Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Firearms topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident Birgit Johnson raises wildlife and firearms-ordinance concerns at Richfield open forum
Summary
At the Richfield City Council open forum on April 28, resident Birgit Johnson said a proposed viewing platform at Betts Park had been moved to avoid nesting black-crowned night herons and urged caution on a proposed ordinance that would restrict firearms in certain city-owned buildings and parks; she said some residents have threatened lawsuits if the city proceeds.
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Firearms topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
During the April 28 open forum, resident Birgit Johnson told the Richfield City Council she and others were relieved that a proposed viewing platform location at Betts Park had been moved after concerns it would interfere with nesting black-crowned night herons. Johnson also addressed a proposed ordinance discussed at the April 14 work session that would prohibit firearms in certain city-owned buildings, parks and civic spaces, including a list of weapons and components the draft would cover.
Johnson identified the ordinance's scope as including “assault weapons, binary triggers, large capacity magazines, and ghost guns along with possessions, assembly, sale of unserialized firearms and unfinished parts,” and said the measure targets untraceable weapons often used in violent crimes. She told the council that some residents have said they would sue the city if it proceeds with the ordinance.
Johnson urged council members to be mindful of cost and community tensions and stressed the importance of retaining experienced staff who can help explain proposals to residents. Council members did not take action on the ordinance during the April 28 regular meeting; the proposed ordinance had been discussed at the April 14 work session and remains a work-session item pending council direction.
Why it matters: the proposed ordinance would change access rules for city buildings and public parks and invites debate over public-safety, legal risk and municipal authority. Residents’ comments at public forum signal community concern and potential litigation risk if the city advances the measure without further public engagement.
Next steps: the council did not vote on the ordinance at this meeting; staff and councilmembers may return to the proposal for additional discussion in future work sessions.

