News

Fire Celebration to go on
Mass Gathering permit exemption given
By Elizabeth Prata

Gray--At the Wednesday night special workshop, the Council discussed whether the Fire-Rescue Association was exempt from having to obtain a mass gathering (MG) permit, and if the organization was exempt, why the Manager had made them go through the myriad hoops associated with the permitting procedure.

The Fire-Rescue Association has been planning a celebration to honor the Town's Fire-Rescue Department on the occasion of their 125th anniversary. The Association had expected 2000-2500 attendees, well beyond the trigger of 500 that would prompt the mass gathering permitting procedure.

Chair Gary Foster said that throughout the summer Manager Mitchell A. Berkowitz had told the Council that the sponsoring organization, the Gray-Fire-Rescue Association, must comply will all the conditions outlined in the ordinance. One of the conditions for non-exempt applicants is that they must apply before 60 days prior to the event. Applicants must also pay a $250 fee. But when the application came in on August 9, with less than 60 days before the celebration, and when they saw that the fee had been waived, the Council began asking questions as to why the Ordinance was not being applied correctly.

The Manager said that since the Town's Fire Department was now a co-sponsor, along with the Association, which is not a Town Department, that an exemption applies and they did not need to meet all the conditions after all. Under the ordinance, town-sponsored events or events under the direct supervision of the Town are exempt from the mass gathering ordinance.(MGO)

Mr. Foster continued by saying that "None of us are opposed to the event. We all would hate to see something interrupt this. But these issues must be raised."

Dean Hadlock is president of the Association, and he had said they have been planning this for almost two years. It really accelerated in March when the Association sent a letter to the Council asking for a donation of $10,000 toward the event. They expect it to cost $50,000.

Mr. Foster asked Fire Chief Barton when the Manager told them they needed to apply for the permit. Mr. Barton said "about three or four days before you got it, on August 9. Dean and I made it out that night and we brought it down."

Mr. Berkowitz said he was as surprised as anyone that the co-sponsorship came in on the application, but when he saw that, he deemed it an exception. Mr. Upham said that he was not buying Mr. Berkowitz's smokescreen. "If you want to exempt them because our toe is in a jam, then let's be honest and just say that."

Vice-Chair Upham was also concerned about the proposal to close a section of State Route 26 for two hours on a Saturday. The ordinance intent states that one of the reasons the ordinance exists is because "The Town of Gray is concerned about the adverse effect to the general health and safety of the community that may result from large crowds which attend outdoor events, including, but not limited to, exhibitions, festivals, music concerts and fairs…Such gatherings may also threaten the safety of the community through the obstruction of roads."

Public Safety Committee member Steve Pelletier was on the original sub-committee that dealt with the drafting of the MGO. Vice-Chair Andy Upham asked Mr. Pelletier on a scale of problems, how important is closing a portion of a state route. "Very important," Mr. Pelletier said, "I don't see how you can close it without DOT [Department of Transportation] knowing.

Chief Barton said that DOT and the Maine Turnpike Authority (MTA) have been notified. MTA will illuminate signs along the Turnpike alerting motorists that there will be a detour in Gray. The Association notified the trucking companies, too.

Gray is a major route for both truckers and motorists who exit the Turnpike in the Village and travel over one of the five state routes to destinations that cannot be easily reached via other routes. The concern Mr. Upham had was that closing such an important thoroughfare for two hours with the resulting road obstructions would raise exactly the kind of public safety concern that the ordinance was designed to prevent.

Councilors John Welch and Denise Duda noted that the group was either excepted or they weren't. The two noted that if they weren't, then they didn't have to go through the ordinance's clauses, nor even apply. Mr. Welch said that he had a problem between what the ordinance says and the practice of the Manager. "It seems to me that if an organization is exempt, they are exempt and you say no more. But the Manager's practice seems to be that he asks these questions even of exempt organizations."

The Manager said that as manager, with an event of this size that using the ordinance's clauses as a guideline is a good idea. He needs to know if traffic will be interrupted, if there is likely to be sanitation or crowd control problems, etc. he said.

The Council noted also that the Manager had told the Celebration organizers that they may be exempt but told the Council that they weren't. "Nobody likes being blindsided," Mr. Upham said. "Not you, not us. Not even a little bit."

The Council deemed that it was a staff issue and that the Association/Fire Department should not be penalized for failures in communication or inappropriate application of the ordinance. They said that on September 6 at their regular Council meeting that they will vote that the Fire Department/Association is exempt. They will be discussing the staff issue at a later date.