A recent article published on the NH Municipal Association website has Dublin officials debating whether they can enforce their policy prohibiting town employees from possessing firearms while on duty.
In addition to giving authority and jurisdiction to the state over the regulation of firearms and knives, NH RSA 159:26 prohibits local governments from enacting municipal ordinances or regulations relative to the possession, sale, transportation, etc., of firearms. The RSA also renders previous municipal regulations and ordinances null and void.
The gray area in this RSA, according to the NHMA article “RSA 159:26 Revisited: Can Local Governments, Acting as Employers, Prohibit Employees From Possessing Firearms in the Workplace?,” is whether a town, acting as an employer, can have a policy that would prohibit an employee from possessing a firearm while working.
“I am not in favor of a town employee open carrying because I think it would make townspeople uncomfortable, but I don’t have a problem with someone who follows the correct protocol and concealed carries,” said Dublin Select Board chair Sturdy Thomas.
The town of Dublin currently has a policy that prohibits a town employee from carrying a firearm while on duty, but the board at this time is unsure if it can be enforced, based on the evidence brought up in the article.
“Not all rights translate to the workplace,” said Selectman Walter Snitko. “I think allowing a town employee to carry a firearm increases the liability of the town.”
According to the NHMA article, there has been no court ruling in New Hampshire at this time setting a precedent one way or the other. The article also states that because of this, many municipal lawyers suggest that towns should not adopt any rules that would restrict its employees from carrying a firearm.
The town of Dublin has not decided whether to enforce or rescind its policy, opting to speak with the town’s legal counsel before moving forward.
If a precedent was to be set, a number of towns in the Monadnock region could be affected. In addition to Dublin, Bennington, Jaffrey, Rindge, Greenville, and Wilton all have policies prohibiting town employees from possessing firearms and other weapons while working for the town or while on town-owned property.
The town of Bennington ran into an issue enforcing its policy relative to town employees possessing firearms in May 2013. Town Administrator Denise French said the town was handling a situation with a town employee possessing a firearm in their vehicle, when they were told by NHMA not to enforce the policy.
“We were told to tread carefully,” said French, who said no disciplinary action came out of the situation. “They recommended to educate our employees of the risks.”
The towns of Hancock, Francestown, Lyndeborough, and Peterborough currently do not have a town policy addressing the matter.
Peterborough Town Administrator Rodney Bartlett said the town does not have a policy because the state already gives citizens the right to carry a firearm.
“You have to have state enabling laws [as a municipality] and in New Hampshire, state gun laws are pretty loose,” said Bartlett. “Unless you’re in a federal building or on school property, that’s [anyone’s] right.”
Wilton currently has a firearms policy for its employees, but the town is working to modify it.
Currently, the policy enacts disciplinary action for employees in possession of any weapon on town-owned property, but a draft of the new policy would only restrict an employee from open carrying while working for the town.
The new policy, if approved, will allow for on-duty town employees to concealed carry if the employee has the proper licensing to do so. Employees would also be able to keep firearms in their personal vehicles, as long as they are in line with all local, state, and federal laws.