Ch 7, 10pm news last night, covered both bed tax and noise ordinance. More of the noise ordinance.
From experience, I can tell you that simple objections to parts of the proposed ordinances are not enough for the County to reject the ordinance as written. The Commissioners want suggestions for changes, and they are not likely to come up with them on their own.
In my opinion, we wouldn't be having this discussion if we had zoning in Walton County. Many of our bars and restaurants are located in neighborhood plats, which have commercial use, and typically back up to residential properties. If our area had been planned, we would have buffer zoning between commercial and residential property. It will be almost impossible to implement zoning, without disrupting current businesses.
As for Noise Ordinances, they are difficult at best to enforce in a Court of Law, if you have a half-way decent attorney representing you. Regardless of how the noise is quantified, there are problems which cause cases to be tossed out.
The Sheriff said something at last night's meeting, which is spot-on accurate. (and I'm paraphrasing) He said that you are trying to legislate people to be neighborly. He spoke the truth about that.
No musician who spoke seemed against having a noise ordinance. They just want to know how to play by the rules. It would be like not having a posted speed limit, but having law enforcement enforce the speed by an eye gauge. "They look like they are going to fast, so I'll give them a ticket." Most speeding tickets issued use radar guns as their evidence against the speeder. If the officer is not radar certified, the Judge may throw out the case, if the attorney calls them on it. No difference here in my opinion. Give people standards. The Sheriff also noted that if a deputy came on the scene to a noise call, he would give everyone a warning, and would walk out to the distance (50ft) of enforcement, to show that the sound was audible. The only problem with that is that if the amplified musician is the alleged violator, how will they be able to hear themselves if they have to stop playing to walk 50ft from the property?
Regardless of how this ordinance is written, it will likely be deemed unConstitutional by a Court, if called in question. (I'm not a lawyer. I just read a lot.) It may require some jail time and defense funds, but it sure seems legally unenforceable regardless of the method of measurement.
The four speakers in favor of the ordinance (some came with proposed amendments), were all victims of wedding houses being next door -- very legitimate complaints of commercial operations being thrust into a residential neighborhood. None made reference to restaurants and bars having music. I think their issues are bigger issues, which should be handled by existing laws on the books. They don't need noise ordinances to handle their situations.
From experience, I can tell you that simple objections to parts of the proposed ordinances are not enough for the County to reject the ordinance as written. The Commissioners want suggestions for changes, and they are not likely to come up with them on their own.
In my opinion, we wouldn't be having this discussion if we had zoning in Walton County. Many of our bars and restaurants are located in neighborhood plats, which have commercial use, and typically back up to residential properties. If our area had been planned, we would have buffer zoning between commercial and residential property. It will be almost impossible to implement zoning, without disrupting current businesses.
As for Noise Ordinances, they are difficult at best to enforce in a Court of Law, if you have a half-way decent attorney representing you. Regardless of how the noise is quantified, there are problems which cause cases to be tossed out.
The Sheriff said something at last night's meeting, which is spot-on accurate. (and I'm paraphrasing) He said that you are trying to legislate people to be neighborly. He spoke the truth about that.
No musician who spoke seemed against having a noise ordinance. They just want to know how to play by the rules. It would be like not having a posted speed limit, but having law enforcement enforce the speed by an eye gauge. "They look like they are going to fast, so I'll give them a ticket." Most speeding tickets issued use radar guns as their evidence against the speeder. If the officer is not radar certified, the Judge may throw out the case, if the attorney calls them on it. No difference here in my opinion. Give people standards. The Sheriff also noted that if a deputy came on the scene to a noise call, he would give everyone a warning, and would walk out to the distance (50ft) of enforcement, to show that the sound was audible. The only problem with that is that if the amplified musician is the alleged violator, how will they be able to hear themselves if they have to stop playing to walk 50ft from the property?
Regardless of how this ordinance is written, it will likely be deemed unConstitutional by a Court, if called in question. (I'm not a lawyer. I just read a lot.) It may require some jail time and defense funds, but it sure seems legally unenforceable regardless of the method of measurement.
The four speakers in favor of the ordinance (some came with proposed amendments), were all victims of wedding houses being next door -- very legitimate complaints of commercial operations being thrust into a residential neighborhood. None made reference to restaurants and bars having music. I think their issues are bigger issues, which should be handled by existing laws on the books. They don't need noise ordinances to handle their situations.
