CCMIN020998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Pico said there was no reference in the ordinance to patents or designs. Therefore, he felt the above interpretation of the ordinance made it a bad law. He could go on for hours but basically felt the ordinance was badly written. Ms. Ayala asked staff to clarify the ordinance. Mr. Roush said he was trying to paraphrase what subparagraph A meant. As indicated in the staff report the City met with the individual who was primarily responsible for the drafting of the definitions and the roster and based on that meeting, the staff report was written. Ms. Dennis explained the reason why some firearms were on the list and why some were not. She also explained there is an appeal process if someone felt a gun should be removed from the list. Ms. Michelotti asked if smaller firearms were available other than what was on the list. Chief Eastman said yes. Ms. Michelotti understood that the ordinance would not take away the guns that were being used by the police officers. Mr. Roush said while on duty none of the police officers used any of the guns listed on the roster. Ms. Michelotti commented about her educating herself on firearms. She does try to educate herself, especially on sensitive issues. She had a meeting with a gun expert and the NRA to learn definitions and other facts. Mayor Tarver asked if staff knew whether the firearms listed were banned from import. Chief Eastman said the 1968 ban prohibited foreign made weapons from import to the United States. Subsequent to that, similar weapons were manufactured within the United States. He said the banned weapons may or may not have been duplicated. Mayor Tarver was looking for the intent of the 1968 law. [Someone from the audience said the 1968 ban was to prohibit the importation of non- sporting firearms.] Ms. Ayala asked if it made sense that manufacturers would set up in Southern California to manufacture the same guns that had been banned. Pleasanton City Council 17 02/09/98 Minutes