Although La Verne residents can now apply to legally carry a concealed firearm in the city, the high costs associated with doing so have some residents in an uproar.
In February, the City Council unanimously approved a permit process for residents interested in obtaining a carry concealed weapon license that includes a background investigation, psychological exam and a series of fees totaling $1,081 for first-time applicants. Renewing applicants will pay $647 every two years after their initial permit date.
At a council meeting Monday, March 6, residents spoke over an hour during public comment about their displeasure with the costly application process to obtain a license.
“The fees are unconstitutional,” resident Keith Reeves said at the meeting. “They disenfranchise those who need it the most.”
Another resident, Agatha Juarez, said she was “absolutely floored by the fees.”
There is also the possibility of pending legal action from the California Rifle and Pistol Association due to the “exorbitant fees,” said attorney Konstadinos T. Moros, who sent the city a letter on Feb. 27 on behalf of the pro-gun group.
“It could be a single mom or someone who doesn’t have $1,000 to spend and feels endangered, they may just end up carrying illegally,” Moros said Monday. “They may try to apply and see the price and be dissuaded.”
The city has until March 13 to respond, before a lawsuit is initiated, according to Moros’ letter.
Since the permit fees were not on the meeting agenda, the council was not able to comment on the matter, according to City Attorney Kim Barlow.
After the public meeting, however, the council met in closed session to discuss possible litigation over the matter.
In an emailed response Tuesday afternoon, City Manager Ken Domer said the criticism about La Verne’s fees, compared to concealed weapons permit fees charged in other cities, was the fallout of the city listing every fee associated with the complete application process, not just those collected by La Verne.
To process applications, the city is working with MyCCW.us, an independent vendor, that will run the background check, schedule psychological exams and refer the applicants to an approved vendor for firearms training. All of this accounts for the $398 processing fee, according to the city.
The La Verne Police Department, meanwhile, will be responsible for conducting a records check, obtaining fingerprints, interviewing applicants and issuing the CCW permit if all criteria are met.
“If the city were to conduct the background examination on its own, it would actually cost an applicant more than what they would pay the vendor Myccw.us due to our limited resources,” Domer wrote. “We would have to dedicate a staff person away from patrol or investigations and we are not in the position to do that.”
Domer also defended the fees, calling them “not out of line for a small city implementing the issuance of CCW permits and doing so in a reasonable and effective manner that does not overly subsidize the cost of a private party seeking a permit.”
Some residents also criticized the city’s requirement for a psychological exam, which California law allows. At this time, the city and Police Chief Colleen Flores have chosen to require it.
The city’s ability to process CCW permits in response U.S. Supreme Court’s June 2022 decision striking down a 1913 restrictive concealed-carry law in New York, weakening the ability of states, cities and counties to enact tighter gun-control laws.
Before it was struck down, the New York law required people to demonstrate a particular need for carrying a gun in order to get a license to carry a firearm in a concealed way in public. The Supreme Court said that requirement violated the Second Amendment right to “keep and bear arms.”
Since August 2022, the Los Angeles County Sherriff’s Department, which previously oversaw all new applications for CCW permits throughout the county, has stopped due to the easing of restrictions on local governments to approve permits themselves.
Now, applicants who do not reside within a jurisdiction contracted by the Sheriff’s Department must apply through their local police department.
Since the Supreme Court ruling, the La Verne Police Department has received over 50 CCW applications from residents, according to a previous staff report.
La Verne’s fees for first-time applicants include $398 for “processing,” a $150 administrative fee, a $93 licensing fee, $20 for fingerprint scanning, $150 for a department-approved psychological review, $250 for an approved safety and training course, and a $20 fee for the physical CCW card — $1,081 in total.
Other local municipalities that contract with MyCCW.us have similar costs: Irwindale, Manhattan Beach and West Covina all charge applicants a total of $916 for a concealed-carry permit, while South Gate charges $1,016.
Still, La Verne has the highest fees for CCW permits among those and other nearby cities. For example, the cost for a first-time CCW permit in Pomona totals $275 and $243 in Glendora.
In LA County, applicants are charged with a $30 application fee, a $120 licensing fee and the cost of training and Livescan, which the applicant does on their own.
Meanwhile, the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department charges $397 for a permit and Riverside County charges $195, which doesn’t include training costs.
In the letter sent to La Verne, Moros included other jurisdictions’ permit fees and said the city “really takes the cake in terms of being over and above the rest.”
“In all, most applicants in California will spend around $400-$500 to get their permits. That amount is likely still much too high for a constitutional right, but it is a downright bargain compared to LVPD’s fees,” the letter reads.
But not everyone at Monday’s meeting had issue with the city’s fees. Resident Stephen Ward said that although he understands frustration regarding the permit costs, there is logical reasoning behind them.
“The City Council just two weeks ago unanimously determined that those costs did bear a rational relationship to the fees occurred,” Ward said. “The city and Police Department presented to you as the experts in public safety in our community what they needed to help keep our city safe.”
But, he added, if the city “can reduce the fees, find a cheaper vendor without sacrificing the thoroughness and quality of the investigation,” he would support it.