Big Bend board denies proposed change to fireworks rules after safety and storage concerns

The Village of Big Bend board voted March 20 to deny proposed changes to its fireworks ordinance that would have allowed a second fireworks retailer and a temporary seasonal tent operation on Town Line Road.

Dustin Honey, who identified himself as representing Freedom Fireworks/Best of Wisconsin LLC, told trustees he and his family had recently purchased property on Town Line Road and sought a two-phase plan that would allow seasonal tent sales for up to two or three years while utilities and a permanent store were developed. "The first request is that the village would allow a second fireworks company to operate and grow within their community," Honey said, and he asked for a limited seasonal seller permit to generate income so they could complete required improvements.

Supporters of keeping the ordinance unchanged emphasized safety and the ordinance’s original intent. Heather Siegel, founder of American Fireworks in Big Bend, reminded the board that the original ordinance was crafted over many months to prioritize safety and property values: "First and foremost, the priority, of course, was safety," she said, pointing to sprinkler and storage requirements that were built into the code.

Residents and other commenters raised safety, security and community-character concerns. Luke Siegel urged trustees to maintain the population threshold that limits additional permanent fireworks locations until the village reaches 3,000 residents, saying the village remains far below that number and that tent operations raise fire-department concerns. One nearby resident said placing a temporary tent across from event space and wedding venues could be unsafe and invited traffic and crowding.

Trustees debated technical points including the ordinance’s storage-distance rules, which bar wholesalers or dealers from storing fireworks within specified feet of public assemblage areas; the board discussed whether the proposed site fell within the 250-foot limit and noted the proximity of planned soccer fields. Trustees also cited prior problems the village had seen with tent operations elsewhere and questioned overnight security, fire suppression systems and enforcement mechanisms.

After question-and-answer exchanges with the applicants and the village attorney, a trustee moved to deny the changes at this time (the minutes record the motion maker as Jamie and the second as Josh). The board voted in favor and the motion carried. Trustees said unresolved questions about storage distances, sprinkler and suppression requirements, and broader community impacts persuaded them to retain the ordinance as drafted.

The petitioner had asked the planning commission and the board for flexibility to operate seasonally while building a permanent store; the planning commission previously tabled the request. Board members noted the planning commission may revisit layout, drainage and emergency-access changes and that petitioners could return with revised plans, but no ordinance change was adopted at the meeting.

What’s next: Trustees denied the requested ordinance changes and took no immediate action to amend Chapter 10. Petitioners and interested residents may seek further review at future planning commission or board meetings; the planning commission was expected to receive revised engineering and site plans if the applicants pursue them.