In Our View: Give Public Say on Fireworks

At times, it seems, there can be a cavernous gulf between democracy and representative democracy.

Democracy — while we like to suggest that it is the cornerstone of American government — is untenable. We would not, for example, expect the public to vote upon every placement of a stop sign or upon whether the city should spend money to add a bench to a public park. Instead, we elect representatives to make such decisions, lest we be distracted from our yard work or the latest episode of “Downton Abbey.”

Which brings us to a conundrum facing the Vancouver City Council. As city officials debate whether to limit or eliminate the use of personal fireworks in conjunction with the Fourth of July, they also are considering whether to place an advisory question about the matter in front of voters. For the record, all members of the council have expressed a desire to ban fireworks within the city, but that is where the agreement ends. Council members Alishia Topper and Bart Hansen support holding an advisory vote; Jack Burkman and Larry Smith favor immediate action; and the others are undecided.

Such is the messiness of democracy — or, in this case, representative democracy. The council will reconsider devising an advisory vote in a couple weeks, and The Columbian encourages them to place such a vote on the ballot. As Topper said: “On an issue like this, I feel as though because every single citizen has a unique opinion about it, they should be given an option to vote.”

We agree, with the stated caveat that advisory votes should be used sparingly and with great discretion. In 2013, Clark County officials placed a multitude of advisory votes on the ballot, with most of them relating to transportation issues over which the county had no direct control. This was an absurd abuse of the system and a waste of time and money for taxpayers.

The Vancouver City Council, on the other hand, has direct control over fireworks regulations in the city, meaning that input from voters would be valuable. It also would be constructive, as the notion of personal fireworks has grown particularly contentious within the city. Each Fourth of July brings out competing opinions about the traditional manner for celebrating personal freedom and the collective danger involved. For every resident that embraces fireworks as an expression of independence, there is another who complains about incessant noise, as well as trauma for pets or individuals suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. Tack onto that an estimated property loss this year of about $575,000 due to fireworks, and the importance of the issue becomes clear.

That discussion, however, is for another time. For now, the question of whether to place the issue upon the ballot is at the forefront — and there are strong arguments on each side.

As Burkman said about the idea of an advisory vote: “I think it’s a delaying tactic for us. I don’t think in the end it will provide value.” Burkman can find a kindred spirit in 18th century Irish statesman Edmund Burke, who said, “Your representative owes you not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays instead of serving you if he sacrifices it to your opinion.”

A valid point, and yet the contentiousness of the fireworks debate calls for a public vote. For while elected representatives are tasked with using their judgment, sometimes it is appropriate to enlist the thinking of the public in forming their opinions.