garand_guy
Regular Member
Has anybody gotten a copy of November's Board of Trustees meeting minutes? I'm thinking they're ignoring my emails because, well, you know.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Open carry at library?
- Thread starter 07yzryder
- Start date
Vegassteve
Regular Member
Looks like we have to do the standard form with them for that. I will try to file one over the next couple of days.
garand_guy
Regular Member
No standard form is required by law. They should be posting it online as well. I think it's perfidy on their part and I plan on filing a complaint with the attorney general's office if they don't comply.
garand_guy
Regular Member
Check this nifty thing out! It's the Nevada Open Records Act manual for public agencies. Here's the part that I think applies to the excessive fee request DTOM is dealing with:
Extraordinary Use Fees.
All fees waivers must be standardized by a written policy and evenly applied.
In addition to any other fee authorized pursuant to the Act, an agency may charge for extraordinary use of personnel or technological resources. The Act specifically states, this fee is not to exceed 50 cents per page. The request must be made in writing, and upon receiving such a request, the agency must submit to the requester a written estimate of the fee before preparing the requested information.
The fee for extraordinary use must be reasonable and must be based on the cost that the agency actually incurs for the extraordinary use of its personnel or technological resources, not with the intent or effect of excluding persons from access to records. What is reasonable will vary from agency to agency, depending upon the agency’s staffing levels and the ready availability of technological resources. A “busy office” is not an extraordinary situation.
Extraordinary use is extensive use of information technology resources or extensive clerical or supervisory assistance, or if producing the record in the medium requested results in a greater use of information technology resources than that established by the agency for reproduction of the volume of information requested.
Examples of extraordinary use:
• The request is for a voluminous quantity of records containing a substantial number of records;
• The request requires the agency to review a large number of records to locate the records requested;
• Redacting confidential information that the requester is not entitled to inspect from information that the requester is entitled to inspect requires extensive editing;
• Extracting information that the requester is entitled to inspect requires computer programming.
If an agency charges extraordinary use fees, then the agency must define extraordinary use. There is no statutory-defined time established for extraordinary use, such as any request taking more than X minutes to fulfill. What may be voluminous for one agency may be standard operations for another. Agencies with fewer resources, such as small independent boards and commissions with fewer than 4 FTE, for example, may set a 30 minute threshold. The larger the agency, the more IT resources and FTE available, the longer the threshold should be considered, such as one hour or even up to four hours.
Sample policy statement: The fees charged shall not include the first 2 hours of staff time associated with complying with a request to inspect or copy a public record and shall not include the costs of locating, retrieving, or refiling a requested public record.
The Act specifically states, if a second request is made for the same records, the agency cannot charge a second extraordinary fee for the second request if extra personnel or technological resources are not needed to fulfill a second request.
Extraordinary Use Fees.
All fees waivers must be standardized by a written policy and evenly applied.
In addition to any other fee authorized pursuant to the Act, an agency may charge for extraordinary use of personnel or technological resources. The Act specifically states, this fee is not to exceed 50 cents per page. The request must be made in writing, and upon receiving such a request, the agency must submit to the requester a written estimate of the fee before preparing the requested information.
The fee for extraordinary use must be reasonable and must be based on the cost that the agency actually incurs for the extraordinary use of its personnel or technological resources, not with the intent or effect of excluding persons from access to records. What is reasonable will vary from agency to agency, depending upon the agency’s staffing levels and the ready availability of technological resources. A “busy office” is not an extraordinary situation.
Extraordinary use is extensive use of information technology resources or extensive clerical or supervisory assistance, or if producing the record in the medium requested results in a greater use of information technology resources than that established by the agency for reproduction of the volume of information requested.
Examples of extraordinary use:
• The request is for a voluminous quantity of records containing a substantial number of records;
• The request requires the agency to review a large number of records to locate the records requested;
• Redacting confidential information that the requester is not entitled to inspect from information that the requester is entitled to inspect requires extensive editing;
• Extracting information that the requester is entitled to inspect requires computer programming.
If an agency charges extraordinary use fees, then the agency must define extraordinary use. There is no statutory-defined time established for extraordinary use, such as any request taking more than X minutes to fulfill. What may be voluminous for one agency may be standard operations for another. Agencies with fewer resources, such as small independent boards and commissions with fewer than 4 FTE, for example, may set a 30 minute threshold. The larger the agency, the more IT resources and FTE available, the longer the threshold should be considered, such as one hour or even up to four hours.
Sample policy statement: The fees charged shall not include the first 2 hours of staff time associated with complying with a request to inspect or copy a public record and shall not include the costs of locating, retrieving, or refiling a requested public record.
The Act specifically states, if a second request is made for the same records, the agency cannot charge a second extraordinary fee for the second request if extra personnel or technological resources are not needed to fulfill a second request.
garand_guy
Regular Member
I have the unapproved minutes from the board of trustees meeting. Forum won't allow me to post, but if you PM me or email me through Nevada Carry, I'll email you a copy.
garand_guy
Regular Member
Library District Can Learn From Denver Science Museum on Open Carry
As the Las Vegas-Clark County Library District Board of Trustees meets later this week, they will not be discussing the hot topic of open carry in the library. At the board’s November meeting, citizens expressed their concerns over self-defense, the equal application of the law, and the library district intentionally exposing itself to a costly lawsuit. Despite a half-dozen citizens, including Assemblywoman Shelton, speaking out against the district’s illegal actions, no trustee decided to step up and tackle the issue.
Of interest in this matter is a recent action of the Denver (Colorado) Science Museum. They have chosen to remove their policy and signage asking concealed carried weapons stay out of the building. The change in policy was based upon recent terrorist attacks and a concern for employees and visitor safety.
The LVCCLD administration can inform staff of the legality of openly carried firearms in the library. Ideally, the trustees should repeal Rule of Conduct #3 and affirm the legality of open carry under state law. It is the district’s employees and counsel which seem to have forced this matter to become an issue. Rather than simply respect state law, they chose to defy it.
As the Las Vegas-Clark County Library District Board of Trustees meets later this week, they will not be discussing the hot topic of open carry in the library. At the board’s November meeting, citizens expressed their concerns over self-defense, the equal application of the law, and the library district intentionally exposing itself to a costly lawsuit. Despite a half-dozen citizens, including Assemblywoman Shelton, speaking out against the district’s illegal actions, no trustee decided to step up and tackle the issue.
Of interest in this matter is a recent action of the Denver (Colorado) Science Museum. They have chosen to remove their policy and signage asking concealed carried weapons stay out of the building. The change in policy was based upon recent terrorist attacks and a concern for employees and visitor safety.
The LVCCLD administration can inform staff of the legality of openly carried firearms in the library. Ideally, the trustees should repeal Rule of Conduct #3 and affirm the legality of open carry under state law. It is the district’s employees and counsel which seem to have forced this matter to become an issue. Rather than simply respect state law, they chose to defy it.
garand_guy
Regular Member
We had an OCer go to a library today and nothing was said. Has anyone else been? I'd like to have several non-events confirmed in several locations before we declare the all-clear.
Vegassteve
Regular Member
They might have updated the rules page to reflect the correct NRS. http://www.lvccld.org/pdfs/policies/rules_of_conduct_en.pdf
garand_guy
Regular Member
Nope. Unchanged.
Vegassteve
Regular Member
I couldnt recall its been so long since I looked. I thought maybe the reference to the CCW NRS was the new part.
garand_guy
Regular Member
Report from the Sunrise Library (not me). No issues with open carry and the security guard even said "Thank you." That's two good reports so far.
Last edited:
Glen Baker
Newbie
I understand someone was trespassed recently at a Clark County or Las Vegas public library for Open Carry?
Could be false or true?
I could not find any info. such as Who, What, When and Where?
I love these stories that pop up, but no one knows anything.
Could be false or true?
I could not find any info. such as Who, What, When and Where?
I love these stories that pop up, but no one knows anything.
garand_guy
Regular Member
Full information and plans for public participation are pending a consultation with an attorney. I'll probably post full details on the blog later next week.
Let's remember that there are two cases: criminal and the civil suit. Criminal cases aren't taken on contingency. Pro bono, yes, but an attorney must take it. If anyone knows and attorney willing to assist in the case, I can help put them in touch.
Let's remember that there are two cases: criminal and the civil suit. Criminal cases aren't taken on contingency. Pro bono, yes, but an attorney must take it. If anyone knows and attorney willing to assist in the case, I can help put them in touch.
BB62
Accomplished Advocate
I would hope that a willingness to be charged, and legal defense/offense arrangements were made ahead of time, but that doesn't seem to be the case. (...of course, who am I to talk about such things?
)Either way, once the whole story is put out for public consumption, I look forward to assessing the situation, and possibly helping in some way - especially if the legal proceedings will lead to a directive to recalcitrant public entities.
garand_guy
Regular Member
Thank you for all your patience. The story can now be told. As for the person involved, I don't know if she will comment publicly, but here are the full details of the library incident. And yes, I'm lazy and just pointing the link. I have leftover pork chops that need urgent attention.
Frontier Carry Blog
Frontier Carry Blog
rightwinglibertarian
Regular Member
Well isnt this just charming. Lets see firstly you can't be trespassed for exercising a right and of course can't be given a citation, which probably includes an extortion fee. Second you can't be detained without probable cause and under no circumstances can your weapon be stolen. That could well be considered armed robbery and the consequences could be extreme and severe.
Once again a citizen was terrorised and got off scot free. I am aware there is a lawsuit but judges are notorious for violating their oath to the Constitution and making foolish degrees that are not valid and nullified according to the Constitution. Which many cite but practically nobody believes
b0neZ
Regular Member
TV stations need to know about this story.
That is a most interesting read. Fully expect the lady to win a major hunk of change. A series of such law suits is needed.
garand_guy
Regular Member
Thank you, sir. The real congratulations go to the plaintiff for having the courage to stand-up for her rights. It will be an interesting journey, but as we have seen across this forum, many 'rights'-minded citizens have had great success defending their constitutional rights against local bureaucrats who chafe under the idea of not being able to enforce their own viewpoints on citizens.
BB62
Accomplished Advocate
I think the lawsuit deserves its own thread.