Group demands Shasta supervisors remove Second Amendment resolution from agenda

A group of local citizens says the Shasta County Board of Supervisors’ intent to adopt a Second Amendment resolution at its meeting this evening violates California’s open meeting law.

In a news release, Susanne Baremore, of Shasta County Citizens for Stable Government, said the board’s consideration of the resolution is a violation of the Brown Act because it does not clearly state “the intent of the resolution in the agenda description.”

Baremore said the group, which she characterizes as a cross-section of the community, submitted a cease-and-desist letter to supervisors on Tuesday morning.

“According to the Brown Act, agendas for public meetings of governing boards much accurately describe an issue and the actions to be taken,” the news release states.

Baremore said the group wants supervisors to follow the law and believes the resolution, “as written, is unconstitutional, and is at odds with open meeting laws.”

Labeled under “Board Matters” as agenda item R4, the item reads, “Adopt a resolution in support of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.”

District 4 Supervisor Patrick Jones, who is chairman of the board, put the resolution on the agenda. Jones also helps manage his family’s gun store, Jones’ Fort, in Redding.

“I believe it reenforces the Second Amendment that people have the right to keep and bear arms,” Jones has said of the resolution.

A key part of the resolution states that supervisors and all county officers, officials and employees have the right to not enforce “any past, present, and future state or federal laws, regulations, orders, treaties, or rules that violate the Second Amendment as determined by precedential decisions made by courts of competent jurisdictions.”

Dig deeper:Déjà vu: Shasta supervisor wants to allow county employees to carry guns to work

Jones has said any county official or elected leader who violates this could be reprimanded.

The resolution supervisors will consider was initially drafted by the California Rifle and Pistol Association in collaboration with the group’s local chapter. County Counsel Rubin Cruse Jr. reviewed the resolution and submitted a heavily red-line-edited version to supervisors.

“While the proposed resolution has been heavily edited by Shasta County Counsel, the group expects the board majority will ignore most, if not all, the changes recommended to ensure the document is legally compliant,” the group says in the news release.

What’s more, the resolution’s call for a loyalty oath from county employees runs contrary to the California Constitution, Baremore’s group says.

She said her group has not yet obtain legal representation.

"Several of us have tried to obtain legal counsel on both this issue and the issue of the Dominion voting machines. We are having a difficult time finding an attorney locally who doesn't have a conflict of interest or room in their case load," Baremore said.

Shasta Citizens for Stable Government is asking supervisors to remove the Second Amendment Resolution from the agenda and reintroduced it at a later meeting “with an accurate description which specifies the policies, procedures, and other administrative protocols which will be drafted or amended as directed by the proposed resolution.”

The group also believes that Jones holds a conflict of interest because his family owns a local gun store, which it says would benefit from the resolution.

Meanwhile, Cheryl McKinley, a local Democratic party activist, is asking residents to come to Board of Supervisors Chambers this evening and sign a petition asking supervisors to not approve the Second Amendment resolution. She also wants supporters to bring signs that protest the resolution.

The meeting is scheduled to start at 5 p.m.

This article originally appeared on Redding Record Searchlight: Group: Shasta Supervisors' Second Amendment resolution violates law