JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Don't get me started in the fraud/scam that is publicly-funded, privately-owned professional sports stadia. You guys also know the NFL is a non-profit and tax-exempt, right?
 
To clarify, SafeCo was funded mostly by taxpayers ($380 million) and is owned by the Washington-King County Stadium Authority, with a long term lease to the Mariners.

Since the Stadium Authority is a Public Facilities District (a municipal corporation), it falls under the RCW pre-emption of municipalities. However, both the Mariners (and First & Goal, Paul Allen's company which leases CenturyLink) are on record claiming that they don't think pre-emption applies because of their private lease from the Stadium Authority.

Most of these claims rely on two WA Supreme Court cases but in fact, those cases are not relevant. The Cherry case relates to employees carrying under pre-emption, and the Sequim case is about a gun show. Neither case is about the general public carrying under pre-emption (as noted by the Court in Sequim).

Personally, I think it's pretty clear when the legislature wrote the law - "any stadium or convention center, operated by a city, town, county, or other municipality" - they included stadiums in the definition. But it will likely need a court case to sort it out.
 
To clarify, SafeCo was funded mostly by taxpayers ($380 million) and is owned by the Washington-King County Stadium Authority, with a long term lease to the Mariners.

Since the Stadium Authority is a Public Facilities District (a municipal corporation), it falls under the RCW pre-emption of municipalities. However, both the Mariners (and First & Goal, Paul Allen's company which leases CenturyLink) are on record claiming that they don't think pre-emption applies because of their private lease from the Stadium Authority.

Most of these claims rely on two WA Supreme Court cases but in fact, those cases are not relevant. The Cherry case relates to employees carrying under pre-emption, and the Sequim case is about a gun show. Neither case is about the general public carrying under pre-emption (as noted by the Court in Sequim).

Personally, I think it's pretty clear when the legislature wrote the law - "any stadium or convention center, operated by a city, town, county, or other municipality" - they included stadiums in the definition. But it will likely need a court case to sort it out.

Thank you. This was my suspicion but I wanted another point of view on it. Appreciate your post.
 
Thank you. This was my suspicion but I wanted another point of view on it. Appreciate your post.

You're welcome. Would be great to get it clarified. But I'm not confident in the outcome given the current makeup of the WA Supreme Court.
 

Upcoming Events

Centralia Gun Show
Centralia, WA
Klamath Falls gun show
Klamath Falls, OR
Oregon Arms Collectors April 2024 Gun Show
Portland, OR
Albany Gun Show
Albany, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top