MONROE - The City of Monroe is preparing to vote on banning guns in all its municipal buildings.
The Judiciary and Ordinance Review Committee last week voted 2 to 1, with Chairman Charles Koch not voting, to have an ordinance drafted and, eventually, buildings posted, to prevent the carrying of weapons into public buildings. Committee member Tyler Schultz voted against the motion.
To post or not to post - that is the question the committee discussed at two previous meetings since October, each time asking Phil Rath, city administrator; Carol Stamm, city clerk; and Fred Kelley, chief of police, for more information.
The city's issue of whether to allow weapons into City Hall and other municipal buildings comes from Wisconsin Act 35, a new state law that went into effect Nov. 1, which authorizes the state Department of Justice to issue permits for carrying a concealed weapon.
The new state law prohibits the carrying of a concealed weapon in certain government places, such as school and courtrooms, but not other public buildings, such as city halls. Restrictions into those buildings are left to the local governments to enact and enforce.
Green County Board of Supervisors has already established its restrictions for all county buildings, and has posted notifications at entrances, as required by law.
The city's Judiciary and Ordinance Review Committee's final decision came after a survey of city employees indicated they did not want concealed weapons in their work places.
"If they feel it will be a safer workplace for them, we ban them (weapons)," said Chris Beer, committee member.
The survey results indicate that allowing weapons in municipal buildings "gives the perception that it creates an unsafe working environment," said Rath, who conducted the survey at the request of the committee.
But if the city allows the public to carry concealed weapons into public buildings, employees indicated that they also should be allowed to carry concealed weapons at work.
Employees responded, 40 to 13, against the Common Council allowing concealed weapons to be carried into public buildings. They agreed 39 to 14 that allowing the public to carry concealed weapons into public buildings would create an unsafe working environment.
But they agreed 45 to 8 that they should be allowed to carry concealed weapons if the public is allowed to carry concealed weapons into public buildings.
Monroe has had a city ordinance, last updated in 1984, against any person going armed with a concealed and dangerous weapon. That ordinance is scheduled to be updated in December to reflect the new state law.
According to state law, to ban weapons in public buildings now, the city may post signs at all building entrances as a form of notification.
Committee members recognized that posting a sign on a door isn't going to stop anyone from disregarding the sign or the city's intent to keep its buildings weapon-free, and CVMIC, the city's liability insurance company, recommended additional language on the signs to indicate that potential.
Whether the added wording will protect the city from any lawsuits for not preventing a person from entering a municipal building with a weapon remains to be seen.
"We won't know until we get some history from proceedings in the courts," Koch said.
Rath believes the city may have no more risk in a lawsuit than before the new state law went into effect.
The Judiciary and Ordinance Review Committee last week voted 2 to 1, with Chairman Charles Koch not voting, to have an ordinance drafted and, eventually, buildings posted, to prevent the carrying of weapons into public buildings. Committee member Tyler Schultz voted against the motion.
To post or not to post - that is the question the committee discussed at two previous meetings since October, each time asking Phil Rath, city administrator; Carol Stamm, city clerk; and Fred Kelley, chief of police, for more information.
The city's issue of whether to allow weapons into City Hall and other municipal buildings comes from Wisconsin Act 35, a new state law that went into effect Nov. 1, which authorizes the state Department of Justice to issue permits for carrying a concealed weapon.
The new state law prohibits the carrying of a concealed weapon in certain government places, such as school and courtrooms, but not other public buildings, such as city halls. Restrictions into those buildings are left to the local governments to enact and enforce.
Green County Board of Supervisors has already established its restrictions for all county buildings, and has posted notifications at entrances, as required by law.
The city's Judiciary and Ordinance Review Committee's final decision came after a survey of city employees indicated they did not want concealed weapons in their work places.
"If they feel it will be a safer workplace for them, we ban them (weapons)," said Chris Beer, committee member.
The survey results indicate that allowing weapons in municipal buildings "gives the perception that it creates an unsafe working environment," said Rath, who conducted the survey at the request of the committee.
But if the city allows the public to carry concealed weapons into public buildings, employees indicated that they also should be allowed to carry concealed weapons at work.
Employees responded, 40 to 13, against the Common Council allowing concealed weapons to be carried into public buildings. They agreed 39 to 14 that allowing the public to carry concealed weapons into public buildings would create an unsafe working environment.
But they agreed 45 to 8 that they should be allowed to carry concealed weapons if the public is allowed to carry concealed weapons into public buildings.
Monroe has had a city ordinance, last updated in 1984, against any person going armed with a concealed and dangerous weapon. That ordinance is scheduled to be updated in December to reflect the new state law.
According to state law, to ban weapons in public buildings now, the city may post signs at all building entrances as a form of notification.
Committee members recognized that posting a sign on a door isn't going to stop anyone from disregarding the sign or the city's intent to keep its buildings weapon-free, and CVMIC, the city's liability insurance company, recommended additional language on the signs to indicate that potential.
Whether the added wording will protect the city from any lawsuits for not preventing a person from entering a municipal building with a weapon remains to be seen.
"We won't know until we get some history from proceedings in the courts," Koch said.
Rath believes the city may have no more risk in a lawsuit than before the new state law went into effect.