Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Yuma County board sends proposed noise ordinance back to Planning & Zoning after mixed public comment
Summary
After hours of testimony both for and against, the Board voted to send the proposed county noise-control ordinance back to the Planning & Zoning Commission for further review, citing concerns about enforcement, county islands next to city neighborhoods, and exemptions for generators and construction hours.
Planning staff presented a draft county noise-control ordinance intended to regulate excessive noise in unincorporated areas, summarize Planning & Zoning Commission recommendations (including exemptions for generators on certain off-grid properties and modified construction hours in summer) and to introduce an objective enforcement standard (a decibel threshold or plain-audible test).
Public commenters were split. Ronnie Rubino urged the Board to align quiet hours with the city and to adopt objective decibel limits, saying the county should mirror city thresholds to improve enforceability. Audio engineer Daniel Tortellano, who described decades of experience in sound measurement, told the Board events and outdoor music near residences can create decibel levels he described as "in the 125, 130 decibels" at the property edge and said prolonged high-volume events can be a safety issue. "Those are between 120 and a 130 decibel levels," he said, and supported implementing measurable thresholds.
Aaron Celie urged the Board not to adopt a county ordinance, saying state disorderly-conduct statute (13-2904) already covers unreasonable noise and warning that new county civil enforcement would burden sheriff's deputies and affect ag-waivered properties. "We have plenty of other ways to deal with these kind of issues," Celie said.
Board members debated enforcement approaches: several argued a civil ordinance gives a practical tool short of criminal prosecution. Supervisor Pankrazi noted county islands that resemble city neighborhoods could benefit from a county standard. Supervisor (speaker 8) moved to forward the proposed noise ordinance back to the Planning & Zoning Commission for further review and refinements; the motion was seconded and the Board voted in favor ("Aye"). The referral will allow the commission to revise exemptions, refine decibel or plain-audible standards, and return the draft for additional public hearings.
The Board did not adopt the ordinance at this meeting; it directed additional review and public participation at the Planning & Zoning level.
