Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Second Amendment topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Waupaca County Board unanimously affirms residents’ Second Amendment rights

Waupaca County Board of Supervisors · March 1, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Waupaca County Board adopted Resolution No. 5 (2021-22) on May 18, 2021, formally affirming the constitutional right to keep and bear arms and opposing state legislation it views as infringing those rights; the motion passed unanimously by roll call.

The Waupaca County Board on May 18 adopted Resolution No. 5 (2021-22), declaring the county’s affirmation of its citizens’ rights under the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 25 of the Wisconsin Constitution.

Supervisor Fred Zaug moved to adopt the resolution and Supervisor Jack Spierings seconded. The resolution states the board’s view that citizens have a right to keep and bear arms for “security, defense, hunting, recreation or any other lawful purpose,” and it opposes legislation the board considers an infringement on those constitutional rights.

A roll-call vote was recorded with all voting members in favor. The resolution was recommended for introduction by the Waupaca County Legislative, Judicial, Ethics, Safety & Security Committee and was signed in the record by county officials, including County Clerk Jill Lodewegen and Corporation Counsel Diane L. Meulemans.

Why it matters: the advisory resolution expresses the county board’s policy stance for transmission to the public and to state legislators. It does not create or change local law but signals the board’s position on potential state legislation affecting firearm policy.

Next steps: the resolution is recorded as adopted and will be transmitted to the counties and state legislators identified in the document; there was no further action or implementation required by county staff at the meeting.