Nuisance ordinance

[miznotebook]

The county commissioners are scheduled to take up at nuisance abatement ordinance at their regular meeting next Tuesday, Jan. 26 at the county courthouse in DeFuniak. The meeting starts and 4 p.m. and the ordinance is scheduled to come up at 4:25. You may remember that some months ago they had looked at adopting a countywide noise ordinance but then decided to go in this direction instead. Only one reading of the ordinance is required, so action on it would be possible on Tuesday. This link should take you to a draft copy of the ordinance on the county Web site: http://www.co.walton.fl.us/DocumentView.aspx?DID=1847.

 

[John R]

If I read article V correctly, the only places where nuisance noise will be enforced is Grayton Beach and, Chaparrel Estates, Hidden Harbors and Holiday Shores. It seems to me that this ordinance should cover the entire county. It also appears to only be concerned with amplified noise.
Sections 9-137 and 9-147 are different as to what is an offending noise.
Sections 9-139 and 9-149 indicate that measurement is subjective, by ear, and section 9-149 indicated that officers may "use a decibel reader or sound level meter as provided herein." Unfortunately, there is nothing provided 'herein' pertaining to a specified SPL or distance measurement.
Sound and distance are clearly quantifiable. Adopting an ordinance that relies on subjective measurement technique vs. quantifiable means, and not including the entire county, is a mistake in my opinion.

 

[Just Curious]

If I read article V correctly, the only places where nuisance noise will be enforced is Grayton Beach and, Chaparrel Estates, Hidden Harbors and Holiday Shores. It seems to me that this ordinance should cover the entire county. It also appears to only be concerned with amplified noise.
Sections 9-137 and 9-147 are different as to what is an offending noise.
Sections 9-139 and 9-149 indicate that measurement is subjective, by ear, and section 9-149 indicated that officers may "use a decibel reader or sound level meter as provided herein." Unfortunately, there is nothing provided 'herein' pertaining to a specified SPL or distance measurement.
Sound and distance are clearly quantifiable. Adopting an ordinance that relies on subjective measurement technique vs. quantifiable means, and not including the entire county, is a mistake in my opinion.

I'm not sure if you looked at the right draft. When you read this draft you also need to read Ch. 823 of Florida Statute, as it states in the draft. It lists all kinds of stuff that this ordinance would cover.

 

[John R]

Yes, 823 is lovely and will outline what code enforcement is charged with. As I indicated above, the noise sections specific to the communities listed seems inconsistent at best.

 

[TechPyle]

823 covers a lot including no bonfires within 10 rods (about 165 feet) of any building.

 

[Alicia Leonard]

I got an email from a group in the event industry last night. Sounds like they are getting a crowd together for the BCC meeting.

 

[Groovegirls]

UGH!!! Here we go again!

 

[Matt J]

This ordinance seems a little vague and broad reaching for my tastes. It covers litter too. I notice that nowhere, unless I missed it, in the ordinance does it mention that responding law enforcement should have and be required to have a properly working decibel meter.

 

[scooterbug44]

I thought that too - would most of our antics qualify us for arrest based on #1's vagueness?

 

[Just Curious]

This ordinance seems a little vague and broad reaching for my tastes. It covers litter too. I notice that nowhere, unless I missed it, in the ordinance does it mention that responding law enforcement should have and be required to have a properly working decibel meter.

No decibel meter. If you check the "plainly audible" definition in chapter 5 or whatever it says, it is defined as "using normal hearing faculties"