| 2/3/2010 | Email this article • Print this article | Maplewood adopts recreational fire ordinance
Derrick Knutson
Review staff
The Maplewood City Council has been discussing recreational fires in one way or another for more than a year, but when it came to passing an ordinance dealing with the issue, everything was squared away in less than five minutes.
That's not to say debate did not take place on recreational fires and wood smoke in the city, though. A wood smoke taskforce comprised of 15 members was organized over a year ago by then council member Will Rossbach to study the effects of wood smoke, and the task force took more than a year before coming back to the council with a recommendation.
The task force didn't recommend any changes to the city's burning code, but it did give suggestions in June about how to educate the residents about the code.
During the debates about the recreational fire ordinance, flyers were distributed in southern Maplewood that claimed the City Council was attempting to ban recreational fires completely.
Former council member Erik Hjelle even said in an Oct. 3, 2008, Maplewood Monthly Newsletter that the city was making "efforts to regulate bonfires and wood burning." Rossbach and other council members repeatedly asserted that was not the case. Rossbach told the Review in June that the purpose of updating the fire ordinance was to make it adhered to state fire codes because there were areas where the two didn't match up and state code takes precedence over city code.
Council member John Nephew said during the Jan. 11 council meeting that one of the areas where the two codes didn't coalesce was in terms of what types of materials can be legally burned.
He said the city Web site used to say that a resident could burn coal in a recreational fire, but the state code says that's illegal, so if a resident followed the city recommendations they would actually be breaking state law.
At the first reading of the ordinance, the council made some minor changes before it was brought before the council again for the second and final reading last Monday.
City Attorney Alan Kantrud said some language in the new ordinance about what can and cannot be burned was cleared up.
"The only change was the addition of vegetation, which is already restricted by state fire code," he said. "We are offering it here to make sure there's no confusing (language). In addition to leaves, I also added brush and grass."
Nephew said the "brush" language in the new ordinance that Kantrud added was somewhat vague and might be misconstrued.
He said he would prefer not to have the "brush" language included in the ordinance because he didn't want to get in arguments about what is a "stick" and what is "brush."
Mayor Rossbach then made a motion to approve the ordinance, minus the language about brush.
"Now it's official; we have not banned burning in Maplewood," Council member Kathy Juenemann joked while raising her hands over her head in a field-goal-like motion.
Derrick Knutson can be reached at dknutson@lillienews.com or at (651) 748-7825.
|
Article Comment Submission Form
|
