Outdoor shooting range ordinance passes Mat-Su Borough Assembly 4-3, referred to Planning Commission

PALMER — To the dismay of many in a massive agitated group of residents who had gathered at the Mat-Su Borough Assembly meeting, Ordinance 20-025 passed 4-3 and will be referred to the planning commission for 90 days.

Assemblyman Jesse Sumner’s Resolution 20-018 would rescind Resolution 19-083, which requested that staff develop a Conditional Use Permit regulating outdoor shooting ranges also failed along the same 4-3 vote. Sumner was joined by George McKee and Ted Leonard in voting for his own resolution 20-018 and against 20-025. Assembly members Tam Boeve, Stephanie Nowers, Tim Hale and Dan Mayfield voted in favor of 20-025 and against 20-018.

“I guess my thoughts about the second amendment is that it does give the right to bear arms but it shouldn’t give the right to shoot whenever or wherever one pleases,” said Linda Sloan. “We live in a society, hopefully a civilized society where we should be able to come up with some reasonable regulations that allow people to live safely and enjoy the outdoors without fear of being in crossfire of guns.”

In the absence of Mayor Vern Halter and Manager John Moosey who are attending the Alaska Municipal League in Juneau, Deputy Mayor Mayfield chaired the meeting and had a difficult time getting cooperation from the nearly 100 Valley residents, many of them outraged over the proposed outdoor shooting range ordinance. Many of the speakers who opposed 20-025 also supported 20-018. Of the 53 members of the public who gave comments, 41 were against the original outdoor shooting range ordinance and 12 were in favor.

“We are the militia. We the people are the militia,” said Scott Vukich. “You are directly infringing on our ability to obtain and give quality firearms training to the people of Alaska who are the militia. We the people not only have the right, we have a civic duty and responsibility to obtain and maintain ourselves as a trained militia force for the purposes of defending the state and the borough.”

Those opposing the outdoor shooting range ordinance gathered for a rally on Jan. 31 in the parking lot of the borough building. Of the hundreds that gathered, many were openly carrying firearms and were also allowed to warm up inside the lobby on the cold Friday afternoon at the end of the public comment period for Ordinance 20-025.

“I want to make sure that I’m respectful to each and every one of you this evening and I really wish that you would respect the decorum of this body by refraining from clapping because it really does tend to,” said Mayfield.

Mayfield was interrupted by outbursts from the crowd. In total, Mayfield asked the crowd to remain calm six times and Borough Clerk Lonnie McKechnie stepped down from the dias once to address the audience as well.

“When you’re interrupting speakers it’s not giving them their first amendment right,” said McKechnie.

Borough Development Services Manager Alex Strawn joined many assembly members in attending the rally to discuss the proposed ordinance with protestors.

“One of the things I really appreciated about the demonstration that was held outside in regards to your cause is that the participants there were very polite and respectful and I do wish that you could do that.”

Despite Mayfield’s request, applause continued past public comment and followed speeches from Sumner and Assemblyman George McKee. When asked for a second time by Mayfield to follow the rules, some shouted “I will not comply.”

Ordinance 20-025 was a result of the passage of resolution 19-083, which directed staff to develop a conditional use permit for shooting ranges. Sumner’s Resolution 20-018 rescinded resolution 19-083. Many members of the public who spoke on the outdoor shooting range ordinance were in favor of more gun ranges to increase shooter safety, but both sides did not agree on what the proposed ordinance 20-025 would entail. Lee Henrikson directly read the intent of the ordinance.

“I’m concerned about my safety when I go out for the trails with unregulated shooting ranges. I would love this ordinance to move through, I would love all you people who are concerned about the shooting range to participate in the process so I get my safety and you get your ranges. Let’s work together to solve this for all of us,” said Henrikson.

The 4-3 passage of ordinance 20-025 forwards the legislation to the Mat-Su Borough Planning Commission for 90 days. Once the public had their say, the assembly began to discuss the ordinance amongst themselves. Boeve said that this was part of the process and a result of compromise after the outdoor shooting range working group was unable to come together. Hale spoke up as the only person who applied and was appointed to the working group that was never able to establish a quorum and conduct business.

“I don’t think people see the unintended consequences, the unintended cost of these regulations,” said Sumner. “I don’t think that anybody that’s proposing this is has bad intentions, I just think that they’re not considering the full ramification of the effects that it will have.”

Nowers agreed with Sumner and echoed what many in the audience had previously stated, saying that more gun ranges are needed in the Valley.

“I have an issue with the process that Jesse’s talking about because he’s presupposing that you know the result and so that you’re not giving the process a chance,” said Nowers. “It’s not going to infringe your rights.”

Leonard offered a motion to double the 90-day period, which failed along different 4-3 lines with Hale, Leonard and Mayfield in support of the 90-day extension. Boeve asked that the ordinance be sent to the planning committee with a neutral stance, but Nowers asked how the assembly could communicate to the planning commission that the ordinance needed serious work.

“Sending it to the planning commission for further work, further public hearings so that we can achieve some kind of consensus on what’s needed is a reasonable step in my estimation,” said Mayfield.

While two specific unorganized ranges were discussed, sparks flew over accusations of how the original request was made that led to the passage of 19-083. Neighbors of a range in Big Lake were unhappy, as well as those near Palmer Fishhook that had been referenced as two neighbors that needed to work their problems out in court by many who opposed ordinance 20-025.

“I’ve read 20-025 and I don’t see anything in there that threatens second amendment rights. What I do see are common sense recommendations for range standards,” said Jerry Hupp.

Steve Shuler paused during his public testimony to ask for a show of hands for supporters of the second amendment, to which nearly everyone in the audience raised their hand. Shuler also paused to high-five someone sitting near the podium.

“I have a right to do the second amendment and your beliefs, whatever it is, have no bearing on that. Anyone else agree with that,” asked Shuler.

Shuler’s comments were met with raucous applause. Norm Stout spoke about the range in the Fishhook community, saying that it was not just two neighbors but a majority vote of the Fishhook Community Council asking for common sense outdoor shooting range regulation. Stout mentioned Luke Howard, whose Facebook videos in outrage over Ordinance 20-025 had garnered thousands of views.

“The entire neighborhood met with this fellow up there and he was not receptive to anything,” said Stout. “This is an incompatible use. That’s the problem is this fellow brought a gun range up into our residential neighborhood. I’ve been here 30 years, you know what Mr. Howard said? Even though he just barely moved here he said if you don’t like the shooting then you should leave to Eagle River.”

Howard wore a gun he custom built himself at the rally on Jan. 31 and spoke into a microphone to urge the opposition of Ordinance 20-025, saying he handed out public comment slips himself. Howard manufactures guns and also disagreed with claims about lack of range safety where he allowed friends to shoot guns he had built for them. Stout claimed that Howard’s operation was by definition commercial. Howard countered by stating that each of the five times the Alaska State Troopers have responded, he had not been arrested. Howard held in his hand a red binder full of public testimony against the ordinance and a noticeably thinner green binder of comments in support.

“Everytime I make a video lately and I thank god for all of these people here, within an hour and a half I have 1,200 plus people watch my videos and start calling and calling,” said Howard. “I purposely chose a place to live that no longer had a homeowner’s association because I don’t need people telling me what to do with my land. I enjoy my freedom.”

Mark Troutman incorporated an audio recording during his public testimony. Troutman played an audio clip from his house of gunfire on a neighbor’s property.

“Mr. Sumner I hope you win your election because I sure as hell don’t want you to be my representative out there any more,” said Troutman. “You failed to take a resolution that the Fishhook Community Council passed and you refused to bring it to the assembly. That’s not right. We have 220 acres. I pay a lot of taxes, I expect some representation for that taxation.”

A total of eight former members of the military and law enforcement spoke and 13 members of the public boasted about how long they have lived in the state.

Sumner said that assembly members should have courage to make it known where they really stand and hinted that he believed passage of the ordinance would result in a citizen’s initiative to repeal any outdoor shooting range regulations. McKee said that this was not a decision for the assembly to make. As Boeve made a motion to extend the meeting to 10:30 p.m., which was later extended to 11 p.m., members of the audience began to shout one last time. Hale said that he felt the more public input on the final product, the better the final product would be. McKee called the question to end discussion and vote on Ordinance 20-025, which passed. After Boeve, Hale, Mayfield and Nowers, for 20-025 and against Resolution 20-018, the crowd of nearly 100 thinned out to nearly zero while the assembly finished a meeting that lasted more than five hours.