Aldermen struggle with City Hall gun policy

GREEN BAY - Alderman Randy Scannell worries the lack of a clear policy on carrying guns in City Hall is impeding residents' participation in the democratic process.

Scannell and Alderwoman Barbara Dorff are leading the charge to revisit the city’s lack of a weapons policy, but with a twist: They’re not looking to ban guns in public buildings, but rather just for people to be discreet.

The problem is, there's no clear way to accomplish that goal.

Scannell says he isn't seeking a ban on guns in City Hall, but the issue needs to be addressed so that people feel safe participating in the political process in Green Bay. That goes for people who are nervous about guns and people who are nervous about going out in public without their guns, he said.

“People have been packing for years,” he said. “For me, I don’t look at it as a safety issue. We want participation (in local government). If someone is intimidated by people who are packing, I want them to feel comfortable, and I want people who feel safer carrying to be comfortable, too.”

Right now, Green Bay is one of only two of the largest cities in the state that doesn’t ban firearms from municipal buildings, according to a survey Dorff requested recently.

And it’s the only community in Brown County that has no weapons restriction in place for its public buildings. Brown County also bans guns in some of its buildings, and state law prohibits weapons in the county courthouse.

The issue of openly carried weapons came up earlier this year during a contentious City Council meeting concerning plans for repairing or replacing Colburn Pool. Scannell said some members of the public who opposed building a new pool approached Scannell and Dorff to say they would have spoken but felt intimidated by a pool supporter who was wearing a gun on his hip.

That isn’t the way government should work, Scannell said. But he also doesn’t want to discourage participation by people who are uncomfortable being out in the public unarmed.

“I’d like to work with everybody,” Scannell said.

He pitched a compromise plan: To ban open carry, so people fearful of guns don’t have to see them, but still allow concealed guns.

The trouble is, that’s not legal. Scannell withdrew his suggestion after learning state law is an all-or-nothing matter. Cities can ban weapons from public buildings or allow them, but they can’t issue a partial ban, Scannell said.

Gun enthusiasts weren’t crazy about the compromise idea anyway.

Henry Rahr, a member of the National Association of Certified Firearms Instructors, attended Thursday’s committee meeting, along with a handful of other gun enthusiasts.

They were prepared to argue, but when Scannell pulled his proposal, an opportunity for discussion fizzled.

Rahr said after the meeting that gun rights are gun rights, and the city has no business banning something that’s constitutionally allowed.

He advocated for a sign being posted asking gun carriers to keep their weapons out of sight at public meetings. If anybody objected, Rahr himself would be happy to take him or her aside and explain the city’s reasoning, he said.

That approach didn’t go over with Scannell.

“So if he’s unable to attend all of our meetings, we should just give him a call?” he said.

The measure would have to have some kind of teeth, he said.

Scannell plans to talk to local legislators to see if changes could be made to allow banning just open carry.

“If it turns out I’m just spinning my wheels, and I probably am. We can look at whether we should just ask visitors (to comply) or see whether a full ban would pass the council,” Scannell said.

The committee agreed to pick the issue back up May 22, after Scannell had time to talk to legislators.

psrubas@pressgazettemedia.com and follow him on Twitter@PGpaulsrubas