Falmouth Select Board Has Mixed Feelings On The Entertainment Regs

Falmouth Select Board Has Mixed Feelings On The Entertainment Regs 

Published online 8/8/25 and in the published edition on page 10; by Lin Lin Hutchinson

It has been just over a year since the Select Board adopted stricter regulations on entertainment at alcohol-serving establishments. On July 28, the board revisited the regulation, discussing how it can both protect long-standing businesses and ensure residents are shielded from excessive noise.

The current regulation, adopted last July, requires that entertainment noise from businesses holding liquor licenses be contained either within the building or within the property lines, unless a specific exemption is granted. The regulation was introduced after years of inconsistent enforcement under the town’s previous bylaw and was intended to standardize expectations across businesses.

At this week’s meeting, Select Board member Douglas C. Brown shared concerns raised by members of the Falmouth Chamber of Commerce last year about how the regulation impacts established businesses. Brown relayed one key concern: that a long-running business could suddenly face challenges if a new neighbor complains about noise, even if the business has been operating in the same manner for years, never having had issues.

Brown proposed adding language to the regulation that would recognize preexisting, nonconforming uses, similar to how zoning laws can protect older structures that do not meet current codes.

“It would be a kind of ‘buyer beware,’” he said. The selectman added that it is meant to send a message of “don’t expect that it’s going to be perfect within our entertainment regulation” for anyone moving into areas of entertainment with long-standing businesses.

Town counsel Maura E. O’Keefe followed up. “I’m not sure what problem we’re trying to solve here,” she said, noting that there have been no issues with the current regulations since they were adopted.

“The regulations were put in place because there were problems when there were no regulations, because this board didn’t have any ability or any teeth, when there was a complaint,” she said. “It’s for when something goes awry that you need them. So [the regulations], I find to be essential. It’s also essential that they apply to everybody.”

Building on Brown’s comments, Select Board member Jack P. Richardson asked O’Keefe whether, under the current regulations, a resident could potentially file a complaint or lawsuit against a longstanding business for violating the entertainment rules, and have legal grounds to do so. Brown said that “maybe we are not prepared” for such a scenario under the existing regulation. O’Keefe agreed.

Select Board vice chairwoman Heather M.H. Goldstone, the only member to vote against the adoption of the new entertainment regulations in 2024, expressed ongoing concerns about how the rules apply to qualifying businesses.

Goldstone described the regulations as “a standard that is frankly impossible to meet.” Specifically for outdoor entertainment, she said, “The property would have to be so large and the entertainment so small and so quiet for it to not leave [the property].” Regarding indoor entertainment, Goldstone noted that while she would not name specific businesses, many establishments along Main Street regularly have music audible outside their doors.

“Personally I think it is fabulous and a wonderful part of walking down Main Street, on an evening after having had dinner and I wouldn’t want that to stop, but that is not by the letter of the law,” Goldstone said.

Select Board chairman Robert P. Mascali said he was originally opposed to the regulation but with no businesses or public opposition to the regulation, he was okay with it.

“I kind of tend to agree with Ms. O’Keefe,” Mascali said. “If it’s not broken, I don’t think we should bother trying to fix it at this point. That’s my opinion.”