The College Park City Council delayed action on a controversial change to its noise ordinance policies last night after several council members admitted they had misunderstood the issue and needed to re-evaluate it.
District 3 Councilwoman Stephanie Stullich had suggested that College Park amend its city code to charge a double fine to anyone who violates the city’s noise ordinances twice in a year, instead of within a six-month period.
Stullich argued the move would crack down on rowdy parties, but other council members said extending this period would open up the possibility for them to receive heftier fines based on the transgressions of previous tenants.
Under the current policy, any student – a term council members used interchangeably with “resident” at last night’s public hearing – found to be creating too much noise by city code enforcers faces a $500 fine. If the student doesn’t own his or her house, the landlord receives a warning.
A second violation within six months of the first would result in a $1,000 fine for the tenant and a $500 fine for the landlord. Any further violations within six months would lead to a $1,000 fine for both. Stullich’s proposal would extend that period to twelve months.
City Public Services Director Bob Ryan also pointed out that noise fines may not only apply to residents at their homes, but can also be levied if they’re caught exceeding noise limits anywhere. These fines, too, carry the double penalty for repeat offenders.
Landlord’s Committee Chairman David Dorsch said that fining landlords for their tenants’ transgressions unfairly puts them in the role of “baby-sitter.”
“These are adults out there living in these houses,” Dorsch said. “Do you send a notice out to a mortgage holder because the homeowner has noise ordinance?”
Student Government Association President Andrew Friedson had a separate concern: Landlords who are fined would send the bill to their tenants rather than paying it themselves.
The city’s plan would prevent a new tenants from being charged twice as much because of a past problem with the property, but the same rule would not apply for landlords. This caused Friedson to believe landlords would still pass on the costs.
“To me, that is fundamentally unfair and it is fundamentally bad public policy,” Friedson said. “And by staff’s own admission, there has been no research whatsoever into what this will charge.”
District 2 Councilman Bob Catlin said Friedson had taken an unusual step when he lobbied individual council members in the week leading up to the meeting. He was talking with Stullich and Mayor Stephen Brayman outside the city hall just before the hearing on the noise ordinance began.
For her part, Stullich said she received complaints about noise from permanent residents and students alike, and the current six-month system of determining fine amounts encourages students to schedule their parties just outside the existing window to beat the system rather than to just keep quiet.
“I know some students think it’s a rite of passage to have rowdy parties,” Stullich said, though she added that she was quiet as a student. “But I think that everyone needs to abide by the law.”
After a lengthy public hearing, the council decided to put off making any decisions until after the university’s spring break. It will be accepting written statements through next Tuesday evening.
holtdbk@gmail.com
