PDA

View Full Version : Recreational noise ordinance, Mat Valley, Ak



skukum12
01-29-2008, 06:12 PM
This is obviously last minute information, apologies.

There is a public hearing this afternoon (1/29/08) about limiting ambient noise levels in the Mat Valley. Some jokers are trying to put a stop to r/c model users because of the 'incredible' amount of noise they produce.

Naturally, folks need to nip this one in the bud. Because as we all know, if 'they' get their way, then it will be fourwheelers, snowmachines, boats and ultimately airplanes that will be targeted.

Whoever is pushing this wants a 5 decibel limit on the elevation of ambient noise levels.

The address is 615 S. Valley Way, Palmer, 4 pm. I believe that is the old train depot.

Thanks, Joe

skukum12
01-30-2008, 04:46 AM
Here's a brief summary of a dismal display by the Mat Su Borough assembly.

The mayor vetoed the noise ordinance because he thought the public process was lacking. He said that insufficient public notice was given.

So, there were approximately 45-50 people attending the meeting. By a 'stand up count' of folks, only TWO favored the noise ordinance. Of these about fifteen testified in favor of the veto or for designating several r/c model areas in the valley.

The r/c supporters offered solutions, ideas and were courteous and cordial to the mayor and the assembly. Even to the point of bringing decibel meters to make points about noise measurements.

Only one person spoke in support of the noise ordinance. She used the typical 'he who shouts loudest' technique. She squawked and made noises like a kid on a playground. She spent most of her time addressing (translated mocking or taunting) the attendees, not the mayor or assembly members.

However, in the end, this one person swayed the assembly to over-ride the mayor's veto. SOOO, right now it is ILLEGAL to use r/c models(gas powered) in the Mat Valley due to noise restrictions. By logical extension, recreational use of snowmobiles, planes and boats can be included.

This was an absolutely sickening display of power wielded by those who think they are so important to humanity that society may collapse without their over-lording.

Steve Pierce
01-30-2008, 07:48 AM
skukum12, Very well written and informative post. Any way of overturning the decision other than at voting in new board members. Keep fighting the good fight. :up

Jerry Gaston
01-30-2008, 08:41 AM
Well there goes the neighborhood. Sounds like the California people are starting to move in.
Keep up the fight!

oldbaldguy
01-30-2008, 10:53 AM
Whatever happened in this country to the will of the people, the greater good, and the majority rules? How is it that those who make the most racket about an issue always win? I'll bet the gal in question is one of those "I just moved here but I don't want anybody else to" types who has a little yappy dog and hates everything. Looks like your only recourse will be to get either a rope or a lawyer.

180Marty
01-30-2008, 11:27 AM
Too bad that lady can't use my solution---earplugs. I have studded tires on my bicycle and still ride out to the airport on the bike trail even though it is ice covered. The snowmobiles are running in the field right next and a couple of guys have some kind of tuned exhaust that sounds like a bumble bee at a 1000 db(really loud) and then the trucks are always using the Jake brake too. Well, I know I can't squawk too much 'cause when I get to the airport and take off with that 88 inch seaplane prop turnin' 2600 rpm, I guess it is similar to that bumble bee. :D Well, it's up to 5 below zero so better start peddling. :crazyeyes:

gbflyer
01-30-2008, 12:36 PM
Skukum12, was that a noise ordinance that the Mat/Su Borough already has in place that the assembly decided to act upon, or did they enact a new ordinance?

If it is a new ordinance, then I would check with the clerk and make sure their procedures for public process was followed to the letter. If it wasn't, then the ordinance is worthless.

I've seen how these small town political things work. There are about 400 of us that live in our little town. That same person "who shouts the loudest" and has lots of time to write letters lives here too. Actually there are about 30 of them, and we conservative types call them the CAVE people - Citizens Against Virtually Everything.

It is disheartening at times, but you must stay involved if the matter is truly serious to you.

gb

bearsnack
01-30-2008, 01:11 PM
Unfortunately we are shorthanded on real politicians here in the Mat -Su borough, these occurrences are one of the results of this catastrophe

YELLOWMAULE
01-30-2008, 01:57 PM
This ordinance was predetermined in terms of it's approval. I had contacted several of our Borough officials to voice my displeasure regarding this piece of socialism. The fact that the displeasure or perception of the minority has been foisted on the majority is one more brick on the load. So to speak anyway. The explanation from the several I contacted last week seemed almost rehearsed (!?) "We have to have some law to deal with those that refuse to compromise and be responsible for their actions" paraphrasing here, but that was the gist of it. I was unable to make last nights meeting but it's no surprise that it went the way it did. Thanks Skukum for the follow up. Feel free to contact me if you want another voice. One of my neighbor's chairs a group that it sounds like you might fit in real well with. I'll have to send you their email address.
Once the erosion starts, it escalates and is indiscriminate.

cubflier
01-30-2008, 02:03 PM
This is just one step toward closing the numerous small back yard airports that are in this Valley.

We pilots need to watch out because we now live in a place where complainers rule.

Jerry

gbflyer
01-30-2008, 03:26 PM
I have requested a copy of this - Ordinance No. 08-005, MSB 8.52, Amplified SOund and Vibration - from your clerk. It would also be interesting to see the minutes from the meetings when the subject was discussed.

As an aside, I would personally contact the mayor and see just what the hell happened if I lived there.

gb

skukum12
01-30-2008, 03:54 PM
Thanks for the support everybody.

Yellowmaule, you were told that the people 'refused to compromise?' That's a direct lie. The r/c club reps offered sane and rational answers to this 'problem' which did include some compromises. You are correct, this is a rights erosion problem.

This biggest problems here were the lack of public notice and input. Also the db limits set are abnormally low.

Gbflyer, this action was an amendment to the ordinance already in place.

To quote the mayor's memorandum, "On January 15th the Assembly passed Ordinance No. 08-005 (AM) amending MSB 8.52, Amplified Sound and Vibration."

skukum12
01-30-2008, 09:01 PM
Reprinted from an email to me:

Hi Friends,
The RC airplane model community is the very most likely group of people where future pilots and EAA members come from, and we all suffered a major setback yesterday evening!
The "Friends of the Mat-Su" lobby group controls the MAT-controls Borough assembly, there are at least 5 of them in there, with 7 total members. The WHOLE MEETING was run by Michelle Church, and despite 80 pro flying people present and speaking up, and just one woman complaining about noise,- they just outlawed it all anyway. They are targeting RECREATIONAL NOISE, so we all know that big/real/man-carrying aircraft and fields and owners are the next target !!!
I have information that 6 of the 7 members are "Friends of the Mat-Su", some claim to be former "Friends of the Mat-Su" only, so they are more credible. It was pathetic, only the one guy voted against it. This lobby group is very clever how it has control of things, and they will next target more of what-we-all-like . They have already hindered Float plane ops in the Mat-Float plane as much as they can and sued people left and right. Michelle Church is running the whole show, as soon as she said what she wants the others trailed behind...
Their "Noise abatement Ordnance" has it that TV sets or music can be 32times as noisy as any Radio Controlled Powered Device, thus outlawing RC boats, cars, planes, you name it. They crafted it that RC stuff is illegal as soon as it raises the ambient noise level more than 5 db, and the common instrument for db has a 2 db accuracy !!!
I am very strongly believing that we need to try to help the RC airplane modelers and support their cause. We ourselves will be the next target of the "Friends of the Mat-Su" lobby group...
The real motivation behind all this seems to be a real estate deal out there...
Please lets think about what could be done...
Best regards,
Lars

There is an organizational meeting planned for next week. If you are interested in attending, please pm me your name and contact number. We need to filter out the "sneaky."

Joe

oldbaldguy
01-31-2008, 07:29 AM
You all need to hunker and put a stop to this Lower 48 hippie BS now and forever. I have it on good authority that there were airplanes in Alaska before there were people.

Steve Pierce
01-31-2008, 07:34 AM
I would guess that someone involved has lots of money.

SteveE
01-31-2008, 07:47 AM
I would guess that someone involved has lots of money.

Steve is probably correct. I had full FAA approval along with the local airports Letter of Agreement for a private strip in my back yard. Full city council meeting and the whole yards, voted down because money talks in this town. I was opposed by people I wont even fly over, even though they are under the flight path of one of the busiest airports in the US. RVS. So I told them 2 weeks later what I thought, made them all mad, and I am moving in a couple of years. But money talks and I learned a HUGE lesson about friendships, people and MONEY.

oldbaldguy
01-31-2008, 08:05 AM
Maybe the Alaskan state legislature should enact a law that says newcomers who move to the state can have no say in how things are done until they have lived there full-time for 10 years.

willyb
01-31-2008, 08:29 AM
Skukum
Seems pretty odd that a hearing was held and an ordinance voted on at the same time.
Sounds pre-determiined to me.
I would first research and find out if this was legal to do according to local law.If the correct process was not followed then the ordinance is meaningless.
If in fact they abided by the rules then I would determine the correct procedure to undo the ordinance and have at it.
Like anything else it is usually the one who is willing to put in more effort than the competition that wins.
I have seen all kinds of this around here.

We have a group called Stop The Noise that will get your N number with binoculars then file a civil suit against you in court for excessive noise.Even if it gets thrown out you still have to go through the process of defending yourself.

Of course you could if all else fails due what my sister use to do.Do you have any idea how many magazine subscriptions you can sign someone up for! :D
Bill

mvivion
01-31-2008, 10:19 AM
willyb is absolutely correct. Get involved in your local politics if you want to beat these folks. You have to work the system. They can work the system to their advantage, but you can work it to your advantage as well, if you take the time and devote the energy to the process.

I believe Doug Millard did just this on a seaplane issue in that part of the world a while back.

I had a friend in Corvallis, OR that had a land use ordinance issue he didn't like. He took some classes at OSU in community planning, etc, got smart on the process, then got himself elected to the P and Z commission, got the ordinance changed, and quit the commission.

It took him two years plus, but he got it done, and it was the right thing to do.

This stuff can take time and a lot of energy, but I think you can beat em at their own game if you work hard at it.

Good luck.

MTV

OLDCROWE
01-31-2008, 11:58 AM
A 5 db raise is NUTS, I would attack it from that point. Did they set how and where to measure and all the enforcement that goes with it?

Surely the RC Modeler's have an active association that can help.

Did they define "recreational" If you want to get to them get a meter and camp out around the board members and lobby group members and watch and listen.

If I read it right the vote was split and under Roberts rules a member on the prevailing side can bring forth a motion to reconsider but you need a second to get back to a vote. Start working the members individually NOW as you only have one or two meetings for a MTR to be allowed.

If everyone in the user group pitched in 100 bucks I bet you could get a favorable ruling at the court house...the old life liberty and the pursuit of happiness approach. Heck file on the the leader of this little group too!

If nothing else find out the procedure for getting on the agenda at each and every meeting and have someone in the user group there at EVERY meeting and wear them out, run favorable people for office in the future JUST DON'T GIVE UP as from the appearance of this there should be things that can be done.

skukum12
01-31-2008, 03:35 PM
Willyb,

The mayor had vetoed the ordinance, and the meeting I attended was for public input, which resulted in the assembly overriding the veto.

You have an excellent point, I should explore whether the ORIGINAL meeting resulted in a vote the same day.

Pre-determined is definitely the word of the day in this situation.

Oldcrowe, the arbitrary 5 db limit is one of the major points. If you can believe this, the limit is 3 db at other times during the day and week! The rc clubs are all over this ordinance, they look to be leading the charge and hopefully the snowmobile guys will fall in line.

Mvivion, it is time to get into the local sniveling, putrid political scene. I'm sick and tired of these do-gooders having their way. In my experience, do-gooders end up only doing good for themselves.

All the input I've received from you guys is incredibly helpful, and will be put to good use, THANK YOU. Keep it coming and ANY points or ideas will be considered.

Joe

gbflyer
01-31-2008, 05:31 PM
Joe, your clerk sent me the unsigned ordinance this morning. Anyone who wishes to read it PM me and I'll email the PDF. Probably some stuff in there to use to your advantage if you have a mind for legal documents.

gb

oldbaldguy
01-31-2008, 09:03 PM
The only thing worse than a dictator is a liberal with an agenda. Civil rights and civil liberties mean nothing to them.

Skukum12, roll in the media. Try to find someone in the local print and/or electronic media who is sympathetic to your cause. Get them interested in YOUR story, not the tree-huggers' becuase you all are the wronged party here. If you can demonstrate that THEY tromped on YOUR toes and were helped by members of the council to deny you legal rights and process, you're home free. Hell, Bill and Hillary did this all the time and look where it got them.

mvivion
01-31-2008, 09:10 PM
I'd be REAL careful with bringing the media in on this sort of thing. All it will take is for your favorite media contact to get smoozed by the wrong party involved just a bit, or for them to talk (on camera) to some absolutely darling 7 year old who was frightened by some airplane flying low over his/her house.......

Besides, media hype is just that--hype. Beat them at their own game, and you will have a much more predictable outcome.

MTV

Christina Young
01-31-2008, 09:16 PM
Who keeps voting in these idiots? This is the kind of thing that you would expect in the nanny state of New Jersey, NOT Alaska....

skukum12
01-31-2008, 10:17 PM
Who keeps voting these people in?

Statistically, around Anchorage anyway, the average resident has been here less than THREE years!

My gut feeling is that folks move here from outside to get away from the #### where they used to live. But they just end up bringing the ideas that allowed their old home to go to heck.

IF THESE PEOPLE WANT TO MOVE HERE FOR PEACE AND QUIET, DON'T ######## PLANT YOURSELF IN ANCHORAGE/WASILLA/PALMER/FAIRBANKS/KENAI......AND MESS THINGS UP FOR THE REST OF US!!!!!!

If peace and quiet is what the greenhorn is after, may I suggest Attu Island!!!

Moderator, I sincerely thank you for allowing us to use this forum. If this post qualifies it for RnR, please strike this post and allow it to remain public. Thank you, Joe

Crash
01-31-2008, 10:30 PM
I think a lot of this is aimed at the idiots who put loud "pipes" and "exhaust cans" on their snowmobiles because they think they sound cool. In doing so they piss off none snowmobilers and close down riding areas.

The valley is the snowmobile capitol of the state. Every weekend an army of 20 year olds pour out of Anchorage headed for the valley (with their loud machines) to "rip it up".

This is not aimed at planes as far as I can see.

I was one of those snowmobile idiots in the 60's and 70's that got the Anchorage area shut down to snowmobiles.

I preach to these young knuckle heads but to no avail. They still go out and spend $500.00 plus on a pipe just to make noise.

They won't be happy until there's no place to ride.

Crash

Jerry Gaston
02-01-2008, 09:40 AM
Crash I think your on to something there. I just bought a new ski boat with an inboard. The salesman said that for an extra $500 I could get an option that would allow the exhaust to vent above the water line. I ask what for? and he said that it would sound mean and everyone on shore would notice me. I couldn't believe it.

No I didn't bite.

willyb
02-01-2008, 09:42 AM
Crash
I wholeheartedly agree with what you just said and have had the same discussions.Not to wander off the thread but I have been trying to convince aviation that if we don't quiet our aircraft down there will be more of this as has happened in Europe and elsewhere.The response that I usually hear is oh that's prop noise.Put a foot long muffler on a 350 Chevy and see what it sounds like.Then imagine it a thousand feet over your head.
I am a motorhead and like what a nice running engine sounds like with a nice tuned exhaust (That does not include every Harley with straight pipes).
I would love to rip my neighbors weedwacker out of his hands.I think he mows his whole lawn with it.
I guess my point is Noise is an issue for all of us.
As aviators we need to be proactive in policing our own area and not giving people cause to do it for us because they will do it.
OK off the soapbox.
Bill

behindpropellers
02-01-2008, 10:01 AM
Crash I think your on to something there. I just bought a new ski boat with an inboard. The salesman said that for an extra $500 I could get an option that would allow the exhaust to vent above the water line. I ask what for? and he said that it would sound mean and everyone on shore would notice me. I couldn't believe it.

No I didn't bite.

Must not be a real ski boat because they are governed by AWSA on the amount of sound they can produce. Already fighting this battle.



http://www.usawaterski.org/pages/divisions/3event/AWSATowboatTestingManual.pdf



11. SOUND LEVEL TESTING
For the purpose of knowing that boats passing USA Water Ski's tests are not in violation
of generally accepted maximum noise level standards, the noise produced by boats
during typical tournament situations will be measured. Specifically, measurements will
taken from shore with a sound level meter during slalom deviation passes. Neither
average sound level for 36 mph passes nor the average sound level for 34 mph passes
may exceed 75 dB(A). Failure to meet this standard constitutes a disqualification for
boat. Standards for set-up, equipment and procedures may found on the test form.
Tim

Jerry Gaston
02-01-2008, 10:30 AM
Tim I don't attend "typical tournaments" :D

behindpropellers
02-01-2008, 10:36 AM
Tim I don't attend "typical tournaments" :D

What did you get then Jerry?

Jerry Gaston
02-01-2008, 11:16 AM
A very quiet 22' Crownline with a 351 Ford EFI

Christina Young
02-01-2008, 02:54 PM
Their "Noise abatement Ordnance" has it that TV sets or music can be 32times as noisy as any Radio Controlled Powered Device, thus outlawing RC boats, cars, planes, you name it. They crafted it that RC stuff is illegal as soon as it raises the ambient noise level more than 5 db, and the common instrument for db has a 2 db accuracy !!!


BTW - does this new noise ordinance just single out RC models by name, or is it for general recreational noise? What about shooting, is that included (and therefore banned)?

YELLOWMAULE
02-01-2008, 04:01 PM
http://community.adn.com/adn/adn_pubstory_301030#comment-139093

jay cross
02-01-2008, 04:06 PM
If you want to know about this ordnance read the Anchorage Daily News or the Frontiersman on line. They both had articles about it today. I think that snow machines and jet skis are more annoying than model airplanes. As I read it it is only to effect model airplanes.

skukum12
02-01-2008, 08:06 PM
Model airplanes today, passenger carrying planes tomorrow.....

moneyburner
02-02-2008, 02:10 AM
I dunno - I think we're all TYPING real loud, maybe 5 or 6 dB. We better shut up or we're all going to be in BIG TROUBLE!

:)

I live in town because I work here - I don't like it much at all - having lived for 24 years down on the Kenai Peninsula, I find it a constant annoyance and there are insulting noises EVERYWHERE. I sure would like some enforcement on the city ordinance governing loud vehicles; or at least the HOBSMF next door with the Japanese car equipped with a Fart Cannon. He's too lazy to plug it in, so he has his auto-start programmed to start it EVERY HOUR all night long so it will go in the morning. 15' from my window. (I'm thinking of filling the muffler with insulating foam to help him keep it warm). Or how about the 300 hp mobile thump music that rattles my windows from a car a block away at 4:00 AM? They obviously don't have to get up early to be anywhere.

But R/C airplanes? These people have some serious problems that modern pharmaceuticals, shock therapy and lobotomies might be perfect for. Are they just picking some group that is easy to pick on? The Los Anchorage police (whom I respect immensely) don't have time to enforce the "noisy obnoxious car" ordinances, and I understand that, but these folks that are pushing this thing in the valley are just NIMBYs without a clue or a backbone. The IDEA of peace and quiet appeals to me sometimes, but so does the sound of a big block Chevy trying to eat a clutch.

8)

The answer might be that people with noisy things need to practice some restraint, and people with twitchy ears, need to practice some patience, realize that they don't OWN the world and . . . shut up.

Don't want to add to the ambient NOISE, now, do we?

:wink:

aktango58
02-02-2008, 10:17 AM
Why not get someone to use a meter by these assembly people's house and meter their noise. Snowblower, car, dog yapping.

Video it and take it to the constable for a citizens ticket.....

aalexander
02-05-2008, 03:57 PM
Plenty of food for thought here, for everyone.

To me the ordinance doesnít sound reasonable, and I agree that the process sounds like it is/was badly flawed. That said, let me play devilís advocate for a bit.

As a general principle as people get packed closer and closer together there needs to be more laws to make it work. As a result, individual liberties, necessarily become more limited. Thatís just reality. If everyone had a quarter section to themselves, everyone could do pretty much as they please. You can fly RC airplanes, shoot high powered rifles, run your snowmachine, whatever, and itís nobodyís business but your own. If everyone is on 1/6th acre lots, things are necessarily different. What you do on your 1/6th acre lot has a tremendous spillover onto your neighbor 10 feet away. As people get packed closer and closer together, basic concepts of human decency require that people exercise their "rights" with consideration of how they are affecting those around then. Unfortunately itís pretty common for folks to lack that minimal measure of basic decency, so as a result, we wind up with laws that dictate restraints on behavior.


Iím not an RC flyer, but as far as Iím concerned, thereís nothing inherently wrong with it. Seems like good wholesome fun to me. I might get into it if I tried it. I just donít need another hobby. However, whatever your views on it are, only the most clueless could fail to recognize that a gas powered R/C model makes a nasty, unpleasant noise. Yeah, it doesnít seem so to those engaged in it, because itís got a pleasant association. Thing is, it isnít just about you, itís also about those around you, and a lot of people arenít willing or able to take that extra step and consider those around them.

I donít know the woman who is pushing this ordinance. She sounds like an angry, irrational person. So whatís her beef? Is she just attacking people who are having fun because sheís a bitter, controlling harridan, or is she in reality a reasonably rational person who has reached the end of her rope because she lives in a subdivision which borders on a small open space and 2-3 nights a week in the summertime thereís some jackass* or another flying his noisy R/C plane around and around and around in a circle at 11 oíclock in the evening, without the slightest regard for the 20 or so homes whose occupants have to listen to the noise? I donít know. Likely the truth falls someplace in-between those extremes, but Iíd bet long odds that somewhere thereís been some inconsiderate R/C fliers who have contributed to this situation. The whole thing is just a little too specific to have been dreamed up without some basis in reality. My neighborhood doesnít lend itself particularly well to R/C planes, but I have certainly had R/C cars screaming up and down the street at some very unreasonable hours. Itís not particularly pleasant. Nor is listening to the neighborís kids screaming round and round their house on a snow machine, in the late evening. Thereís a time and a place for everything, and in a very urban subdivision, where the houses are in some cases 10í apart, is not the place for snowmachine riding, probably any time, but certainly not at 9 PM.

Now, Iíll repeat that my intent here is not to support this ordinance, nor the people behind it, but to provoke some thinking on a deeper level. No doubt there will be some who arenít capable of grasping that. So be it. There are a couple of posts which stand out, and Iíd like to mention them, not to attack the posters or put them on the defensive.





Whatever happened in this country to the will of the people, the greater good, and the majority rules?


The fact that the displeasure or perception of the minority has been foisted on the majority is one more brick on the load.

My question to this is how do we know that this is the will of a minority? Certainly, it sounds like the majority of the folks at the hearing were against the ordinance, but we all know that itís entirely possible for an excited minority to get a whole bunch of people to a meeting. I donít get the impression that the majority of the general population, in Wasilla or anywhere else are R/C aircraft enthusiasts. I think that if there were some way of accurately measuring it, weíd find that the percentage of the population which actually flies R/C models is quite small in proportion to the percentage who do not. I realize this isnít the same as having the majority support the ordinance, but weíd have to have a lot better data before we can say with any confidence what the majority wants in this case. Besides, weíd better be careful of how much weight we give to "the will of the majority" last I checked, "people who fly airplanes for fun" are a very small minority in this country. Thatís one of the main reasons we have a representative republic rather than a pure democracy, to avoid the tyranny of the majority: Itís entirely possible for a majority to impose something on a minority which is neither right nor fair. If in a popular vote, the Mat-Su valley voted to prohibit the use of RC models, anywhere at any time, would that be OK because that was the will of the majority, as measured by a popular vote?




The explanation from the several I contacted last week seemed almost rehearsed (!?) "We have to have some law to deal with those that refuse to compromise and be responsible for their actions"

Thatís precisely the problem. If we were all decent, reasonable people who considered the others around us, we wouldnít have things like this. Unfortunately, we arenít. Thereís plenty of people who take the stance "My freedoms to do whatever I want, whenever I want are unlimited, and F##k everyone else that doesnít like what I do." As a result, we get, angry irrational enemies and bad noise ordinances.

These people exist. They arenít a figment of my or someone elseís imagination. Take a look at Jerry Gastonís post:



Crash I think your on to something there. I just bought a new ski boat with an inboard. The salesman said that for an extra $500 I could get an option that would allow the exhaust to vent above the water line. I ask what for? and he said that it would sound mean and everyone on shore would notice me. I couldn't believe it.
No I didn't bite.

Not only are there folks who just do not care that they are imposing an annoying noise on others, they go to additional effort and expense to impose MORE noise on uninvolved bystanders for the sole purpose of massaging their own egos. Personally I would support 100 percent without reservation a law that would prohibit some jackass from intentionally subjecting shoreline dwellers to addition noise from his skiboat. The trouble is that such laws also tend to punish guys like Jerry who just want to go water skiing, in part because such laws tend to be an overreaction to a small subset of antisocial assholes.

I think part of the problem is that many arenít willing or able to recognize that although we may enjoy, or at least not mind a particular noise, many others just find it unpleasant. Thereís a good example of this in Moneyburnerís post, where he finds a Japanese car with a fart cannon objectionable, but likes the "sound of a big block Chevy trying to eat a clutch". On a personal level, I tend to agree with this view, but from a broader perspective, a lot of other people would consider both to be "cars which have been modified to make a lot more noise for no reason other than the entertainment of the owner". When the only real distinction you can make between the two is that one sound is higher pitched than the other, there really is no meaningful difference to someone who doesnít have an attachment to one or the other.


To borrow again from Moneyburner:


The answer might be that people with noisy things need to practice some restraint, and people with twitchy ears, need to practice some patience,

Thereís a great deal of truth there, but it cuts both ways: If people with noisy things *arenít* practicing restraint, then people with twitchy ears *arenít* going to practice patience.


*Thatís not to say that R/C fliers are all jackasses, but someone who pursues their interest in R/C models, close to othersí homes late in the evening with no consideration for the noise, may legitimately be classified a jackass, or at the very least, clueless and inconsiderate.

Christina Young
02-06-2008, 02:23 AM
Well even with close neighbors in some areas, it seems extremely absurd that a governmental body responsible for governing such a huge and diverse area would have the authority to pass such a broad, wide-ranging ordinance, "one size fits all". What about home rule? Why isn't this done at a more local level, such as in Palmer or Wasilla, if it is a concern to those residents? I can see population density concerns for certain things, or inconsiderate behavior towards your neighbors at certain hours. But from my understanding of the way the new ordinance is now it seems just vindictive, and not designed to solve any specific problems, just punish people across the board for doing an activity a few may not like. If they really wanted to solve a specific problem, they could have limited the scope of the ordinance to certain hours of the day, or a minimum population density, etc.

Mat-Su borough goes how far? All the way out to Sheep Mountain or something like that? Does this new rule also ban someone with a remote cabin who's bothering no one from flying his model airplane?

Longwinglover
02-06-2008, 11:04 AM
aalexander,

That was a reasoned and well considered post, in my opinion. My opinion is that you have spoken with a voice of reason.

As one that lives on the east coast of the US, I have no personal knowledge of the situation other than what has been described in this thread. As such, I have no place for an opinion until I have complete personal understanding of the issues.

John Scott

aalexander
02-06-2008, 01:22 PM
Well even with close neighbors in some areas, it seems extremely absurd that a governmental body responsible for governing such a huge and diverse area would have the authority to pass such a broad, wide-ranging ordinance, "one size fits all". What about home rule? Why isn't this done at a more local level, such as in Palmer or Wasilla, if it is a concern to those residents? I can see population density concerns for certain things, or inconsiderate behavior towards your neighbors at certain hours. But from my understanding of the way the new ordinance is now it seems just vindictive, and not designed to solve any specific problems, just punish people across the board for doing an activity a few may not like. If they really wanted to solve a specific problem, they could have limited the scope of the ordinance to certain hours of the day, or a minimum population density, etc.

Mat-Su borough goes how far? All the way out to Sheep Mountain or something like that? Does this new rule also ban someone with a remote cabin who's bothering no one from flying his model airplane?

Christina,

I certainly don't disagree. Don't get me wrong. I'm certainly not advocating the ordinance or the manner in which it was passed. I think a lot of things are rotten about it. ANd you're right it does seem punitive and vindictive, which isn't right. I guess my point, if it could be summed up in a few words, is that punitive and vindictive laws don't come from nowhere.

Christina Young
02-06-2008, 01:41 PM
As one that lives on the east coast of the US, I have no personal knowledge of the situation other than what has been described in this thread. As such, I have no place for an opinion until I have complete personal understanding of the issues.


So John what you are saying is that no one here has the right to comment unless they have personal knowledge of the situation... i.e. attended the Mat-Su assembly meeting themselves? How many here would meet that criteria -- one person???

Others have provided references and links for you in this thread to find out more, by the way.

Longwinglover
02-06-2008, 04:27 PM
As one that lives on the east coast of the US, I have no personal knowledge of the situation other than what has been described in this thread. As such, I have no place for an opinion until I have complete personal understanding of the issues.


So John what you are saying is that no one here has the right to comment unless they have personal knowledge of the situation... i.e. attended the Mat-Su assembly meeting themselves? How many here would meet that criteria -- one person???

Others have provided references and links for you in this thread to find out more, by the way.


LOL !! Christina, please put on your reading glasses and re-read what you quoted from me. I never referenced anyone but myself. :wink:

John Scott

skukum12
02-07-2008, 12:34 AM
While I cannot divulge the ideas put forth by the r/c club members, I will, with 1000% confidence say that the members are willing and able to work with the powers that be on this ordinance.

The discussion was involved, rational, and intelligent.

The underlying stink here is HOW this law came into being, and how RESTRICTIVE the limits are.

For discussion's sake, let's change r/c to GUN. Now, if the gov'ment told us all tomorrow that guns of any form are no longer allowable, and use of such would result in fines or worse, wouldn't that raise a hackle or two? Even though something like 99% of guns will never be used illegally, because the actions of a few, we must all suffer. Most of the r/c folks were acting within their rights, while I'm sure some had a disregard for the folks around them. You see, the flyers were enjoying a wholesome family type activity one day, and BAM, the next day became criminals. Just like the family out at the turkey shoot on Tuesday and then Wednesday finding out they are now outlaws.

The r/c folks were flying out of a private field that had been rented by the club for some years now.

The complainers are few, but man can they scream. What we are dealing with here is just a smaller version of the vocal minority throwing a fit and getting everything shut down.

Here's a big version of this scenario: The masses scream for term limits, tax relief, an end to abortion, and a stop to gay marriage. But, percentage wise, a very small portion of the population pools their money and resources and SCREAMS and SHRIEKS and THREATENS and the folks that make the laws bend over to them (WHICHEVER DIRECTION IS PREFERRED) and give them exactly what they want.

THIS IS WHERE THE PROBLEM LIES. Most humans, believe it or not, are rational and sane. When a complaint arises, talk to the 'offender.' Don't blindside them with niche laws crafted in secret and shoved through the system in a covert style.

THIS IS WHAT THE "FRIENDS OF MAT SU" DO. I will say it again, if they are allowed to run unchecked on this issue, WE CAN ALL KISS OUR AIR COOLED HORIZONTALLY OPPOSED RECIPROCATING ENGINE USING @#$ GOODBYE!!!

Christina, the ordinance covers 24,000 square miles of the Mat-Su borough.

Just for the record, I do believe in being considerate of your neighbor. I silence my dog, I don't cut through yards at night on my sled, I don't buzz houses with the plane, and I don't blast loud music from my house or car. This situation can be handled rationally if BOTH sides can be grown up. And from what I've personally witnessed, our side has attained adulthood.

Christina Young
02-07-2008, 01:16 PM
Skukum,
Then I see this ordinance affects me too (my family still has some property in Mat-Su)...

So for now, since the ordinance only prohibits model airplanes with noise more than 5 dB over ambient, the workaround is to raise the ambient noise. So when you fly your model airplanes, make sure you turn on your noisy generator, snow machine, ATV, or turn up the stereo real load.

skukum12
02-07-2008, 11:42 PM
No kidding, Christina, now I'll have to read through the ordinance to get their definition of ambient noise level. Does it mean the noise level of the Parks Hwy at rush hour? A Wasilla Warriors football game? Or the db level next to Lake George? Or an average of all three?

Joe

moneyburner
02-08-2008, 12:45 AM
I think part of the problem is that many arenít willing or able to recognize that although we may enjoy, or at least not mind a particular noise, many others just find it unpleasant. Thereís a good example of this in Moneyburnerís post, where he finds a Japanese car with a fart cannon objectionable, but likes the "sound of a big block Chevy trying to eat a clutch". On a personal level, I tend to agree with this view, but from a broader perspective, a lot of other people would consider both to be "cars which have been modified to make a lot more noise for no reason other than the entertainment of the owner". When the only real distinction you can make between the two is that one sound is higher pitched than the other, there really is no meaningful difference to someone who doesnít have an attachment to one or the other.


To borrow again from Moneyburner:


The answer might be that people with noisy things need to practice some restraint, and people with twitchy ears, need to practice some patience,

Thereís a great deal of truth there, but it cuts both ways: If people with noisy things *arenít* practicing restraint, then people with twitchy ears *arenít* going to practice patience.


*Thatís not to say that R/C fliers are all jackasses, but someone who pursues their interest in R/C models, close to othersí homes late in the evening with no consideration for the noise, may legitimately be classified a jackass, or at the very least, clueless and inconsiderate.

Excellent insights, aalexander!

After going back and reviewing my post, I have to admit that my logic was a bit cheesy. I was tired.

Of course, I'm ignorant and opinionated too, but I really was tired.

I would like to clarify my example - I would not consider eating (or even nibbling on) a clutch at three or four in the morning, and if I did, I would do so on some lonely stretch of road or somewhere inoffensive. I was reenforcing a point made by others about adding noise for the sole reason of stroking an ego, rather than personal entertainment. I haven't had a rat since High School anyway. What I mainly object to is a guy who has his noisy car automatically start itself every hour, all night long, without regard to his neighbors simply because he's too lazy to plug it in. This is plainly grounds for surgical vandalism, for the good of the community. I won't, naturally, but I've dreamed of it.

There are times when I really resent having my peace and quiet interrupted, and other times, it makes absolutely no difference to me.

Again, thank you for your excellent, well-considered thoughts. I've taken the liberty of saving that and I'm going to go back and read it from time to time to calm myself when I get mad about some wanker making too much racket.

Even if it's me.

Cheers;
Mike

aalexander
02-09-2008, 08:02 PM
After going back and reviewing my post, I have to admit that my logic was a bit cheesy. I was tired.

Of course, I'm ignorant and opinionated too, but I really was tired.

I would like to clarify my example - I would not consider eating (or even nibbling on) a clutch at three or four in the morning, and if I did, I would do so on some lonely stretch of road or somewhere inoffensive. I was reenforcing a point made by others about adding noise for the sole reason of stroking an ego, rather than personal entertainment. I haven't had a rat since High School anyway.

Yeah, no worries. I knew what you were saying, I just used your post as a handy example of how sometimes noise doesn't seem as bad to us if we like it, or like what's making it. Not meaning to suggest you'd be inconsiderate, I didn't get that from your post.




What I mainly object to is a guy who has his noisy car automatically start itself every hour, all night long, without regard to his neighbors simply because he's too lazy to plug it in. This is plainly grounds for surgical vandalism, for the good of the community. I won't, naturally, but I've dreamed of it.

If you haven't plugged up his exhaust already, you've got more restraint than me. There's no excuse for that.



Again, thank you for your excellent, well-considered thoughts. I've taken the liberty of saving that and I'm going to go back and read it from time to time to calm myself when I get mad about some wanker making too much racket.

Even if it's me.

Cheers;
Mike

Thanks. My only purpose was to stir up a little thinking, not to dispute anyone, and certainly not to defend the ordinance under discussion.