Fireworks ban blocked

Against a regional trend, Scarborough councilors vote to allow sale and use starting Jan. 1.

SCARBOROUGH — An attempt to ban the sale and use of consumer fireworks was narrowly defeated in Scarborough Wednesday in a 3-2 vote that very easily could have swung the other way, had a full complement of councilors been on hand.

Many communities in the area have instituted some sort of ban, including Portland (which did so Sept. 19), South Portland (Oct. 17), North Yarmouth (Oct. 18), Cape Elizabeth (Nov. 14) and Falmouth (Nov. 14).

Councilors Carol Rancourt and Michael Wood both spoke in favor of a total ban when the enabling ordinance was presented for a first reading Nov. 2. In fact, Rancourt was instrumental in getting the issue on the table at all, teaming with Councilor Karen D’Andrea to maneuver the change through the town’s Ordinance Committee over the objection of its third member, Jessica Holbrook, who favored a Sept. 7 consensus decision of the council to pursue limited regulation over an outright ban.

But for a death in the family, Rancourt would have been present, undoubtedly resulting in a tie vote. That still would have meant defeat of the ordinance, but the result could have gone the other way had Wood somehow had foresight enough to see the debate coming when tendering his resignation last summer.

Citing time conflicts with a recent job promotion, Wood announced Aug. 17 that he would resign, but not until regular balloting Nov. 8. That way, he reasoned, a replacement could found without incurring the cost of a special election. However, newly elected councilors are not sworn into office until the second meeting following an election. Thus, Wood’s seat sat empty Nov. 16, with neither he nor his replacement, James Benedict, there to fill it.

If Wood had stayed on until a replacement was sworn in, not merely elected, his “strong support,” along with Rancourt’s, almost certainly would have resulted in a 4-3 vote to institute a fireworks ban in Scarborough.

Instead, it appears Scarborough has resumed the course it first set Sept. 7, when Town Manager Tom Hall recommend only a zoning change to mandate the addition of a sprinkler system to any building set up to sell fireworks. Hall said Monday that two companies – Ohio-based Phantom Fireworks and TNT Fireworks of Alabama – have expressed interest in opening stores in Scarborough.

After Wednesday’s meeting, Hall said he will prepare sprinkler rules for the council to consider at its Dec. 7 meeting, along with changes to the town’s Noise Abatement Ordinance, which he also with craft.

Hall said changes may include the addition of certain excessive or inappropriate uses of consumer fireworks to the list of “specific prohibitions” in the Noise Ordinance, making enforcement a “discretionary matter” for local police.

Under the new state law, consumer fireworks could be lit on private property any day of the year from 9 a.m. to 10 p.m., except on July 4 and Dec. 31, when use is permitted until 12:30 the following morning.

During Wednesday’s public hearing, several residents spoke in favor of the ban, but only Beech Ridge Road resident David Green turned out against it.

“I don’t appreciate the council telling me what I can and cannot have that’s allowed by state law on my own property,” he said, while reminding the council that what has been decriminalized is small explosives only, not to include “missile” products, such as bottle rockets, skyrockets and aerial spinners.

“The only thing that’s going to be allowed is the sparklers we get now at the corner store and a few small firecrackers,” said Green. “Let’s not confuse the issue, that there’s going to be kids out there with M-80s. It’s not going to happen.”

“Just because they are littler doesn’t mean they can’t still do damage,” countered D’Andrea. “It doesn’t mean they can’t still catch fires. It’s doesn’t mean can’t still injure and maim people. It doesn’t mean they don’t make a lot of noise.

“We need to protect the rights of our citizens to enjoy their property,” said D’Andrea. “They have a right to that. People do not have a right to have fireworks and blow them off wherever they want.”

Holbrook said she is “prepared and willing” to vote for rules to control the use of consumer fireworks in Scarborough’s more densely populated areas. However, D’Andrea, continuing to stump for a total ban, insisted, “It needs to be black or white.” It would be too confusing, for police and citizens alike, she said, if fireworks end up allowed in some neighborhoods, but not others.

Extending that argument, East Grand Avenue resident Steve McKelvey pointed out that most nearby communities have already approved bans.

“Why would our town want to become a local magnet for this activity?” he asked. “I’m not against economic growth in our town, but to allow an out-of-state fireworks company to open a store in Scarborough, and to allow their use in our town, is the wrong idea.

“I ask the council to be mindful of the right of residents to the peaceable enjoyment of our homes and neighborhoods,” said McKelvey. “This right outweighs any pursuant right that may exist to set off fireworks.”

Still dressed in scrubs from her job as a certified nurse, Pine Brook Lane resident Sue Delisle said she has cared for patients burned by fireworks, both as user and innocent bystander. She predicted a high cost to all citizens if use of consumer fireworks is allowed because, “in Maine, a high percentage of the population is uninsured or state insured and the cost of these burns are then passed directly to the taxpayer.”

“People with burns utilize ICU and OR space and sometimes thousands of dollars just in dressing supplies,” she warned, going on to indirectly chastise Councilor Richard Sullivan Jr.

“I find it disappointing that a member of the Portland Fire Department believes that a wait-and-see attitude is the right approach,” said Delisle. “A year from now, will it be one or 20 people who need to be injured for it to be realized that fireworks are dangerous?”

“I don’t think consumer fireworks are going to pose that kind of a problem to Scarborough,” said Sullivan, referring to the nightly noise he endured while living near Old Orchard Beach. “Why don’t we give it a year? If we have a problem, then we’ll do something about it, but this jumping the gun, coming through with an ordinance like this – I’m totally against it.”

As both sides weighed in, it may have been Planning Board member Kerry Corthell who elicited the most nods, while arguing against a total ban and for “a more reasoned approach.”

“You cannot regulate society such that all the idiots of the world will not hurt themselves or others,” she said. “If you were going to do that, you would outlaw knives and cars and plastic bags and a million other things. But regulating the use of fireworks higher than sparklers does make sense on the public safety side.

“Most of the places that I have lived have had only a few restrictions on fireworks, and there were no hoards of raging fireworks aficionados running amok,” said Corthell. “When their use was inappropriate, the users were dealt with by law enforcement.”