South Portland wants to put its stamp on tattoo parlors, not stamp them out.

That seemed to be the message from a majority of the City Council Monday night as it continued to wrestle with language for proposed rules for tattoo and body-piercing businesses in South Portland.

Although the council is under no deadline for adopting rules on tattoo and body-piercing parlors, because none are proposed in the city, members still have devoted much time on regulating businesses that might open in the future.

Monday night’s discussion was supposed to precede a final vote on adopting an ordinance that would require licensing, inspections and criminal background checks for the establishments.

But the council instead chose to amend the requirement for criminal background checks and allow a city attorney to review the change before moving forward.

The decision came after another intense discussion on whether the city is unfairly targeting a single industry based on stereotypes and personal biases.

“My initial reaction is that we are terribly overreacting to a business that is becoming relatively mainstream,” said Councilor Linda Boudreau. “There was a time when these businesses did not have a good reputation. But the world is a new place. Times have changed. Tattoos and their practitioners are becoming relatively mainstream.”

Boudreau’s comments echoed comments by Councilor Tom Blake, who has opposed the city regulating tattoo parlors.

He argues that the city is singling out tattoo and body-piercing shops for rules and restrictions it does not place on other businesses.

“Who are we to say this profession has to require (the background check) of their employees?” he said.

Blake also opposed the proposal because it duplicates state laws governing tattoo parlors. By creating a local law mirroring state regulations, the city places unnecessary costs and burdens on its own inspectors, he said.

“The state statute is extensive,” he said. “If they are skirting their responsibilities, it’s not our job to take it on. It’s our job to call our state representatives and complain.”

Councilor Claude Morgan, who did not run for re-election and was attending his final meeting as a councilor, disagreed with Blake and Boudreau.

He argued the law was necessary precisely because it duplicates state regulations.

“The state is a little overtaxed in terms of labor,” he said. “They don’t have the manpower to oversee these things. How would we tell one of our constituents that there’s nothing we can do about a problem business around the corner because we don’t have home rule? I would submit we have a lot of business making (this regulation) if we cannot rely on Augusta to enforce it.”

Following a half-hour discussion, Boudreau proposed an amendment that requires only “proprietors” of tattoo parlors to undergo background checks.

Morgan then proposed a counter-amendment that specifically excluded “employees” of tattoo parlors from being required to undergo background checks. The amendment passed 5-2, with councilors Jim Hughes and Kay Loring opposed.

Immediately following the adoption of Morgan’s amendment, Blake proposed that the council stop all action on the tattoo parlor ordinance until the amendment can be reviewed by the city’s attorney.

Blake’s proposal passed 6-1, with Mayor Jim Soule dissenting.

The council has been discussing regulations for tattoo parlors since last spring, when a tattoo business wanted to open in the city.

At that time, the council created a moratorium on any tattoo or body-piercing businesses trying to open in South Portland until laws could be developed to regulate them.

City Planner Tex Heuser led the effort for the moratorium and to develop the rules. He argues that while most operations are law-abiding, the rules will keep operators that don’t follow protocol from establishing businesses in the city.

In the meantime, the tattoo business that had considered locating in South Portland located in Standish.