Bad Policy Or Do I Just Need to Cut Loose?

Before addressing the issue at hand; the recently passed noise ordinance, I will disclose some of my life experiences to establish that I am not just a curmudgeon trying to ruin everyone's fun. While we have all "heard" the anecdotal stories related to having a bit too much to drink I will admit that I lived through a lot of them as an undergraduate at Mary Washington College. And while I did not worship at the altar to Led Zeppelin, much to my 17 year old son's disgust, I was known to crank up Bad Company, Pink Floyd, and of course the classic party song "Back in the Saddle" by Aerosmith.
I was for a time content to maintain my arrested state of development until meeting a lovely young lady, to whom I have now been married for the past 30 years, who gave me a swift kick in the (expletive deleted) back onto the road of life. Today I still enjoy cranking up the music of my youth (hearing loss) along with having a Guinness or two with friends. So I have been there and done that--though some of it is still a bit hazy. With my party credentials established we can now go back to the Noise Ordinance.

The city's Noise Ordinance had to be revised (http://fredericksburgva.gov/agenda/2010/0112/10a.pdf) based on recent court decisions. What should have been just another exercise in over complicating a relatively simple issue ( a discussion for another day) was turned up a notch when the Council wanted additional information on whether other localities made special allowances for their downtown commercial districts. Specifically, what were the hours of enforcement. Staff checked (5) localities, Fairfax, Virginia Beach, Alexandria, Williamsburg, and Charlottesville. All five mirrored our ordinance--"... specifying the time of 11:00p.m. as the hour at which common noise disturbances must end..."

In presenting the ordinance staff, based on previous comments from Council, provided an option to push forward the time to 1:00a.m. on Friday and Saturday nights in the downtown commercial district. No recommendations regarding the options were made by staff or requested by Council. The motion, with this change to 1 a.m., passed 6 to 1 with yours truly dissenting. No public statements were made by the majority providing a rationale for changing the time. My reason for not supporting the motion was nothing was presented to support the need for a change that could negatively impact downtown residents.

So why did we make the change? No one or group from the downtown business community requested it. As far as I'm aware no effort was made to discuss this with the downtown business community to determine their views or those of downtown residents. No other localities were identified that have adopted such a change. And no reasons were presented, in public, to support it? The reasons provided after the meeting centered on revenue.
It was suggested that to limit noise downtown before 1 a.m. on Friday and Saturday nights (actually a misnomer with the times actually being 1 a.m. on Saturday and Sunday mornings) could negatively impact revenue and by extending the hours (noise) more revenue could be generated. So the assumption was that more or less noise downtown had a direct correlation with revenue raised by the purchase of alcohol. I say alcohol because not a lot of food in purchased between 11p.m. and 1a.m. Nothing was presented to support that assumption. My guess is no such effort to establish such a correlation has been attempted.
It was also suggested that there are those who will leave an establishment if the band has to stop playing at 11p.m. There is nothing to support that music will have to stop at 11p.m. just because of the noise ordinance. And again nothing was presented to support the supposition that a when a band stops playing sales drop. Finally, having observed the clientele leaving the bars downtown at closing time first hand with our police department I would have to say I heard and saw a lot that would earn at least an R-rating but I don't remember any comments about the bands.
Finally it was put forward that by not extending the time to 1 a.m. could possibly result in people going elsewhere like to the neighboring counties. Yet I didn't hear any questions during the discussions on the ordinance on how the counties handle noise. I couldn't tell you what hours, if any, the counties set in their noise ordinance and I will go out on a limb and say that none of my colleagues do either. So how do you take such a position when you have nothing to support it?
And what about the impact of this change on downtown residents? Well, I was told, you have to expect some inconveniences when you live in a downtown setting--I agree. I agree that living downtown presents parking problems and the level of activity is such that residents do have to deal with more commotion that do residents in neighborhoods. Does that mean we are justified in adding to those inconveniences? Not unless there is some positive results that are derived that could justify the added inconvenience. In the case of extending the hours of the noise ordinance nothing was presented, nor questions asked, or information requested, that could support such a result.
The issue here is not whether the noise ordinance sets quiet time at 11p.m. or 1a.m. Frankly, I see nothing that supports the position that it will have any effect on revenue generation; but it may keep downtown residents up a little later on Friday and Saturday nights, and Sunday morning. What is at issue here is that a decision was made without any supporting documentation, or questions asked, to determine the impact of the change. An unsupported assumption was made and a vote taken without any comment from those who supported the change on why it was being done. Is this the way to deal with any issue that come before Council?
So was this a bad policy decision or should I break out the Mad Dog and 151, crank-up the 8-track player, and cut loose!