An item labeled “Fireworks Discussion” in the Old Business segment on the agenda for the Wednesday, April 29, Clark County Council meeting led to, well, future discussions.
After nearly two hours of public comment and a 30-minute discussion among councilors, no action was taken other than a direction for county staff to continue the saga regarding the future of fireworks in Clark County. In the big scheme of things, the agenda item was not a talk towards banning fireworks, but a continuation of an April Fools' Day workshop on April 1.
During an earlier April meeting discussing if “safe and sane” fireworks would be a middle ground for unincorporated Clark County, fireworks stand operators, including those supporting the Battle Ground High School Equestrian Team and American Legion Post 176 in Salmon Creek, warned that new restrictions ahead of a holiday could cut their sales by at least half, raising concerns about the impact on local nonprofits.
However, any changes to the law made this year would not apply to the highly anticipated America 250 Fourth of July celebrations this summer.
According to previous reporting by The Reflector, Clark County Fire Marshal Donna Goddard said most fireworks stands reported lower sales in 2025 compared to the previous year, while incidents and complaints declined. Goddard could not provide specific sales figures, as most business owners declined to share complete data.
County Chair Sue Marshall then asked councilors to weigh in on whether to maintain the current rules or consider moving to a “safe and sane” model, which she described as a possible middle ground. She noted that an outright ban on fireworks would not be a feasible solution for unincorporated Clark County.
Flash forward to April 29, out of the nearly two hours of public comment, the vast majority just want the rules to remain as is.
Councilor Matt Little was a voice for the pro-aerial fireworks crowd during the discussion councilors held after the public comment.
“I really appreciate everyone coming out. I love hearing the voices from all sides on this, they’re all legitimate concerns,” he said. “I think ‘safe and sane’ is an insane marketing ploy. It basically implies that everything explodes or that goes in the air or that is fun and wonderfully patriotic is insane and unsafe. Which is not true, as many here have described.”
Little continued his comments, discussing personal responsibility, which includes upkeep of property, such as safely burning dry brush, as well as the fact that different types of firearms can be discharged on private property.
Little added that if the county allows different types of firearms to be used on one’s property, “why would we limit shooting off a bottle rocket or something like that, that we don’t trust our residents to be able to do that safely in the unincorporated areas.”
However, for clarification, according to the Washington State Patrol, bottle rockets, firecrackers and sky rocket fireworks are illegal in Washington State unless on an Indian Reservation.
Little continued, “So anyways, I am here for three more years. If I have your trust, I hopefully will be here longer. But there will not be a ban on my watch if I can ….”
Little’s statement concluded as the audio recording cut out, according to Clark County Today reporting; applause rang out from the pro-fireworks crowd after that statement.
Councilor Glen Yung followed Little’s popular-to-the-crowd statements by saying, “A couple of you out there hit it just perfectly, and that was that ‘everybody’s right on this issue.’”
Councilor Will Fuentes said his decision will be based on that of his constituents, who, he said, are strongly opposed to fireworks altogether in the eastern half of Vancouver.
Chair Sue Marshall said that more information will be needed before a vote is even scheduled.
“It just sounds to me like this is really difficult to find a middle ground,” Marshall said. “... If I could summarize, it sounds like we’re not ready to move forward with anything specific.”
