Ordinance to regulate door‑to‑door sales and transient vendors draws debate over background checks; committee postpones for rewrite

Councilor Susan Goff introduced an ordinance combining the city’s rules for hawkers, peddlers and transient vendors and adding a specific section for door‑to‑door sales to set hours, require registration with the police department, and impose documentation requirements. "The reason, for the door to door sales being added is to basically protect our most vulnerable population," Goff said, citing concerns about elderly residents and fraudulent contractors.

The proposed draft requires registrants to provide identifying information, a photograph and fingerprints; it also asks for a statement about prior convictions. Lieutenant Ted Hitchcock, appearing for the police, described the proposed system — a regional database already used by some agencies — and said the intent was modernization and standardization. "It's a database solely on the description, a photo that a detective ... can quickly look through," Hitchcock said, and he noted the program is free and already in use by area pawn shops.

Several councilors and the city attorney discussed vetting. Councilor Shane Brooks urged that registration include criminal‑record checks (CORI) before granting the privilege to solicit at private residences, arguing such checks are a modest additional step that would better protect residents. Attorney Tim Riley noted fingerprinting is required by the draft but the text does not expressly say the fingerprints will be run through the Commonwealth’s criminal-record system; he said the procedure can be revised but cautioned that mandatory checks raise practical questions — for example, how they would apply to youth groups such as the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts who sometimes go door to door under adult supervision.

Committee members flagged logistics and timing as concerns: some wanted the ordinance in place ahead of the spring season when door‑to‑door solicitation increases; others urged careful drafting to ensure registrations cannot be grandfathered in without the added vetting. After discussion the committee voted to postpone the ordinance to the call of the chair so the sponsor and police department can agree on clearer language about fingerprinting, background checks and how minors and charitable groups will be handled.