The Gary City Public Safety Committee on June 11 discussed draft ordinance CPO 20 25 39, which would prohibit the discharge of firearms within Gary City limits and set civil penalties, and set a public hearing on the measure for June 17 at 6 p.m. at the Gary Sanitary District. Attorney Morgan presented the draft, saying the ordinance was intended “to prohibit discharging firearms in the city” and to address safety risks from stray bullets in the city’s open and natural areas.

The ordinance was sponsored by Councilwoman Latham, president of the Common Council, who told the committee the measure grew from visits to levees along the Little Calumet River where staff and volunteers maintain infrastructure and encountered people hunting. “We needed a sign that said, you know, no hunting, no discharging of firearms. And that's when we realized we couldn't get a sign because we didn't have a law,” Latham said.

Gary Police Chief Cannon said he supported the ordinance in concept but urged removing a specific exemption in Section 2, item 3 for “dually licensed hunters,” saying the exemption raised questions about the scope of authority and enforcement. “I would just like to say I'm in support of this ordinance, in review of it. That is a line item in section 2, part 3...that I believe that possibly could be removed,” Cannon said, adding that without the exemption the city would have “a standalone ordinance that will be able to be monitored in a better fashion.”

Renzo Williams, the committee’s administrative attorney, raised a potential supremacy-clause issue if a state agency had authorized hunting in particular areas, asking whether the city could lawfully override such state authorizations. Williams said he searched and “couldn't find anything on point,” and related a personal anecdote to explain why he favored a restrictive local rule. Attorney Morgan (corporation counsel) said earlier drafts had explicitly defined weapons to include crossbows and air-propelled weapons and the council requested that definition be restored to avoid confusion.

Committee members discussed enforcement and penalties. Chief Cannon said officers already investigate shots-fired calls and that the ordinance is aimed at recreational discharges that might not rise to criminal recklessness but could still present a public-safety hazard; such cases could be documented as code violations. Williams noted that under state law firing a weapon can be a class B misdemeanor and may be a class 6 felony if it results in bodily injury. Committee members and staff said the draft lists escalating civil fines for ordinance violations, with the committee discussion indicating a top penalty of $2,500 for repeat offenses; committee staff said they would confirm and circulate the precise fine schedule in the final draft.

Dan Repay, executive director of the Little Calumet River Basin Development Commission, said volunteers and staff working on levees have repeatedly encountered hunters on or adjacent to commission property and described transactions in which adjacent landowners allow hunters onto land near the levees. “We have hunters on our property all the time, and we shoo them away,” Repay said, and urged the council to act to reduce the danger to workers and residents.

Councilman Ivey and others asked how the city would notify residents if the ordinance passes before the Independence Day holiday; staff said the communications department would publish notices on social media and other channels and begin outreach immediately if the ordinance appeared likely to pass. No final vote was taken at the committee meeting; members scheduled a public hearing on the ordinance for Tuesday, June 17 at 6 p.m. at the Gary Sanitary District and asked staff to supply a revised draft that restores a clear weapons definition and confirms the fine schedule.

The committee’s next step is the June 17 public hearing, after which the council may consider amendments, additional legal review related to state jurisdiction, and a final vote.