The Orange County Board of Supervisors heard the Sheriff and critics of the Department’s CCW policy on Tuesday. When all was said and done, the Board members expressed disagreement with the policy change but agreed that the Sheriff has the authority to go forward.  

“It’s over,” said Board of Supervisors Chair Patricia Bates.

For information on the Department's CCW Policies click here.

The issue was first addressed at Tuesday's meeting in a report from Sheriff Sandra Hutchens.

Good morning madam Chair and honorable members of the Board. I just want to provide a brief overview of how we got to where we are today.
In July of last year I ordered a review of all existing concealed weapons permits, specifically looking at the issue of good cause. I implemented a new policy and that was adopted in September of last year. The main issue we have been discussing for the last several months is the issue of good cause.
There are some who have alleged that this is a Second Amendment issue.

I would disagree.

This does not impact an individual’s right to have a firearm in their home of their place of business. The fact is there is a law in the State of California prohibiting the carrying of a concealed weapon. I can’t change that. That exists. There is a section that gives the Sheriff or Police Chief of a jurisdiction the ability to issue a license as an exemption to that law. That law specifically states that the person must have good cause. 

I believe that I have taken a common sense approach to good cause, that is: you must demonstrate that you are at some greater risk than anyone else in the general population. In November of last year I made a presentation to this Board on CCW’s and on good cause.

I listened to the concerns by members of the public and members of this Board, as I plan to do today.  Following that meeting, I attempted to address the concerns about a revocation appearing in the automated firearms system data base maintained by the California Department of Justice.  As a result of those discussions we came up with the option of changing the expiration dates so there would be no data entry. We did have communication yesterday with the California Department of Justice. They are working with their IT staff today to come up with a date. So, while you have a letter in front of you we do not have a date yet that they will be able to accomplish that.

I also adopted the language provided by the Board resolution into my CCW policy.  While it did not fundamentally change the issue of good cause, I think it went a long way to explaining what the good cause criteria might be.  You see that in my policy.

You should have a copy of the letter.

I discussed with County Counsel their opinion on several issues raised by the Board.

Following the Sheriff’s presentation, the Board heard from County Counsel Ben deMayo.

County counsel gave the opinion that the Sheriff has the authority to revoke CCW’s issued by a previous Sheriff and that an individual who is having their CCW revoked  can opt to have the Sheriff include it in the Department of Justice database as an expired license.

All five Supervisors and more than 40 members of the public spoke on the CCW issue and on the controversy surrounding a security tape of the January 13 Board of Supervisor’s meeting, security precautions taken by the Sheriff’s Department at the meeting of the 13th and text messages sent by Command Staff during the November 18 Board meeting.

A resolution appears to have been reached between the Department and the Board on the access to the security tape of January 13th, during which the camera briefly panned on the notes on the desk of Supervisor Chris Norby and the Blackberry of Supervisor Janet Nguyen. 

Sheriff Hutchens said an investigation is continuing into why a Department Investigator panned the security camera on the Supervisors’ desks during the five hour long meeting.

Sheriff Hutchens countered allegations that the beefed up presence of uniformed and plainclothes personnel at the January 13 meeting was intended to intimidate CCW proponents who attended.  No immediate press accounts of the meeting made mention of intimidation but two days later some CCW proponents contended the extra security was intended to intimidate them.

The extra security was due to security concerns over several issues on the Board agenda that were expected to bring in large numbers of people. In addition to the CCW issue on the agenda, those expected included county workers facing layoffs, supporters of Supervisors Nguyen and Bill Campbell, who were  being sworn in that day, and a group of “open carry” advocates who have been testing state firearms laws by carrying unloaded firearms openly.

Sheriff Hutchens also apologized for inappropriate text messages sent by some of her staff during the November 18 meeting. She said those individuals had been admonished and that the Department policy has been amended to limit the use of text messages to having a business purpose and a professional tone.

The meeting continued after the CCW issue was resolved the Sheriff and several members of her staff remained in attendance to answer questions another pressing issue: the Department budget.