蜜柚直播

Legislation given final approval this week would allow a judge to award a $5,000 civil penalty against any elected or appointed official who 鈥渒nowingly and willfully鈥欌�� violates an existing statute that preempts cities and counties from enacting any law, rule or tax relating to firearms. That covers everything from possessing and carrying a gun to rules about how guns can be stored, discharged or given as gifts.

Sen. David Gowan, R-Sierra Vista, made it clear who he鈥檚 currently targeting: the Pima County Board of Supervisors.

The proposal, Senate Bill 1705, comes after a Pima County Superior Court judge struck down a county ordinance that required gun owners to report the theft or loss of a firearm within 48 hours or face a fine of up to $1,000.

Judge Greg Sakall cited existing provisions in the 蜜柚直播 criminal code that preempt local governments from enacting any of their own rules that are stronger than state laws. There is no parallel state law to the county ordinance.

Michael Infanzon, lobbyist for the 蜜柚直播 Citizens Defense League, which filed the lawsuit against the county law, said his organization鈥檚 experience with both Pima County and the city of 蜜柚直播 convinces him that, despite the court ruling, something more is needed to get the attention of local officials who enact such laws. That 鈥渟omething more,鈥欌�� he told Capitol Media Services, is hitting them in the wallet.

The Republican-controlled Senate already approved the bill.

There was no immediate response from Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs to this specific plan, though she announced Thursday she鈥檚 not going to sign anything until she separately gets an acceptable plan to fund services for the developmentally disabled.

And she has a history of vetoing gun-related bills, ranging from allowing guns on school campuses to expanding the state鈥檚 version of a 鈥渟tand your ground鈥欌�� law about situations in which people legally can use deadly physical force.

Infanzon pointed to the hurdles that someone protesting a local gun ordinance has to leap.

One option is to file a complaint with the Attorney General鈥檚 Office to ask whether the adopted measure runs afoul of the preemption law. If the AG says the local government is acting illegally, that can lead to a lawsuit or a threat to withhold state revenues.

That鈥檚 what happened in 2016, for example, when 蜜柚直播 adopted an ordinance saying police must destroy firearms they obtain through seizure or surrender. Republican then-Attorney General Mark Brnovich sued, and the Supreme Court ruled the city was wrong.

The other option is for someone to file suit, as was the case with the challenge to the county ordinance on reporting lost guns.

Infanzon acknowledged that, in both cases, the questioned laws went away. But he said that came at the expense of taxpayers who had to foot the legal bills.

Even the underlying law prohibiting local regulations doesn鈥檛 have a lot of teeth. Infanzon said the maximum penalty now for a city or county that knowingly and willfully violates the preemption law is $50,000 鈥� again, money paid by taxpayers.

A better solution, he said, would be to deter local officials from adopting the ordinances in the first place by using the threat of a personal penalty. That鈥檚 what SB 1705 is designed to do, starting with its $5,000 penalty.

But the bill is worded so that the local government can鈥檛 use any public funds to defend any local official personally accused of breaking the law. It also spells out that any official found by a judge to be culpable cannot be reimbursed by the government for the fine.

Infanzon said it shouldn鈥檛 have to come to that.

The lobbyist said he has made it part of his practice to regularly peruse city and county ordinances and regulations to look for what he says are violations. When he comes across problems, a call to a city attorney is usually sufficient to get the offending provision removed, he said.

He said that鈥檚 the way it worked in the past with places such as Goodyear and Eloy 鈥� but not with Pima County, where the Goldwater Institute filed the latest lawsuit on behalf of Infanzon鈥檚 group over the requirement to report stolen guns.

鈥淚t鈥檚 going to cost the taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines and attorneys鈥� fees because the elected Board of Supervisors 鈥� minus one 鈥� voted to implement an illegal law,鈥欌�� he said. The exception was Steve Christy, the lone Republican on the Pima County board.

Infanzon said the threat of a $5,000 fine for which local officials are personally liable should be enough to prevent such proposals.

Still, anyone seeking such a penalty would have to show that the local officials knowingly and willfully enacted a law beyond local authority. Infanzon said that could be proven through other evidence.

鈥淚f they had been advised by legal counsel and they鈥檙e still willing to violate our state statutes, they will be held accountable on an individual basis,鈥欌�� he said. In the latest lawsuit, the Goldwater Institute had evidence the county attorney told the board the move was illegal, he said.

That鈥檚 not the argument made by Sam Brown, Pima County鈥檚 chief civil deputy, when he defended the ordinance in court. He argued nothing in it ran afoul of the state鈥檚 preemption because requiring someone to report a stolen weapon did no interfere with anyone鈥檚 right to own a gun.

No one from any city or town showed up to testify against the new legislation.

But 蜜柚直播 spokesman Andy Squire said that was by design given higher priority issues.

鈥淭his is one more of numerous other actions being proposed or taken by the state Legislature to preempt local control,鈥欌�� he said. 鈥淎nd since existing state laws already preempt local regulation of firearms, we have been focused primarily on preemption bills that are related to housing and zoning.鈥欌��

There was no immediate response from Pima County.