Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Firearms topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fairfax council opens reexamination of firearms ordinance, schedules public hearing for July 22
Summary
City attorneys and council members debated proposed updates to Fairfax City Code §54‑4 governing firearms in city buildings, parks and permitted events. Council directed staff to prepare an ordinance mirroring elements of Fairfax County’s rule, pursue further outreach and schedule an introductory public hearing and possible vote cycle with a July 22 public hearing date.
Fairfax City Council directed staff on June 24 to move forward with a reexamination of the city’s firearms ordinance and scheduled a public hearing for July 22 as part of continued community engagement.
City Attorney Brian Lopkaman reviewed the 2021 ordinance (codified as section 54‑4) and said the draft under consideration would align the city’s provisions more closely with Fairfax County’s ordinance while preserving the Commonwealth’s limits on local regulation. Lopkaman told the council “there have been no charges under the ordinance since it was enacted in 2021,” and framed the session as an early, fact‑finding conversation rather than a staff recommendation.
Council members and staff focused on three central questions: whether permitted outdoor events should be added to the ordinance’s prohibitions, what exemptions (such as for licensed private security or officials) should look like, and what enforcement costs or signage requirements would be necessary. Council member Bates argued that extending the prohibition to events would allow police “to have a response before something happens,” and flagged penalties as a point for review: the current ordinance is a class 4 misdemeanor (a fine), while Fairfax County’s penalty structure includes a class 1 misdemeanor component.
Council members also pressed for information from the police chief about incident histories, enforcement implications and operational costs. Lopkaman noted the logistical challenges of covering numerous privately permitted events and advised council to expect signage and education obligations if the city pursues event coverage. He also described the statutory context: the 2020 changes to Virginia law constraining the scope of local firearms regulation were a primary driver of the original ordinance.
The council settled on a path forward that includes: drafting an ordinance (staff will prepare language to mirror relevant county provisions where lawful), scheduling an introduction and public hearing in July (staff recommended introducing the ordinance at the council’s first July meeting with a public hearing slated for July 22), and conducting additional outreach and fact‑finding — including invitation of the police chief and parks staff to future work sessions — before any final vote.
What’s next: Staff will draft ordinance language for council review, schedule police and parks leadership for a follow‑up work session, and post public materials so residents can review proposed language and provide comment before the July 22 public hearing.
