Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Quality Of Life topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Waterford neighborhood presses county for quick fix to sheriff’s gun‑range noise; staff to study enclosures and sound mitigation
Summary
Residents of the Waterford community returned to the commissioners to demand solutions for repeated heavy gun‑range noise near homes. Residents want the county or sheriff to move the range or enclose it; staff said they are pursuing feasibility studies on sound mitigation and enclosure options and will bring options back to the board.
Dozens of Charlotte County residents from the Waterford neighborhood told commissioners April 22 they are suffering daily and nightly noise from live‑fire activity at the Charlotte County Sheriff’s Department shooting range and asked for a near‑term fix.
Speakers described repeated live‑fire sessions near residences, including weekend and early morning firing that has continued despite municipal outreach. “We have been here since November 2023,” resident Rob Robbins told the board. “The sheriff department is still misusing the gun range, shooting weapons standing outside of the structure of the building. The range is not designed for these types of weapons.”
Several residents said shipping‑yard‑style small bore use had long since evolved to louder calibers. “The noise level is constant; I’m on the verge of PTSD from this,” said another resident. Waterford neighbors asked the county to require immediate, enforceable operational restrictions such as strict hours, or to enclose or relocate the range.
County response: Facilities and county administration told the board they are working with consultants to study sound‑mitigation measures and the feasibility of enclosing the range. Facilities Director Travis Purdue confirmed the county has sought vendors and specialists who could analyze whether an enclosure, improved baffling, or relocation is feasible. Commissioner Constance told the public staff will study options and return to the board with proposals — and noted the sheriff’s department can be a partner on operational solutions.
Why it matters: The issue pits a public‑safety training mission against neighboring residents’ rights to quiet and to use their homes. Commissioners expressed sympathy for residents and said they expected staff to bring a range of options — from operational restrictions to engineering fixes — to a subsequent meeting.
Next steps: Staff promised to present feasible short‑term mitigation options and longer‑term solutions, including costs, regulatory implications and potential need for relocation or enclosure. No board vote was taken; commissioners asked that staff report back and that the sheriff continue to engage with neighbors in the interim.
Ending: Commissioners agreed the problem requires a practical, evidence‑based approach and urged staff to move quickly: “We’ve heard you,” Vice Chair Jeanette Tessio said; “staff is actively working with consultants and will return with a menu of options.”
