2003-05-14 CC Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I · Minnesota Citizens' Personal Protection Act of 2003 "Conceal and Carry Law" - What it means for Cities Introduction Governor Pawlenty recently signed into law a bill that reduces local authority over issuance of concealed handgun permits and is expected to significantly increase the number of permit-holders. The Minnesota Personal Protection Act, passed in the Senate on a 37-30 vote and signed into law by Governor Tim Pawlenty on April 28, removes all authority from police chiefs to issue conceal and carry permits and mandates that sheriffs issue permits to all applicants except those convicted of serious crimes. The law also prohibits cities from prohibiting guns on city property, except in limited circumstances. More than 300 organizations including city councils, statewide police associations, churches and health and education groups opposed the legislation, arguing that the new law would put an estimated 90,000 additional concealed weapons onto the streets. Currently, fewer than 12,000 individuals have permits to carry concealed weapons. Proponents of the bill argued that sheriffs and police chiefs had too much discretionary authority and that applicants should decide for themselves whether they need to carry a concealed weapon. Three groups supported the legislation - the National Rifle Association, Concealed Carry Reform Now and the Republican Party of Minnesota. An amendment offered in the House on behalf of the League of Minnesota Cities would have allowed public facilities such as city halls, parks, and recreation centers to prohibit concealed weapons on the premises. The amendment failed on a vote of 48 to 84. League staff has prepared this memorandum to help cities understand some of the most significant implications of the new law. The League will continue to supplement this memorandum as additional information is gathered about how the law is being interpreted by affected groups. Can cities prohibit guns on city property? No, with some limited exceptions. While the law allows private property owners, who follow a specific set of procedures, to request that guns not be brought into a "private establishment," the law does not generally afford cities the same ability. For example, a private business may prohibit the carrying of guns on its premises if the business "prominently" posts a ."conspicuous" sign at each entrance to the establishment stating that the "(NAME OF OPERATOR) BANS GUNS IN THESE PREMISES." In addition, the business owner must p~rsonally inform "the person of the posted request, and demand compliance." Again, cities do not.have a similar ability to "post" their facilities. The situations in which cities may. limit guns on city property appear to be limited to the following circumstances: 0