October 31, 2006

Letters to the Editor, Press Telegram 11/2/06

I don't understand the opposition to Measure D. All the supporters want is a safe Lakewood that doesn't turn into a war zone for three days. Although community groups enjoy the revenue that results from this chaos, there are better methods of fund-raising, methods that don't reflect poorly on our city.

Russ Rudman

Lakewood

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Citizens for a Safe Fourth of July's mailing lists 28 community groups that will be adversely impacted, including taking away senior meals and hospice for the elderly, by Measure D. Really? Wow, I never imagined us old folk would go hungry if not for having our neighborhoods blown up.

The $300,000 that the Safe Fourth group claims is annually raised is spread among 30-some groups. Assuming the figure is accurate, that's an average of just under 10 grand per group. Now I know that's a bit of change, but believe it or not, thousands of community groups across America raise that much money and lots more. And they do it without blowing up their neighborhoods.

So, save your campaign advertising money. Invest it in some hot coffee, brainstorm and come up with some original ideas and find other ways to support your groups. You can do it.

Ron Trimble

Lakewood

Fireworks fallout

Crime: Explosion left homes damaged and neighborhood changed.
By Karen Robes, Staff writer
Article Launched:10/28/2006 10:52:05 PM PDT

LAKEWOOD - Yvetth Parada Santos' 9-year-old son avoids the view from his window.

From the top of his bunk bed, he can see a crumbled, blackened structure and a singed flower bush near the front of the house next door.

"He doesn't like to look out that window, so the blinds on that window don't get open very much," his mother said. "I think it just brings back bad memories."

Seven months after Brian Miller's illegal fireworks stash destroyed the home he rented and damaged several nearby houses March 5, residents in the quiet Dunrobin Avenue neighborhood say they still feel the effects of the explosion.

"If I'm walking someplace and somebody's slammed on their breaks, I jump," said Jerry Hildebrant,who lives two doors down from Miller's former house.

Miller, who was sentenced in August to five years in prison, will appear at a hearing Monday to determine how much he will pay in damages to his neighbors. At the sentencing hearing, his attorney said Miller plans to pay full restitution.

The blast did more than jostle the neighborhood - the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department altered the way it polices and profiles fireworks offenders.

It also spurred a citywide debate that led officials to place a measure on the Nov. 7 ballot that would ban all fireworks from Lakewood.

For many who live on Dunrobin, resentment and frustration also linger with the debris that still litters the fireworks-scorched home. Crews last week began rebuilding the house, which has been fenced off since the blast.

Shirley Knull, who has lived here since 1971, remembered when the neighborhood consisted mainly of original homeowners.

"Up until the last few years, it was really, really great," she said. "I mean, I'm not going to knock it now, but people lived here forever. It was so cool. Neighbors would turn the lights on, feed the dog, and take care of our house as if it were their own."

When Miller moved into the neighborhood four years ago, fireworks went off almost nightly, neighbors said.

"It was like bombs going off, like a canon," Knull said. "We were having fireworks problems and it was just going on and on all the time. We were calling the police."

Moving out

Residents said they complained to the Sheriff's Department and to City Hall about Miller for years but felt their calls were not taken seriously.

A Sheriff's official has said deputies answered numerous calls to the house, questioned Miller, staked out the house and dug through his trash for evidence. Miller could not be arrested despite their efforts.

Judy O'Neil recalled her neighbors' ire after the explosion.

"There was a lot of anger, because it was uncalled for," O'Neil said. "It was a relief knowing that we didn't have to contend with all that now."

One month after the blast, she and her husband moved out of their Lakewood home of 11 years. They moved to Missouri to be closer to family, but problems in the neighborhood made their decision to leave easier.

"It was in the back of our minds," she said. "We lost weight and the whole bit, 20 pounds for each of us. The stress, oh boy, I think (moving) was one of the biggest things we did in our entire life."

Blanket on fire

After the blast made their house unlivable for five months, the Santos family moved back home in mid-August. Santos estimated the damage to be more than $50,000.

The first few nights after they returned, her sons were afraid to sleep in their beds.

When they last slept there, illegal fireworks flew into their bedroom. One son was covered in glass; another's blanket was on fire.

"They literally slept on the floor with their blankets watching TV because they didn't want to go to sleep in their beds," Santos said.

With new bunk beds and carpeting, the bedroom shows no signs of an explosion. But other parts of the house are in various stages of repair. Cracks stretch across the kitchen wall and some of the windows need to be replaced.

"It's a work in progress," she said. "We're just waiting. There's still mess. The inside is mostly complete. It's the outside that we need to focus on."

`A bad year'

Next door to Santos, Hildebrant stood in the room that once served as a bedroom for him and his wife.

They no longer sleep here, he said. The room serves as the pets' room, its broken windows covered with the sports pages of the Press-Telegram.

On the morning of the explosion, fireworks shot through their bedroom windows and glass shattered onto their bed and floor. A door was blown off its hinges.

"I knew what it was," he said. "I rolled out of bed, my wife grabs the dog and ran in the closet. My wife was frightened, and I didn't think it was bad at first so I walked down to give him a piece of my mind, 'cause Sunday morning, that's enough of that stuff.

"When I started walking over there, there was more explosions. I met him at the front of his door and I says, `Are you satisfied now, Brian?"'

The couple were not harmed, but their 10-year-old mixed chow, Ginger, died soon after from a heart attack.

"That's the hard part," Hildebrant said.

In addition to $10,000 in repairs to their home, the Hildebrants will seek restitution for $4,000 in veterinary bills.

"Been a bad year for us," he said. "I've been out of work for awhile. Been bad."

Karen Robes can be reached at karen.robes@presstelegram.com or (562) 499-1303.

Sentence reduced in fireworks explosion

Lakewood man whose cache destroyed house will serve 4 years, pay $185,000.

By Karen Robes, Staff writer, Long Beach Press Telegram
Article Launched:10/30/2006 10:55:17 PM PST

NORWALK - A Superior Court judge Monday shortened the prison time of a Lakewood man whose illegal fireworks cache damaged his neighbors' homes and ordered him to pay nearly $185,000 in restitution.

Before ruling on the amount Brian Miller would owe his former neighbors on Dunrobin Avenue, Judge Cynthia Rayvis granted a request by Miller's attorney, Scott Well, to allow his client to serve two of his more than six felony counts concurrently.

Well argued and Rayvis agreed that the two counts - possession of explosive devices and possession of the materials used to make an explosive device - are one in the same and that, according to Penal Code 654, those counts cannot be served consecutively.

For Miller, who waived his right to appear before Rayvis Monday, that means serving four years instead of five. With credits for good behavior, Miller's actual time served will be a little more than two years in prison, Well said.

When Miller is released, he will start chipping away at the $185,000 he was ordered to pay for shattered windows, lost personal belongings and the destruction of the house he rented for four years. Insurance companies paid for about $147,000 of those damages.

"He intends to work and he intends to pay," Well said, adding that Miller was sorry that the incident happened.

Among those Miller owes is Doris Bolin and her daughter, Carol Schwartz, who owned the 6178 Dunrobin Avenue home Miller rented.

The two-bedroom, one-bathroom house - which had been in the family's possession since 1945 - was sold in July to a property company, which recently began work on the house.

Schwartz said the March 5 blast destroyed several irreplaceable family belongings, including antique dolls and landscape paintings her grandmother created.

Asked about Miller's shortened sentence, Schwartz said she tries not to think about it.

"We're trying to put it behind us," she said.

Karen Robes can be reached at karen.robes@presstelegram.com or (562) 499-1303.

fireworks updates...7 days to the election

Well we are down to the final wire on Measure D to ban fireworks.

For those of you that get CNN from Time Warner cable as you already know LAAG is appearing on CNN Headline News Local Edition from now thru the Election. These are 5 minute spots/interviews that appear at the end of CNN Headline news. They will air 24 hrs a day as I understand it and will rotate with the pro fireworks interview as well as the 3 spots done on the parking measures.

I am sure that you have seen the 4 flyers sent out by TNT Fireworks. We have rebutted all the statements made in those flyers elsewhere on this website. Campaign finance reports show "American Promotional Events, Inc., dba TNT Fireworks," in Fullerton, has as of Oct. 21 poured $40,000 in cash into a campaign to defeat Lakewood Measure D. The only other reported cash contribution as of Oct 21. is from the Lakewood Lions Club...for $250!! So I guess we can see who is really benefiting from the fireworks...TNT as they are the one spending the money to keep them.

Also in the news, Mr. Miller's (Dunrobin explosion) sentence was reduced from 5 to 4 years on a technicality meaning that he will likely be out in 2 years. Read the entire story here

Additionally LAAG sent in a letter to the editor of the Lakewood Community News paper November edition (which came out yesterday). The letter appears on the bottom right of page 4 and is also on this website under "Fireworks Editorials" (scroll to bottom article)

The Press Telegram also did an article (with photos) on 10/28/06 on the fallout from the Dunrobin explosion read it here and even posted a Quicktime movie of the aftermath of the explosion and interviews with neighbors.

Last but not least a story on LAAG and the anti fireworks movement appeared on Sunday in Long Beach Report here.

Make sure you get out and vote (early on on Nov 7) and vote YES on measure "D"

October 25, 2006

Do we look like criminals?

Yes unfortunately this is the eye catching headline of yet another flyer from cash spent by TNT fireworks. Of course the headline is over 4 young girls in patriotic dress with lots of flags. What a nice stock photo. Interestingly no pictures of any fireworks anywhere in any of the flyers...so does this mean the election is not about fireworks?

If LAAG had the same money that TNT does then we could send out a flyer with pictures of horrific injures caused by so called safe and sane fireworks. Fair is fair in the world of political ads right? We looked on Google and there are pictures. Click here for the photos. Caution as these are gruesome and shocking. And yes many if not most are of children.

As usual children are being used by the fireworks sellers as pawns. In reality they are the victems of fireworks sales as all the studies show that the vast majority of those injured are kids under 18 who cannot buy or sell safe and sane fireworks. What is "criminal" is the fact that children are being held up as being the ones who will be "criminals" if fireworks are outlawed. If fireworks are outlawed the parents will be the ones held responsible for their use, not their children. And they should be as it is also the parents fault when children are injured with "legal" fireworks.

Once again as adults we have to make decisions for our children. In reality, it is the adults that are acting like children in this campaign in favor of "smoke and sparks and free money".

Yes little Timmy will enjoy going to softball practice in a new uniform, but he will be handicapped by the fact that he has only one eye now or his hand was severely burned by a sparkler. Oh well at least his parents did not need to pay for the uniform. Maybe next year little Timmy can be used as a poster child in the next city to try and ban fireworks.

October 21, 2006

Rebuttal to the Rebuttal

Once again TNT fireworks is feeding bad or misleading or incomplete info to the fireworks sellers. We will rebut their arguments here using the same headings as used in the sample ballot:

The Truth on Fireworks Injuries:

Fist off all they have absolutely no documentation to back up the claim of no injuries or property damage. First of all some injuries and property damage may not have been reported. Secondly this information flies in the face of all the other statistics on this site and others. Please contact LAAG and we will provide you with what ever documentation you need concerning injuries. Also even if their statistic were true, we were all safe until 9/11 or "3/5" the date of the Miller Dunrobin explosion. Every year is a new year. You cant blindly assume noting with happen this year as nothing did last year. Statistics have a way of catching up with you.

Just a brief recap here: AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS Fireworks-Related Injuries to Children

And this also flies in the face of their "statistic": "Safe and sane” fireworks caused more injuries than illegal fireworks, especially to preschool children. The term “safe and sane” fireworks is used to refer to devices such as sparklers, fountains, snakes, party poppers, and ground spinners. ....As a promotional technique, the fireworks allowed under rules of this type have been labeled “safe and sane” fireworks by their advocates. Laws based on this approach allow considerable private use of fireworks, but exclude any explosive type devices that lift off the ground that are allowed under Federal law. In 2004, sparklers, fountains, and novelties alone accounted for two-fifths (40%) of emergency-room fireworks injuries, including most injuries to pre-school children (ages 4 and under) where the type of fireworks device was specified." John R. Hall, Jr. Fire Analysis & Research Division, National Fire Protection Association, June 2006

The Truth on Pollution:

So the sulfur smelling haze than lingers in the air for hours and smells so go is not polluting? Does TNT fireworks have testing to prove that? Ill bet not. And fireworks contain no perchlorates? Thats odd. I wonder why this letter was sent to TNT fireworks regarding perchlorates? I guess we will have to follow up on this later. Any rational person knows that fireworks pollute. Don't let the money blind you as it has the fireworks sellers.

The truth on Noise:

How silly. Wanting to ban emergency vehicle sirens. Are the fireworks peddlers so addicted to money that they compare life saving emergency vehicles to things that blow off smoke and fire? Oh Please. Also there are regulations on vehicle noises, such as sirens and horns (trains busses, cars etc.). Obviously smart people make exceptions for "necessary" noises. And I have not seen a rash of pet "escapes" due to fire trucks lately. But on the 4th of July just ask the humane society how pets just "love" fireworks and how they run away to escape them. Again this is not the entire issue. Just one of many nuisance and safety issues stacked up against TNT Fireworks spending/lobbying power.

The truth on Fundraising:

Oh yes the sky is falling. One thing not mentioned is what happened to all the other Lakewood groups that lost out on the right to sell fireworks when then groups were paired from about 40 to the current 26? Did they wither away? No. They found other means to raise the funds. What do all the other clubs so in all the other cities in California where fireworks cannot be sold? Have Lakewood clubs asked? Many of these clubs also are part of larger national organizations (such as the YMCA) that can either assist with funding or give clubs guidance on seeking funding. I am not proposing bake sales and car washes. That type of a statement shows just how uninspired and unimaginative the fireworks sellers are. They are going to have to get a little more innovative than relying upon contraband for revenue. I ran a sports team with over 100 members (also its a niche sport). It raises money for uniforms, team trips, etc. They don't sell fireworks and never have. The team just raised close to $10,000 cash (not including merchandise) this year from a local merchant just based upon one meeting. You know we have lots of real estate agents in this city call doing very well. Why don't their national companies pony up some marketing money for a team? We have entire stadiums now built with private money and named after the company (i.e. 3com park).

I am not saying its easy. Sure fireworks money is easy. So is selling drugs and they are really profitable. But the fireworks sellers have got to wean themselves off this hazardous product. The got a one year reprive from the city council. What have they done in this last year to look for other funding. Likely nothing.

The truth on Fireworks:

Again no sources cited. The bold statement that 270 California "communities" allow groups to "sell" fireworks is a bit vague. There are 478 incorporated cities in California, 58 counties and three counties with no incorporated cities. So if we assume that 270 is a correct number (which I doubt) then 56% of the cities allow fireworks use or sale (it is not clear if the word community means "city"). Typically if a county bans fireworks they are banned in call areas of the county except for incorporated cities that allow them. Lets look at some figures in Southern California:

Los Angeles County fireworks are banned
In 38 cities they are allowed
In 48 cities they are banned

In Orange County fireworks are banned
In 5 cities they are allowed
In 17 cities they are banned

In Ventura County fireworks are banned
In 1 city they are allowed
In 24 cities they are banned

In San Diego County fireworks are banned
There are 18 cities in the county. Unknown what percentage ban fireworks.

In Riverside County fireworks are banned
In 4 cities they are allowed
In 13 cities they are banned

In San Bernardino County fireworks are banned
Out of 31 cities they are only allowed in 2-3 cities.

Vote YES on Measure "D" to ban fireworks in Lakewood

"Safe and Sane" is "safe"...until recalled

These are safety related recalls by TNT Fireworks (aka "American Promotional Events Inc.") in the last four years as posted on the Consumer Product Safety Commission website at www.cpsc.gov

There are no injuries listed below because at the time these press releases are created no injuries were reported to the CPSC. There may have been injuries after this release date, or injuries that were not reported as the injured parties were not aware of the recall.

June 22, 2005
Release #05-206

CPSC, American Promotional Events Inc. Announce Recall of Fireworks

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with the firm named below, today announced a voluntary recall of the following consumer product. Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed.

Name of Product: Bat Out of Hell and Powder House fireworks

Units: About 9,000 units

Importer: American Promotional Events Inc., of Florence, Ala.

Hazard: These fireworks devices could unexpectedly tip over during use, posing a serious injury hazard to consumers.

Incidents/Injuries: None.

Description: The recall involves Bat Out of Hell fireworks with model number CP1129 and Powder House fireworks with model number CP1130. The model number is printed on all four sides of the device above the warning label. These are 1.4g consumer fireworks devices that consist of 16 multiple shots in the shape of a square cube. The name of the product is printed on the packaging, along with the word “TNT.”

Sold At: Fireworks retailers, including display stands and tents in states permitting the sale of consumer fireworks, from May 2005 through June 2005 for about $20.

Manufactured in: China

Remedy: Return the recalled fireworks to the store where purchased for a full refund or contact American Promotional Events for instructions.

Consumer Contact: American Promotional Events at (800) 243-1189 between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. CT Monday through Friday, or visit the firm’s Web site at www.TNTFireworks.com

Firm’s Media Contact: Dennis Revell, (916) 443-3816

view recall notice


~~~~~~~~~~
June 25, 2004
Release # 04-170

CPSC, American Promotional Events Inc. Announce Recall of Fireworks

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission announces the following recall in voluntary cooperation with the firm below. Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed.

Name of product: “T6” Titanium 6 Break Artillery Shell Fireworks

Units: About 11,700 units

Importer: American Promotional Events Inc., of Florence, Ala.

Hazard: These fireworks could have a defective fuse that can fail to ignite the device. Consumers who attempt to re-light the fuse could suffer serious injury. CPSC advises consumers never to re-light any fireworks that do not ignite after the first attempt.

Incidents/Injuries: There has been one report of a fuse failure from a consumer. No injuries were reported. Subsequent testing by the firm confirms that an unknown number of these shells could have defective ignition fuses.

Description: These are “T6” Titanium 6 Break Artillery Shell fireworks with model number “CP1104.” The model number is on the launch tube and packaging. It is a 1.4g consumer fireworks device that consists of a colorful plastic launch tube and six break display shells in a display box. “T6” “Six Break Artillery Shell” and “TNT” are written on the front of the display box, and “Titanium 6 Break” is on the back of the display box. Only model number CP1104 artillery shell fireworks are included in this recall.

Sold at: Fireworks retailers, including display stands and tents in those states permitting the sale of consumer fireworks, from May 2004 through June 2004 for about $40.

Manufactured in: China

Remedy: Return the entire fireworks device to the store where purchased for a full refund or contact American Promotional Events for further instructions.

Consumer Contact: American Promotional Events, Inc, at (800) 243-1189 between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. CT Monday through Friday, or visit the firm’s Web site at www.TNTFireworks.com
view recall notice

~~~~~~~~~~~
July 2, 2003
Release # 03-157

CPSC, American Promotional Events Inc. Announce Recall of Fireworks

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission announces the following recall in voluntary cooperation with the firm below. Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed.

Name of product: "TNT" Reloadable Tube Fireworks

Units: About 22,700

Importer: American Promotional Events Inc., of Florence, Ala.

Hazard: The firework device has a defective base and can break during launch. If reused, the launching device could then send fireworks in unintended directions, possible causing injury.

Incidents/Injuries: There have been two reports of the base of these fireworks devices breaking. No injuries were reported.

Description: The firework device consists of a black base with a multicolored PVC material tube having approximate dimensions of 11 inches high by 1.25 inches in diameter. Each product is sold with six shells with fuses. The product is labeled "Model No. CP983," "Item No 460070," "TNT," and "#1 SELLING BRAND."

Sold at: Firework display stands and tents and retail operations in those states where the sale of consumer fireworks is legal. They were sold from June 2003 through July 2003 for about $35.

Manufactured in: China

Remedy: Return the entire firework device to the retailer for a refund or contact TNT for further directions.

Consumer Contact: American Promotional Events Inc., (TNT) at (800) 243-1189 between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. CT Monday through Friday.

view recall notice

The "TNT campaign" flyers

As expected the TNT fireworks company is pulling out all the stops. Sor far FOUR color flyers mailed to thousands of homes in Lakewood. Campaign finance reports show "American Promotional Events, Inc., dba TNT Fireworks," in Fullerton, has as of Oct. 21 poured $40,000 in cash into a campaign to defeat Lakewood Measure D. The only other reported cash contribution as of Oct 21. is from the Lakewood Lions Club...for $250!! So I guess we can see who is really benefiting from the fireworks...TNT as they are the one spending the money to keep them.

That's a drop in the bucket given the size of TNT. The TNT flyer notes that "major funding" (like 99.9%!) for the flyers was provided by TNT Fireworks. The flyers lead you to believe that TNT is in Lakewood by using some residence address when the company is based in Alabama with a warehouse in Fullerton. [According to its website: "TNT® Fireworks is the largest distributor of 1.4G Class C Common Fireworks in the U.S....In 2004, TNT® partnered with Millennium Pyrotechnics, the UK’s largest privately owned importer and supplier of retail and display fireworks.]

The TNT flyers headlines mentions that clubs will miss out on $300,000 fireworks funding. Hmmm No mention of the likely $700,000 per year that TNT might loose. Do you think that is why TNT spent its money on the flyers? Oh and how many employees of TNT work in Lakewood? How many employees could TNT have in California when Chinese companies make the fireworks and clubs distribute and sell them for no wages? I guess those facts were not "relevant" to put in the flyer. (No one makes the fireworks here in the USA as that would cut into TNT's profit margin. Also no one in California would want to live near a fireworks factory (safe and sane or otherwise) as it would be too dangerous. That would be as popular as lining next to a prison or oil refinery.)

Quote from the TNT flyer: "The laws were enforced last 4th of July and there were no problems" Did TNT or any of the clubs offer to pay for part of this extra $100,000 police protection cost? NO. Did they assist with enforcement? NO. No problems? The problems were less than 2005 but by no means were there "no problems" Over 125 citations were issued in July 2006 (no word yet on the number of convictions from the $100,000 spent on law enforcement and the anti-fireworks abuse campaign)

The TNT flyers list 27 community groups but very cleverly does not mention that they all endorsed the flyer or the No on D measure. I suppose LAAG could send out a flyer with thousands of pets names on it saying they all support the YES on D Measure due to the fact that pets don't like fireworks (good thing for TNT that pets can't vote).

Quote from the TNT flyer: "Measure D won't prevent another Dunrobin [explosion]" Maybe, maybe not. Who knows. One thing is for sure: the less fireworks around the less likely that FIRES or explosions will happen. Would preventing one house fire (costing $600,000) be worth banning fireworks? Also there were other fires and explosions in Lakewood before Dunrobin where fireworks allegedly played a role. They just were not well publicized as they were smaller fires/explosions.

Another point. At the cross examination of the Sheriff's bomb squad detective in the Miller Dunrobin trial he was asked if it was possible that Miller was using powder and other components from safe and sane fireworks to create larger illegal fireworks. He said it was possible. But as much of the material was burned in the explosion it was had to know. Also Miller's attorney tried to use the legal fireworks use in the city as well as the lax attitude towards the "free for all" activity going on July 4th in Lakewood as justification for Miller's illegal use. Thats right. "Safe and Sane" fireworks being used as an excuse for illegal use. This tactic will likely be used in the hundreds of illegal fireworks prosecutions we have coming up. Once again "safe and sane" fireworks creating an atmosphere friendly to scofflaws. So when you hear "Measure D won't prevent another Dunrobin [explosion]", think again.

Finally as was argued in the Buena Park fireworks referendum in 2004, the issue really is not funding for the clubs but funding for the fireworks companies. The clubs just don't want to bother look for another source as they have been lead to believe (by TNT) that fireworks are the only, or at least an easy source, of quick cash, regardless of the price paid for their use by society as a whole. There is lots of discussion about team uniforms and other sports related subsidies that would be hurt by loosing fireworks. Of course none of this is detailed in any fashion. What percentage of the families with these young children allegedly benefiting from this subsidy actually are spending $100-300 per year on the very fireworks that the clubs are selling? Wouldn't it be simpler to cut TNT's huge profit motive out of the equation and take that money spend on smoke and sparks and donate it to the club and get a tax deduction on top of it? Don't you think that is what other cities do where there are no fireworks (the vast majority of cities in California) along with other corporate sponsorship grants? Think about it. You spend $100.00 on fireworks about 30% or so of that gets to the club. The rest goes to TNT. With a donation 100% goes to the club so you need 60-70% less money with TNT out of the equation. And no one has to work a booth selling fireworks!

The more you think about Measure D the more you realize a "YES" vote is the common sense way to go...

Buena Park Ballot statements in 2004 fireworks referendum

Does this sound Familiar? Same people same tactics...its all about money not safety.

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF MEASURE D (from Buena Park Ballot statements in 2004 fireworks referendum)

Buena Park is one of five remaining cities in Orange County that permits the sale and discharge of fireworks. The other 28 cities banned fireworks to protect the safety and property of their citizens. Because of the ban in surrounding cities, Buena Park’s population swells to over 250,000 each Independence Day. Crowds block streets, take over parks and overrun neighborhoods as they set off legal AND illegal fireworks. Unfortunately, discharging “state approved fireworks” masks illegal fireworks, making law enforcement nearly impossible. The resulting chaos and mess are overwhelming. Buena Park endures each Independence Day one spark away from disaster. Calls to your Police and Fire Departments skyrocketed 400% in the last three years. The alarming truth is no Police Department can protect its citizens from a quarter-million people “legally” discharging dangerous explosives. For six hours each year, Buena Park becomes “a war zone!” The vast majority of California cities prohibit fireworks, calling them “a serious hazard to health, welfare and safety of citizens.” Anaheim outlawed fireworks in 1987 after fireworks burned down an apartment complex, leaving over 200 people homeless. Citizens of Cerritos demanded fireworks be outlawed in 1989 after a home burned to the ground. On July 4, 2002, a nine-year-old boy in Buena Park was killed in front of his family and hundreds of people as fireworks masked the gunshot that ended his life. Today, we have the opportunity to act before another tragedy devastates our community. Fireworks manufacturers claim banning fireworks is unpatriotic. Are cities like Anaheim, Cypress, and Brea less patriotic than Buena Park? The manufacturers’ real issue is losing over $1,000,000 from fireworks sales. Nonprofit groups contend that losing fireworks revenues would be devastating, yet these and similar groups thrive in surrounding cities like La Palma, Fullerton, and Fountain Valley without money from fireworks. The true issue is safety in our community.

s/ Arthur C. Brown, Councilman City of Buena Park
s/ Donald W. McCay, Councilman City of Buena Park
s/ Gary Hicken, Chief of Police Buena Park Police Department
s/ Charles W. Prather Jr, Fire Chief Orange County Fire Authority

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST MEASURE D Claiming 6,800 people “rallied” to keep fireworks IS NOT TRUE. The petition asked that the ordinance “...be submitted to a vote of the people ...” Measure D is responding to that request. Firework manufacturers claim they paid the cost of Police services last Independence Day. THIS IS NOT TRUE. The 100 Officers needed to keep you safe cost our local taxpayers over $50,000. Next year will cost more! Fireworks manufacturers want you to believe cities that already ban fireworks have the same problems as Buena Park. THIS IS NOT TRUE! Anaheim PD did not put on one extra Police Officer last year. While 20 Officers patrolled Anaheim, a city 5 times the size of Buena Park, 100 Police Officers and added Fire Department personnel were not enough in Buena Park. Fireworks manufacturers repeatedly say Measure D will take away funding from local nonprofit groups and is therefore unpatriotic. THIS IS NOT TRUE. Nonprofit groups thrive in our surrounding communities without fireworks money. The loss of fireworks money has nothing to do with patriotism. Advocates say they will be giving up the traditional way to celebrate Independence Day. This is a false issue. Shooting fireworks in the street makes no one patriotic and is no less a tradition than attending a community fireworks display with your family, such as the one your City sponsors each year at Bellis Park. The real issue is safety. Your vote should be based on providing a safe Buena Park. Vote YES on Measure D to ban fireworks in Buena Park.

s/ Arthur C. Brown, Councilman, City of Buena Park
s/ Donald W. McCay, Councilman, City of Buena Park
s/ Gary Hicken, Chief of Police, Buena Park Police Department
s/ Charles W. Prather Jr, Fire Chief, Orange County Fire Authority

October 20, 2006

Long Beach Press Telegram endorses YES on measures C and F to ban street parking

Yes on measures C, F
Lakewood can park the RV flap for good on Election Day.
Article Launched:10/19/2006
Long Beach Press Telegram

Getting Lakewood to let go of the long-standing feud over recreational vehicle and trailer parking is a bit like getting a starved terrier to surrender a London broil. We can hardly imagine Tomorrow's City Today without its best-known battle of yesterday (our apologies to those who want their own school district).

But it's time to curb the RV and trailer issue. Residents have an opportunity to settle a major portion of the exhausting flap by voting yes on measures C and F on the Nov. 7 ballot. We back both.

The measures would offer clarity to the various interpretations of the existing law, which is abused in spirit, if not letter, and, more importantly, get those mammoth RVs and trailers off the streets most of the year while still allowing proper loading and unloading.

The measures are essentially the same, but Measure C regulates RVs while Measure F applies to trailers. The initiatives would ban on-street RV and attached and unattached trailer parking except for limited periods of time. They would require residents to get permits, which would be good for one to three days, up to 16 days a year, for the times they are outfitting their vehicles for trips.

Readying RVs for sojourns would be the only legal reason to park them on the street. This will be a problem, of course, for those who use their RVs as guest rooms, but the practice of suburban camping is incompatible with today's tidy tracts.

Under the new system, Lakewood residents would simply apply for and print out their permits from an online website, providing they have registered their rigs with City Hall. The law would also require three days between permits so residents could load their trailers, leave town for a weekend, come back and unload it.

These new laws would go beyond easy-to-manipulate existing city codes, which allow RV and semi-trailer parking on city streets for up to 72 hours in the same spot. Many owners just move their rigs across the street or down a few feet from their original locations to meet the law.

Neither measure would apply to driveway or backyard parking of RVs or trailers, which are subject to different requirements. We can't see telling people what they can do on their own property as long as they follow existing regulations.

But city streets are another matter. On-street RV parking benefits the few - RV and trailer owners - to the detriment of many. This is the opposite of the utilitarian spirit that pulses through Lakewood.

In addition, the rolling motels detract from the appearance of the city's attractive postwar neighborhoods, which went from good to great in the recent housing boom as residents pulled out equity to make improvements and newcomers came in and made their own fixes.

Streets free of RVs and trailers could certainly do nothing but help property values threatened by a slowing market.

RVs and trailers, when not in use, generally belong in parks and lots made for such uses or out of sight on private property. The arguments to allow RVs to remain on public streets have finally run out of gas.