Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Noise topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press council on police gun range: noise, lead and enclosure proposal discussed
Summary
Multiple residents and petitioners urged the council to act after Planning Commission consideration of a $5 million proposal to enclose the Cranston police gun range; commenters disputed administration statements about suppressor use and rental activity.
Residents from neighborhoods near the Cranston Police Department firing range told the council on March 24 that gunfire noise and lead contamination remain a public-health issue and asked the council to place restrictions or require changes in law.
Susan Blakely said the Planning Commission had reviewed a $5 million capital request from the police department to enclose the range and that the finance director told the commission the range noise met city standards and that only Cranston Police used the range. Blakely disputed those statements, citing independent decibel readings and a Brown University analysis, and said the range historically hosted other agencies, including the FBI and neighboring municipal departments, with fees charged when outside agencies used it.
Patricia Schoninger and another commenter said Finance Director Thomas Zadelis (transcript spellings vary) incorrectly told the Planning Commission the range was used only by Cranston Police and that suppressors would address the noise; they quoted a department lieutenant who told them suppressors would be limited to rifles and not pistols. Commenters asked the council to docket an ordinance to limit range usage to Cranston officers and to require suppressors on all weapons used at the facility.
Council leadership said state open-meeting rules prevent substantive council discussion of undocketed matters at the meeting, and the item was not docketed for consideration. No formal council action on the gun-range requests was recorded at the March 24 meeting.
