Pandering to the Little People
August 21, 2007 by Cato
Filed under Crime, Maryland, Neighborhoods, Salisbury Politics
At Monday’s Salisbury City Council work session the truth finally came out as to why Mayor Barrie Tilghman and her council leadership want to give police the authority to arrest someone for being too loud (and possibly cost that person 90 days in jail). They want to appear to be concerned for the poor working stiffs who pay the taxes in the city without actually solving the problem.
During what I thought was an overly long conversation about this new attempt to crack down on college kids and the Mayor’s opponents, Councilwoman Debbie Campbell hit the nail right on the head.
Most of the “noise” problem would simply go away IF Barrie was willing to enforce the city’s zoning regulations. Rental properties in neighborhoods that were zoned single family residential should only be rented out to meet the code rather than the current preferred Slumlord practice of renting “by the head” and jamming as many persons as they can get by with into a dwelling. If single family residential neighborhoods were restricted to singles, couples and families this problem would go away by itself.
Of course we know that this simply can’t occur. That would constrict the profit margins of those bastions of the community and friends of Barrie – your friendly neighborhood slumlords. This is precisely why the slumlords spend so much time and effort into buying members of council (overtly in one case and covertly in another). Of course I have to give them credit in appealing to Louise Smith’s ego and convincing her to crawl in to bed with them and Barrie Tilghman. I thought that Louise was a little too old to be worried about whether she got to sit at the “cool kids’ table”.
A myriad of problems would be solved by simply following the city’s own rules. Of course we all know that rules and regulations are for suckers (people who aren’t Friends of Barrie).
Technorati Tags: Salisbury, politics, salisburypolitics, LouiseSmith, BarrieTilghman, housing, noise, crime, police
Sphere: Related Content
What about people that work at night? Do they have the same rights to interfere free sleep during the daytime?
A Standard Operating Procedure needs to be in place and use a noise meter to measure sound to keep the measurement and penalties consistent.
You think a judge can tell from a situation when anyone can say, “It was loud!” Leaving the discretion to the officer in charge also leaves room for deviation as one officer may have better hearing than another.
Facts, just the facts.
No matter how they define “loud” the law would be broken by the cheering if Barrie left town for good.
The use of a measuring device (a decibel meter, in this case) removes the subjective determination that ends up being the fuzzy part of the trial evidence that defense attorneys use to get their noisy clients off the hook. With an actual dB number from a directional meter, the attorney cannot question the acuity of the arresting officer’s hearing, as it is rendered a moot point by the readings from the device. With narrative evidence removed and scientific evidence in place, the judge is able to dispense with hearing related arguments, and have an actual number to use to render his or her decision.
The use of radar guns and other accurate speed measuring devices has, over the years, almost completely supplanted the subjective testimonies of arresting officers nationwide in speed limit violation cases (i.e., “He was going real fast, Your Honor, real fast,” vs. “The reading was 78 miles per hour in the 35 mile per hour zone, Your Honor, on my Frammistan 2899B device, which was calibrated to 100% accuracy on the day of the offense.”) It’s ended up in officers spending less time with court cases (saving taxpayer $$ and keeping officers on the street,) judges being better able to judge (incontrovertible evidence,)and more equitable judgements against violators. The same would hold true here if electronic devices were used to measure and record sound volume, and the laws rewritten to categorize the noise level violations.
This is really a no-brainer. Other jurisdictions with chronic noise problems have been successfully using decibel meters for years, even decades. While Salisbury seems to often prefer to catch the last train when it comes to embracing technology, it’s evident that in this case it should board the next one, with first-class ticket in hand.
As Bubba was walking away from me last night, that’s just what I said, you need the noise meter reading as evidence similar to a radar device.
Of course he kept on walking, what does a taxpayer know?
Debbie…..be careful what you ask for! Just a word of advice from an old friend. If you push the issue of eliminating the college students – 4 to 3 or 2 or whatever unrelated people to a household, noise will be the least of your worries. Imagine moving all of the college students out and next thing you know the section 8 families with 6 or 7 kids who have never been shown the difference between right and wrong. While you’re at work, masses of unemployed able bodied people roaming the neighborhood. Crack heads looking for crack dealers and finding them on the corners until 4 or 5 in the morning. Prostitutes walking the streets all day and night.
This is not just a possibility, it is a real llikelyhood. I understand your goals but I think there are better ways to achieve them. I would estimate that your neighborhoods stand on the brink of transitioning into the types of neighborhoods that make up typical inner city hot spots. I welcome the opportunity to discuss these issues at greater length if you choose. Perhaps I can offer a different perspective. If you interested, contact Joe A. and get my cell phone number. Please feel free to call the number he has during normal business hours.
The point is that R10 zoning is the most restrictive zoning, NO APARTMENTS, NO Boardinghouse or multi family rentals, the law is already on the books, but no one will enforce it! We have the same restrictions as Tony Tank or Nithsdale, but the slumlords ignore the zoning law and get away with it because one of their own rules the appeal board. The remaining single family neighborhoods in the city are an endangered species, and are absolutely vital to the future of Salisbury. Grandad are you a landlord by chance?
Yes I am. But All of my units are nice, occupied by families, and more importantly…outside of the City of Salisbury. I haven’t raised my rents in two years….I’ve even lowered them in two instances due to one tenant becoming terminally ill and another losing a job and getting another which pays less. Sickofsmallsbarrie, I’m not trying to be confrontational, but you are beginning to posture yourself as if you are. But if you are….bring it on! I was trying to bring to Debbies attention that the logical progression of moving college students out of the area and demanding the presence of single family rentals is what I described in my previous post. How many of these dwellings of which you speak were in place prior to the R10 zoning being established? Could the reason they still exist in the R10 area be becasue they were “grandfathered” in? Believe me when I tell you….I personally think that all college students should be segregated away from the general population of the city since they don’t know how to behave like responsible adults and the head of the law enforcement agency having primary jurisdiction has failed to address the problems in the communities immediately surrounding the university. If someone had a Duplex in Nithsdale which was grandfathered in (if that was possible) the rent would be so high that no one could afford to live there. But then someone would complain about “slumlords” raising the rents too high. If any of the landlords are in violation of the zoning laws – take them to task for it. Every one of them. MY point is this…..the problems faced by these communities in the city are multi-faceted. In order to cure them, the community is going to have to come together in a constructive way – without all the fingerpointing. You will have to use every resource available within the community including, but not limited to City council, mayor, zoning board, code enforcement, LAW ENFORCEMENT, States Attorney, Judges, and most importantly a united front of citizens. Whether or not you agree, landlords are not the cause of every problem facing the City of Salisbury as some proffer to be the case. The biggest problem is a govt. out of touch with it’s communities.
Grand Dad,
I guess my dilemma is why we can’t have the zoning enforced as written. My guess is that the zoning has been in place for quite a while, but the advent of student rentals for profit en masse has only happened in the 6 or 7 years, prior to that these homes were too expensive to be used as rentals. With student housing in short supply suddenly houses that were previously out of reach cost wise are lucrative if many many students are allowed to rent, bringing in sums of 3,000 to 4,000 per month. And then it was a stampede to buy up these homes in the last few years,if the 4-2 had not happened most of these neighborhoods would already be transitional slums. I know that being a landlord is a thankless job many times and applaud you on your integrity–hope you did not get the wrong impression. I agree that if we could all band together we could truly make a difference. I am not against the business of being a landlord, if the property is in an appropriate location! My biggest fear is that the mayor and her cronies are trying to drive out us single family home owners in order to completely convert the neighborhoods to rentals. As far as “grandfathering” in it is a given that anyone that wants an exception that is a friend of RIchard Insley has gotten one. Stable neighborhoods make a city healthy, any urban study will back this up. Many of us love our city and it makes us frustrated and sick at heart to see the demise at the hand of a few–I am pretty sure that you feel the same way! We are on the same side!