcement folks. They can accomodate about 45 CCW holders per month. If Contra Costa is like Sacramento County, we'll eventually have 8,500 CCW holders. They will have to qualify every two years. He's probably standing in front of his bathroom mirror right now practicing his speech to the County Supervisors, who control his budget. He'll be telling them that the ruling forces him to do this, and to comply, they will have to build this facility. The David O. Livingston Law Enforcement Academy will be his legacy.

imho that is going to be a real hard sell. even to suggest that, i think, would be ballsy.. but maybe i am missing something.

Even at that many CCW holders - eventually, thats 4250 applicants a year. The class is currently $60. Thats $255k gross. How many people will they need to hire? 2-3 part time people at 50k each? its going to be pretty much a wash on the revenue, and the facility will never break even. even if they expect applicants from surrounding counties to attend the class (given the option to go elsewhere, they wont come to marsh creek over other private facilities) at best this is going to be a drop in the bucket compared to the budget. never going to cover the cost. more importantly i dont think the sheriffs office wants to be in the business of running a handgun safety business. why would other counties/cities/etc not be doing this if it made so much sense? these sheriff offices have too much going on to take something like this on.

[Ron Jeremey]

Originally Posted by serper3

imho that is going to be a real hard sell. even to suggest that, i think, would be ballsy.. but maybe i am missing something.

Even at that many CCW holders - eventually, thats 4250 applicants a year. The class is currently $60. Thats $255k gross. How many people will they need to hire? 2-3 part time people at 50k each? its going to be pretty much a wash on the revenue, and the facility will never break even. even if they expect applicants from surrounding counties to attend the class (given the option to go elsewhere, they wont come to marsh creek over other private facilities) at best this is going to be a drop in the bucket compared to the budget. never going to cover the cost. more importantly i dont think the sheriffs office wants to be in the business of running a handgun safety business. why would other counties/cities/etc not be doing this if it made so much sense? these sheriff offices have too much going on to take something like this on.

That’s the million dollar question. Why isn’t he letting us use approved vendors for training/qualification?
Having his own staff do it makes zero sense. Yet that’s what he’s doing.

[bonzai272]

The brick wall and lack of movement in the process is frustrating.

[jackharper]

Originally Posted by bonzai272

The brick wall and lack of movement in the process is frustrating.

And might not meet the constitutional requirements of response time as laid out in the Bruen ruling.

[Gator15]

Originally Posted by jackharper

And might not meet the constitutional requirements of response time as laid out in the Bruen ruling.

Might? The Bruen court stated that the 2A is not a second class right. Delay of a day or two on a free speech issues has been deemed unconstitutional. So....