By Ward Peck

Editor

    Three months after the expiration of a
council-sanctioned recognition period allowing yellow ribbons to be
placed upon South Portland city property in honor of two soldiers
killed in Iraq, the ribbons remain or have been replaced.

    The ongoing presence of yellow ribbons has not
escaped the notice of several residents as well as city officials– but
those officials have decided to avoid confrontation in searching for a
solution.

    “We are not going to go bashing heads with Billy clubs over this,” Mayor Claude Morgan said.

    The debate over whether the city should allow
residents to hang yellow ribbons meant to symbolize support for members
of the armed forces has been bubbling since the early days of the
conflict in Iraq. In October of 2003, then City Manager Jeff Jordan
ordered Department of Public Works crews to remove all yellow ribbons
that were affixed to city property placed around the city that spring,
affixed as a show of support for all troops serving in the war. Those
ribbons were placed by a group centered around Valorie Swiger, the
mother of one of the soldiers who was later killed in action.

    The ribbons, then as now appear to violate a city
ordinance that makes it illegal to, “attach, place, paint, write,
stamp, paste or otherwise affix any sign, advertisement or other matter
upon any electric light or public utilities pole, tree or fire hydrant,
or on any bridge, pavement, sidewalk or crosswalk, public building or
any property or thing belonging to the city or located in the public
streets or other public places; provided, that this shall not be
construed to prevent any public official from so doing for any public
purpose.”

    In March of this year the City Council agreed upon
such a public purpose when it voted to allow ribbons on public property
in honor of Army Sergeant Jason Swiger and Marine Angel Rosa, who had
been killed just weeks apart. The ribbons were to come down on April 27.

    After the resolution allowing ribbons expired, those
attached to city building and other public property were removed,
however a number remained up with most of the remaining ribbons
attached to utility poles owned by the private electricity distribution
company Central Maine Power, Inc. (CMP).

    According to CMP Spokesperson John Carroll and Mayor
Claude Morgan neither the city nor anyone else requested a waiver from
CMP to attach the ribbons to their poles.

    The poles, according to Carroll are private property
and the company has a policy of prohibiting any group from attaching
signs or other objects to its poles without express permission.

    “We prefer the community not attach things to our
poles,” Carroll said. “If our poles become public bulletin boards then
it encourages other forms of attachment.”

    Carroll said there are several reasons for the
prohibition, foremost among them being the safety of its employees. He
said staples on the poles could puncture workers’ safety gloves, which
could result in electrocution. He said such things as ribbons could
pose a hazard if the worker becomes tangled.

    According to emails obtained by the Sentry, several
residents have registered complaints about the ribbons. As early as
March 28, one resident pleaded that the city not allow the ribbons to
stay up after the March 26 resolution expired because she felt they
represented a statement of support for the war.

(While the emails are signed, the Sentry has chosen not to print the names of the senders.)

    In May another resident said the ribbons posed a
threat to animals, particularly cats who could fall ill if they ate the
ribbons. Other emails referenced residents personal feelings about the
war and others simply objected to their presence on public property and
another complained they had “become nothing but an eyesore.”

    A message left on Valorie Swiger’s answering machine was not returned by press time.

    In late June Acting City Manager Jim Gailey asked
the city’s attorney Mary Kahl if the city had a right to remove the
ribbons from CMP’s poles if the poles are considered private property.

    “The utility poles aren’t ours. You might want to
contact CMP and see if they want them removed,” Kahl replied.

    Councilor Linda Boudreau said the city should not
rush into a confrontation when the property owner has not made its
desires clear.

    “They are not being specific,” Boudreau said.
“Either they want things on their poles or they don’t. “If they don’t
want yellow ribbons on their poles they should say that and should ask
to have it enforced.”    

    Carroll said CMP’s desire to have unauthorized
attachments removed has been consistent since 2003 and it expects the
city to enforce the laws and protect public property.

    “To enforce the law as a matter of public safety is for public safety officials,” Carroll said.

    While the city awaits a firm request from CMP and
CMP awaits the city to enforce its own laws, Gailey has attempted to
negotiate a solution by offering Swiger a plot of city property for a
permanent memorial where people could place ribbons and wreathes.

    Gailey was away on vacation and could not be reached for comment.

    According to Councilor Ralph Baxter, Swiger has rebuffed Gailey’s proposal.

    While acknowledging the initial efforts to come to
such an agreement have not succeeded, Morgan said he believes such an
agreement is still possible.

    “I’m willing to give it more time,” Morgan said. “Long term solutions take a long  time to achieve.”

    Boudreau was more pessimistic.

    “A monument is fine,” she said. “But I don’t see it
as a solution to this. My sense is that is not what [Swiger] is looking
for.”

    In the meantime, Bourdeau said if a resident objects
to the placement of a ribbon on a utility pole, there seems to be no
reason they could not remove it themselves.