I am writing in response to your August 21, 2024 letter, wherein, you request that I "cite any controlling Pennsylvania law, other than Dillon v. Erie, that stands for the proposition that an ordinance respecting discharge of firearms is preempted; or that it is in invalid for any other legal reason."

Barrett Township recently hired Neil L. Albert, a partner at the Ephrata-based law firm Zimmerman, Pfannebecker, Nuffort & Albert, LLP, to represent them in a legal challenge regarding the proposed firearm discharge ordinance. Albert was chosen over the township's standard solicitor.

Yesterday, Chief Counsel Joshua Prince of the Firearms Industry Consulting Group (“FICG), a division of Civil Rights Defense Firm, P.C., filed a letter on behalf of Firearm Owners Against Crime – Institute for Legal, Legislative and Educational Action (FOAC-ILLEA) with Barrett Township Chairwoman Gardsy and Members of the Board of Supervisors regarding their recent consideration of an unlawful and unconstitutional firearm discharge ordinance.

Nate: I've posted this in a couple of places on FB and Nextdoor. If you think there's some merit, please consider sending it out to your email list. I've heard from several people that it was your notice the last time--for the first meeting where the ordinance was discussed--that they became aware this was even being discussed.

Thanks for your help.

Karl

------------------------------

There has been a lot of interest in the "Peace and Good Order" ordinance in Barrett Township. The ordinance will be voted on TONIGHT, Wednesday Aug. 14 at the Supervisor's meeting, which begins at 5:30 PM at the BARC.

... also commonly known as a “gun permit” or “carry permit,” whereby your confidential information may have been disclosed in violation of Pennsylvania law, your rights could be affected by a proposed class action settlement.

This is a proposed settlement of a class action lawsuit alleging that Monroe County, and certain of its employees, agencies and departments, disclosed confidential information under Pennsylvania law and in particular, 18 Pa.C.S. § 6111(i), through the use of un-enveloped postcards. The information disclosed included names, addresses, and other related LTCF Applicant information (“LTCF Information”). The lawsuit also alleges that certain policies and practices of the Defendants are unlawful and should be changed.

Further Reading:
monroeltcfclassaction.com/

Editor's Note:
17,000 affected individuals * $1,000 = $17,000,000