Sonoma

[TheBest]

Spooky. Here's the response, dated October 31.

[Paladin]

NRA & CRPA responce


https://web.mail.comcast.net/service...91848&part=2.2

Linky no worky....

HTTP ERROR 404

Problem accessing /service/home/~/. Reason:

must authenticate

Powered by Jetty://

[Ajaxx]

Sonoma

NRA & CRPA response









Sorry no idea how to make it show up, send your Email & I can forward response

[Paladin]

IIRC, there are cases of gov't services where evidence of financial hardship leads to a waiving of fees. I wonder if there's a way you guys could get the sheriff to not charge the extra psych eval fee for those who can present evidence showing that it would be an financial hardship? That way the GC standard gets broadened so more Sonoma folk can apply and get issued, and yet those who cannot afford the extra fee would still be able to get issued. That would be win:win -- more Sonoma gunnies can get issued CCWs due to broadened GC standard and the sheriff gets his in depth psych eval to ensure applicants are in fact GGs of sound mind.

That's an idea that sounds worth developing.

[estrom]

I hear ya, GF. I hear ya.

The NRA's involvement might actually hurt us in this instance.

[GillaFunk]

Because all those 13 people with permits have been shooting the county up, murdering people, and causing so many problems.......

Oh.....no...wait....those aren't CCW holders....those are just criminals....carrying illegally.

[estrom]

NRA is involved in it, I know.

I'm betting we're in between a rock and hard place. Consider this: the GC requirement has recently been relaxed and this psyche eval put in as a replacement deterrent ($$$ & time). If the board says the fee is in fact too much, we could see a switch back to the stiffer GC requirement.

[baggss]

What is Santa Rosa's CCW issuance policy with respect to SD = GC?

[Spyder]

Ha. I see you mentioned that. I'll plan on being there the 15th.

[Spyder]

NRA is involved in it, I know.

[Naquai]

I contacted the Sonoma County NRA Members Council about this a couple days ago to see if they could get members to attend.

I went to the BOS meeting this morning and they announced that late yesterday they had received a letter from the NRA and had not had sufficient time to explore the various line items of the letter and so they were tabling the entire agenda item over to Nov 15th as they did not want to discuss it until they had time to properly review the NRA info.

It sounds like it will be 9:30am on Nov 15th. I would encourage as many folks as can to plan to be there to address the topic and to write letter to the BOS before then. I sent them the following letter yesterday (bear in mind that appealing to the emotions of democrats can be more effective than just facts):

Dear County Supervisor,

It has been brought to my attention that item number 22 on the agenda for tomorrow morning is a request to increase the CCW application fee by $555.

I am a CCW holder and I can tell you that even without this additional fee it is a very expensive and thorough process. There is a background check to purchase the gun, now background checks to purchase ammo, a background check to apply for the CCW permit. There is an in person interview with law enforcement, training and qualifying with your weapon and all of this for the right to defend yourself against something (just cause) that the sheriff department has agreed is a credible threat that necessitates you carrying a weapon.

I am a survivor of a very violent domestic abuse situation. It took great strength and courage to stand up and press charges against my abuser. Statistically speaking a woman is more likely to be killed by their abuser upon leaving the relationship than she is staying in the abusive relationship. Just prior to my abuser's release from prison I was able to get a CCW permit so that I would be able to protect myself if he decided to come back for me. I went through very thorough training not only to learn how to use my weapon but on how to be mentally and emotionally prepared if I had to react in a self defense situation. The process as it stands is expensive. There is a cost to each step (the gun, the ammo, the fingerprinting, the application, the training, etc). When I was putting the pieces of my life back together after being violently attacked it was a stretch to cover all of those costs, but I am valuable. My life is valuable. My safety is valuable, and I was not going to be an unprepared victim again if he came for me. We should be empowering people, but especially women, to take the steps necessary to defend themselves because like mine, their life has value. Increasing this fee by another $500 will make it even more out of reach to women like me. If you knew me, you would be grateful that I am alive to tell my story and to help empower other women.

I have great respect for law enforcement. I think that they are heroes that sacrifice their own safety to make our community a safer place. That does not change the fact that when seconds count, law enforcement is minutes away and a valuable life like mine hangs in the balance.

Please do not support this fee increase.

Sincerely,

[GillaFunk]

First Reading is Tuesday Nov 1st

"Be It Further Resolved, that the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors will
consider adoption of the proposed ordinance on November 15, 2016, in the
Board of Supervisors Chambers, 575 Administration Drive, Room 102A, Santa
Rosa, CA."

I cannot make the reading on the 1st. I will be at at work conference all this week.

I will attend on the 15th. I will draft up some content with supporting documentation in opposition of this measure and send it to the BOS by early next week.

This guy is such a disgusting lying POS.

I recommend ALL of you write a formal letter to your County Supervisor, in opposition of this. Those of you who want content, please PM me. I will work on that this coming weekend.

[estrom]

So the "cost" to the sheriff's dept. will be greater than $150. This results in charging an exorbitant fee to us. Apparently, the fact that we're taking 3.5 hours out of OUR time doesn't matter to them.

They should just call it what it is, a way to say we're "loosening" GC standards, while adding a different layer of deterrent ($$$) in it's place.

[Spyder]

" Incorporating a psychological evaluation into the CCW permit process would serve the health and safety of the community by preventing unsuitable applicants, and those who would constitute a threat to him-/herself or the community if issued a CCW permit, from legally carrying concealed firearms. The evaluation would include psychological testing, a mental status exam, a face-to-face clinical interview, and a one-page written report. The evaluation would take approximately 3.5 hours to complete and would be conducted locally in Santa Rosa. The psychological evaluation would occur after the fingerprint check but before the training course."

"The cost to the Sheriff’s Office of providing a psychological evaluation of a pre-approved CCW permit applicant is significantly higher than $150, which does not adequately cover the cost of 3.5 hours of service by a board-certified psychologist. The Penal Code ceiling on the psychological testing rate has been a deterrent to the medical professionals who can provide these evaluations, but the California Government Code, Section 54985, provides authority to recover the actual costs that are reasonably appropriate for providing these services. The Sheriff’s Office recognizes that this new and higher fee may represent a financial burden to applicants. However, the Sheriff’s Office strongly believes that a psychological evaluation will be an important addition to the CCW permit process for the health and safety of the community and that the fee increase is appropriate to provide the service.

The proposed fee for psychological evaluations of CCW permit applicants to be established by the Board of Supervisors and to be collected by the Sheriff’s Office is $555. This fee is based on an amount reasonably appropriate to recover the cost of providing the services. This would increase the total cost of a new CCW permit from $212 to $767. This fee is non-refundable and subject to revision on a yearly basis."

[Spyder]

Looks like the first reading of that particular issue is THIS TUESDAY THE 1ST AT 9:30 AM!

http://sonoma-county.granicus.com/GeneratedAgendaViewer.php?view_id=2&event_id=666

http://sonoma-county.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=2&event_id=666&meta_id=205789