Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety And Nuisance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council hears first reading of revised noise ordinance; vehicle-noise enforcement remains constrained by state law
Summary
City legal staff briefed council on proposed amendments to Everett Municipal Code Chapter 20.08 to clarify definitions, create tiered enforcement and move noise enforcement to code enforcement; the proposal keeps in place limits imposed by state traffic law for on‑road vehicle enforcement and schedules final reading for Feb. 26.
The Everett City Council received a first reading Tuesday of a proposed ordinance (Council Bill 2501‑11) that would amend Chapter 20.08 of the Everett Municipal Code on noise control.
Hill Kamen of the city attorney’s office said the draft moves noise enforcement from human resources to code enforcement, distinguishes episodic from ongoing noise, tightens definitions (including how “plainly audible” is measured), and sets tiered sanctions for repeat violators. Kamen told the council the ordinance acknowledges changes in measurement technology and relaxes some device‑certification requirements so higher‑quality consumer meters may be used for enforcement purposes.
The proposal includes a public‑disturbance/noise standard that applies when sound is plainly audible from 50 feet away, and it provides tools to address chronic, property‑associated vehicle noise and persistent on‑site loudness. But Kamen repeatedly cautioned that when a vehicle is traveling on a public roadway, enforcement is governed by state law under Title 46 and the city cannot preempt traffic statutes. He said that means enforcement of moving‑vehicle modified‑exhaust violations generally remains under the state traffic code rather than the city noise code.
Council members questioned how detection and enforcement would work in practice. Kamen confirmed most criminal or infraction charges must be observed by a law‑enforcement officer or code enforcement officer; third‑party recordings alone are generally insufficient. He also noted the city has added proposed legislative changes to its state agenda to enable future adoption of automated sound‑detection technology if state law allows.
Why it matters: The draft changes would give code enforcement more tools to address neighborhood noise nuisances while leaving moving‑vehicle enforcement governed by state traffic law. Council scheduled the third and final reading for Feb. 26.
What was not decided: Council did not adopt the ordinance Tuesday; it was presented for first reading and briefing. Several members asked staff to clarify how consumer sound meters, recordings and future automated technology would be incorporated into enforcement protocols.
Next steps: Staff will return Feb. 26 for a final reading and vote; staff said they may bring amendments to clarify measurement devices and enforcement processes if state law evolves.
