That direction followed a March 24 vote by the council to turn down applications of four local nonprofit groups – the Lake County Channel Cats, Miss Lake County Scholarship Program, the Clear Lake High School Boosters and the Terrace School Parent Teacher Organization – that have been allowed to sell safe and sane fireworks during the July 4 holiday.
Councilman Jim Irwin, who was absent from the March 24 meeting, had asked for a reconsideration of the applications, but noted at Tuesday's meeting that there was concern about the ordinance itself in relation to those applications. So Irwin said he wanted to go back and look at the ordinance, which he did.
The council approved that original ordinance on Oct. 4, 1993. Councilman Roy Parmentier served on that council, and had voted for the ordinance along with all of the other members of the council at that time.
That ordinance allowed only four nonprofit groups based in the city to sell the fireworks annually, with the Channel Cats, Clear Lake High School booster Club and the Terrace School PTO being existing groups that were grandfathered in. Miss Lake County was added later.
The original ordinance allowed the nonprofits to sell between noon on June 28 and 9 p.m. July 4 of every calendar year.
A 2002 ordinance – which Councilman Bob Rumfelt voted for along with fellow council members – added city parklands to areas of “high hazard and/or fire areas” where fireworks can't be used, which also include Natural High, all school grounds and vacant lots, and the Del Lago development.
Last year, responding to the extreme fire season and concerns from Lakeport Fire Protection District Chief Ken Wells, the four nonprofits agreed to suspend sales.
This year, when their applications went to the city, Wells suggested denying them during his review, again citing fire danger.
At Tuesday's meeting, Dennis Revell, speaking on behalf of firework company and nonprofits, presented the council with a pack of information that included statistics he received from Wells through a public records request.
There were six incidents between 2003 and 2007 attributed to fireworks, with only one of them – a July 4, 2004, fire on a 4 foot by 6 foot spot fire that burned for nine minutes – specifically related to illegal fireworks. There also were two garbage can fires and three landscaping or grass fires. No injuries were reported. All of the fires required a total fire district response time of 55 minutes.
Safety concerns emphasized
On Tuesday the council wasn't scheduled to take any action, but merely have a discussion and decide on a direction for staff, said City Attorney Steve Brookes.
“You have a whole host of choices you can do,” said Brookes. “Nothing is off the table.”
Council member Suzanne Lyons asked if the four groups who had applied but were turned down could reapply if the ordinance remains. Brookes said yes, because they were originally denied without prejudice.
Rumfelt said in the past month he's become more firm in his anti-firework stance, adding that he's been contacted by many people who support banning them. He read a letter from a constituent – who he did not name – who said they don't like the smoke that comes from the fireworks, the loud noise and the impact on their dogs.
“Those are the kinds of comments I've gotten from a lot of people,” he said. “Everybody seems to think that the chief has a good idea, that there's too much of a fire hazard.”
Rumfelt suggested that along with a ban, the fines assessed for fireworks usage should be raised significantly – in the neighborhood of $1,000 per violation – and that money could be used for the local nonprofits.
Lyons said she was bothered to see the nonprofits agree to stop sales last year over public safety concerns, only to have the city turn around and ban them this year.
She said she's been contacted by people on both sides of the issue. “I don't know if we can make everybody happy every minute of their lives by policy.”
Lyons said the discussion has connected last year's fires and smoke to the fireworks, “but nobody has shown me anything that shows me that that's the truth.”
Rumfelt compared the situation with the banning of burning in the city limits several years ago. Lyons replied that using fireworks isn't the same as burning leaves.
Mayor Ron Bertsch asked Wells, who was sitting in the audience, if he wanted to make any comments.
Wells said there has been a lot of back and forth between his office and the fireworks promoters, which he didn't feel the need to rehash.
The issue is a straightforward one for Wells. “Basically, I'm doing my job,” he said, which includes alerting the city to potential fire dangers.
He noted that the discussion was on the ordinance specifically, and since his district is now separate from city government, he wanted his name removed from the ordinance and such decisions left up to the city.
Parmentier said he believes there's a time to put the toys away. “We've been really lucky. We haven't had any major fires, we haven't had any major injuries,” he said.
But if they continue to roll the dice something bad might occur, said Parmentier. “I think it's time to change the ordinance before somebody gets hurt.”
Public offers wide range of perspectives
Melissa Fulton, a Lakeport resident and chief executive officer of the Lakeport Regional Chamber of Commerce, reminded the council of the dangers inherent in many activities. “We cannot always be afraid of 'what if'.”
Fulton said it's speculation that enough tickets for illegal usage could be written to support nonprofits, and the people whose letter Rumfelt read should be willing to be named.
She said the public needs to be notified that the council plans to ban fireworks. “I think your residents need fair notice so they can come before you and see how it plays out.”
Interim City Manager Kevin Burke said if the council makes a decision to change the ordinance, there would be a public process, including hearings, before final changes were adopted.
The council heard from a small number of community members both for and against fireworks sales within the city.
The arguments ranged from wanting to protect a patriotic celebration – as well as a longstanding local tradition – to concerns about public safety, and the fact that Lakeport is the last area in the county where they can be legally purchased and used.
Jennifer Hanson of the Lake County Channel Cats said many people support fireworks, and she thought the community should be asked for its opinions.
Pete MacRae called the name “safe and sane fireworks” an oxymoron. He said there are more than 93,000 groups that give grants to nonprofits, according to information presented at a recent grantwriting workshop he attended, and suggested there are other and better avenues for funding local causes than fireworks sales.
Chris Vallerga, a member of the Lake County Arson Task Force, said he supported Wells' stance on fireworks. He's been in the county more than 20 years, and has seen people come into Lakeport to purchase fireworks only to take them to the county's unincorporated areas, where they're banned.
Vallerga sugested the safest option is to ban fireworks totally. He said he's seen them lit and thrown out alongside Highway 20, and he can collect reams of safe and sane fireworks materials in the hills along the Northshore after July 1. The fireworks, he said, are coming out of Lakeport, and are unchecked.
Revell told the council that many activities have inherent risk. He told Rumfelt that fine revenue from tickets has to go to a specific public safety budget and can't be otherwise distributed.
He suggested a number of possibilities were available, from the groups who followed the ordinance but were denied seeking a writ of mandate compelling the city to allow them to move forward, to forming a task force, allowing the groups to write a new ordinance or putting a measure on the November ballot. Revell said the groups can sell fireworks on tribal lands, an option that's being explored.
Nancy Ruzicka asked the council to continue allowing fireworks, which she said has been a community tradition and draws tourism. She said she wanted her 3 and a half year old granddaughter to be able to enjoy fireworks.
Ruzicka added that the nonprofits needed the revenue, and said local businesses can't make that up this year. She said she would rather local groups get the proceeds than companies out of the area, since people can still buy fireworks online.
Council divided over tradition versus safety
Following public comment, Rumfelt and Parmentier both reiterated their desire to ban fireworks.
Irwin said he had enjoyed fireworks growing up, which were part of “the fun and the celebration that made the Fourth of July special and different from other holidays,” where neighbors shared time setting fireworks off.
He said there are many things that are dangerous in the community, from dodging boats on the lake on July 4 to the swings at the park.
“Tons of stuff is unsafe but – butt out,” he told his fellow council members.
“It's celebration, it's tradition,” he said, adding that he understands Wells' concerns.
Likewise, Lyons didn't want to see fireworks go away. She said there's something about July 4 that takes you back to the original meaning of the holiday – people standing up for what they believed in.
“I think it's really sad that we've gotten this afraid,” she said, a comment which brought a round of applause.
Bertsch said he agreed with Irwin's comment about where to stop when looking at preventing dangers, but added, “I just have to support what our chief recommends.”
Burke said county staff could look to the county and what it did to ban fireworks for guidance in writing a new ordinance for the city.
Rumfelt moved to have staff come back with a new ordinance banning fireworks, with Parmentier seconding.
Irwin asked what would happen if the council were asked to ban alcohol sales as a safety measure to reduce drunk driving. “Where do you stop?'
At the end of the hour-long discussion, the council approved the direction for staff 3-2, with Irwin and Lyons voting no.
Bertsch asked when the ordinance would come back to the council. Burke said it would be on the agenda for the next meeting on May 5. A public hearing would likely be scheduled for the June 2 meeting, according to City Clerk Janel Chapman.
E-mail Elizabeth Larson at
How to resolve AdBlock issue? 
