Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Open Carry Parks topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Staff tells Monroe council: state law limits city’s ability to ban open carry in parks; council weighs awareness and advocacy options
Summary
City staff told council that Washington state law preempts local firearm regulation and therefore Monroe cannot ban open carry in city parks; councilmembers suggested a public awareness campaign and possible advocacy to change state law in future legislative priorities.
City staff briefed the Monroe City Council on Dec. 2 on whether the city can prohibit open carry of firearms in public parks. Staff presenter Liam McCorkle told council that state law largely preempts local firearm regulation and that parks are not among locations where state law expressly bans open carry.
“Pursuant to the Revised Code of Washington, the state of Washington fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearm regulation,” McCorkle said, explaining that the city lacks express authority under state law to restrict open or concealed carry in park property. He outlined limited local options such as zoning steps, informational campaigns, voluntary buyback programs and the option to add advocacy for state‑level changes to the city’s legislative priorities.
Council response: Councilmember Beaumont suggested the city pursue a public awareness campaign through the parks department reminding people about prohibited conduct that remains illegal even if open carry is allowed — for example: displaying a firearm in a manner that suggests intent to intimidate or discharging a firearm in a way that endangers others. “Maybe a public awareness campaign next year… would be something that it doesn't cost any money that would be a good reminder and would help,” Beaumont said.
Councilmember Fulcher, who chairs legislative affairs, said she would not object to adding advocacy for a change in state law to the council’s legislative priorities and asked colleagues on legislative affairs for input. Councilmembers Hanford and Walker said they were not ready to make changes to the legislative priorities at this meeting given other pressing items.
Outcome: No ordinance or local prohibition was adopted. Staff characterized the city’s immediate options as informational and legislative advocacy rather than local regulatory change.
What’s next: Council may consider whether to add advocacy for authority to restrict carry in parks to the 2026 legislative priorities.
