Washington Votes

2007 Senate Bill 5544 (Abating environmental noise.)

[Comments on this legislation] [Text and Analysis] [Add to Watch List]
[Previous] [Next]

  • Introduced by Sen. Karen Fraser, (D-Thurston County) on January 23, 2007, to prohibit the operation of a non-highway vehicle in a manner where the engine noise is audible in or near a residence. The first offense would be punishable by a fine of up to $100. Fines would double for each subsequent violation by the same person. No fine could exceed $800. See companion HB 1434.
    • Referred to the Senate Consumer Protection & Housing Committee on January 23, 2007.
      • Substitute offered to the Senate Consumer Protection & Housing Committee on February 26, 2007, to clarify that the tail pipe noise levels of 96 decibels only applies to model year 2008 and beyond. Existing vehicles will be measured against the current standard, which is 105 decibels at 20 inches. The current regulatory noise limit for the property line is codified at 55 decibels. It is clarified that "exterior to the residence" means within ten feet of the residence. A definition of plainly audible and an alternative measurement of 45 decibels is added. The penalties are changed to the first offense being $100 and subsequence offenses being double the previous fine, up to a maximum fine of $800 for a single violation. Recoverable attorney's fees and costs are narrowed to when nuisance actions are brought to enjoin violations of the property line 55 decibels, and inside the residence plainly audible or greater than 45 decibels.
    • Referred to the Senate Rules Committee on February 26, 2007.

Line

Comments

Introduced by Sen. Karen Fraser, (D-Thurston County) on January 23, 2007. New Comment

1) Washington State Legislature known as SB 5544 [by Anonymous Citizen on April 9, 2008]
If laws are on the books already, why do these people that we vote into office, pay well and most likely have never even been on an ORV need to waste their time and effort re-writing laws? This happens over and over in so many areas of state government that I wonder if there is no "real" work to be done.
Have any of these "sponsors" been to any of the meetings or events and seen the fun and families together. Also Mr. Kline, ORV riding is VERY physical and not for the OBESE. If you think motor sports are not "SPORTS" you better think again. Lets think about all the INTERNATIONALLY recognized motor sports events, Baja 1000, Paris to Dakar etc.
Could you finish one of these races? I think not.

Enforce the laws on the books. Don't recreate a smooth rolling wheel.

You may think the outdoors is for quiet, solitude and self reflection, not everyone goes outdoors for those things every time. There are more quiet peaceful outdoor areas than ORV areas.

Keep your hands off things you do not understand, care for or even do!

Thanks

Reply New Comment

Line

2) Family rides ORV's but... [by Anonymous Citizen on March 28, 2007]
I support the spirit of this bill. However, I think the bill should take into account zoning to the extent that the issue is of greater impact to those in residential areas. Even though our entire family enjoys ORV outings in the established ORV riding areas, and we have a substantial investment in equipment and accessories, there is no place for this type of activity in a residential neighborhood. The noise and dust created can be annoyances with few rivals; they can cause stress and aggravation, diminish the desirability of adjoining residential properties and place undue burdens on neighboring residents subjected to this activity in the way of diminished enjoyment of their activities, both indoor and out. Despite being equipped with the latest muffler designs, modern 4-cycle ORV's, of even the smallest engine displacement, produce more than enough perceived noise to be a significant irritant to adjoining neighbors, especially when multiple vehicles are operated at once, which is often the case. Under dry conditions, substanital quantities of dust can be generated and this has health implications, especially for those with allergies and other respiratory conditions; not to mention the general unpleasant nature of having a dust cloud descend on you as you're trying to enjoy outdoor activities.

By my own ORV riding experiences, and those of my family, I'm fully aware of the pleasures of this activity; it has its beneficial side, but there are opposing issues which must be balanced in the interests of the broader community. I'm not saying the bill has reached a state of perfect balance, but without some kind of reasonable limits on this activity, especially in residential neighborhoods, it becomes a tyranny of the minority whereby the few dictate to the many when they shall have peace and quiet and for how long. I trust my elected representatives will have the wisdom to strike an equitable balance.
Reply New Comment

Line

3) Mrs [by Anonymous Citizen on June 19, 2007]
We recently had a neighbor, to bring in piles of dirt and make 4 wheeler dirt tracks in his back yard. He is surrounded by homes on 3 sides. At times they run multiple 4 wheelers.

We have consulted our Area Plan Commission. They state there is nothing we can do about this.

Inside our home I personally do not hear them operate (some hearing deficet), but the dust can be frustrating, especially when you are cleaning windows, siding, and outdoor furniture.

We also have concerns about the change in the natural flow of the drainage around us, because of the mounds of dirt. The ground is very poor to begin with, and many residence have had to pay extra money, (mandated by the county) to put drainage systems in.

Please advise steps that we might take to resolve this problem in a manner that would benefit all parties involved.

Reply New Comment

Line

4) Sen. Adam Kline's response to Mr. Helgeson who opposes this measure [by Anonymous Citizen on March 9, 2007]
Interested parties will find this useful information on one of the Senators who has "signed on" to this bill. A Mr. Helgeson apparently wrote him in opposition to the bill and the following was his response. Some of you may have heard him say the same thing on TV.

begin quote
Dear Mr. Helgeson,

I signed on because I have been annoyed, endangered, and angered one too many times by people riding motorized dirt-bikes and other off-road vehicles that have no damn business anywhere. To me, this bill is narrow -- it doesn't include those "personal watercraft", seemingly jet-powered little missiles whose only apparent purpose is to risk death and dismemberment for boaters and swimmers, for the amusement of spoiled drunk teenagers.

Yes, I am sure there is the occasional responsible person who rides one of these machines on land or water. And yes, like every human being I have been pleasantly surprised to find my stereotypes broken. But why, why, why, do folks insist on motorized "sports"? Those two words are an oxymoron. There is nothing sporting -- athletic, physically demanding -- about riding any machine anywhere. And it's a damned annoyance to folks who see the outdoors as a place to go for quiet and solitude and self-exploration. I would be happy to ban the use of the internal combustion engine off-road, by anyone without a handicapped sticker, subject to a stiff fine. Maybe we could call this an anti-obesity measure.

Please circulate this to all motorized sports enthusiasts, so they can remember never to vote for me.

Adam Kline
end quote

Talk about arrogance! Not to mention he is completely misinformed about the physicality of riding any of those motorized recreational vehicles. Riders of any of these vehicles know differently, "anti-obesity measure", LOL! He'd rather have teens sitting in front of TVs playing video games?

One thing these legislators have not taken into consideration is how many farmers use ORVs on their farms, daily, to save on wear and tear on their tractors, as well as gasoline.

My 63 year old husband uses his ORV for fun and he also uses it on our little two acre piece of property, hauling a trailer around into which he puts limbs from trees he's pruning and other yard waste that goes on the compost pile. It's much easier on his back (he has degenerative disc disease) than using a wheelbarrow. Most of our neighbors have ORVs, too, and they all ride for fun both within our rural neighborhood and on trails, elsewhere.

The legislature should also be thinking about all the small local businesses (all over the state, who sell these vehicles) which will be going out of business if this measure passes. I'm sure they and riders will be challenging the law in court if it passes and is signed by the governor. This little bill could cost the state of Washington a whole lot of money in the long run, and even in the short run. Every action has consequences and I do not think the legislature will be happy with the consequences of this law.
Reply New Comment

Line

5) ORV Recreation Abatement [by Anonymous Citizen on January 30, 2007]
Should this Bill become law as written it would outlaw ORV use almost anywhere within the state of Washington.

This bill replaces objective standards with the subjective "plainly audible."

With infractions of up to $800.00 for simply being heard adjacent to a residence (5544 states that any home and the area within a 100 foot radius is a residential area regardless of underlying zoning including but not limited to farm, forest, commercial or industrial area.

This bill also allows the moving party to be compensated for all costs incurred. I forsee NEPA SEPA contractors setting up microphones at a 100 foot perimeter from Ms CrazyLady's house to capture the audible signature of an offending ORV. Then when the local prosecutor does not move as he or she may not see "audible" as reasonable in this matter, Ms CrazyLady hiring an attorney to force the county to move on the action.

Mr. HomeOwner with two kids with stock Honda 50's (quieter than any mower) may now be stuck with a several or even ten thousand dollar fine/bill for allowing his/her children to recreate on brand new 2007, EPA compliant units operated on his/her own private property.

There is much more than meets the eye in this draconian bill, Dig... and see the dirt under this carpet.
Reply New Comment

Line

6) There are already noise laws on the books [by Anonymous Citizen on January 30, 2007]
This law is designed to wipe out Offroad Motorized Recreation altogether.
It imposes restrictions that no lawn mower, leaf blower, automobile, bus, or train could meet, and obscene penalties for perfectly legal and responsible behavior.
Reply New Comment

Line

7) Already noise laws on the books [by Anonymous Citizen on January 30, 2007]
There are already ORV noise laws on the books Indeed, the text of 5544 includes the 96db @ 2ft noise limit that is the strictest internationally recognized standard.
This is a standard that the ORV community has been VOLUNTARILY pushing on it's own members for years, well in advance of the state requesting a reduction in the previous limit.We know all to well that "more sound = less ground"
As a result, the manufacturers of ORV silencers have been making them quieter to meet the new standards, and so have the ORV manufacturers themselves. The 96db limit is a very significant reduction from the old limits, and hundreds of thousands of dollars have been voluntarily spent by ORV owners on newer, quieter exhaust systems to meet what is already a self imposed standard.

This is not as a result of legislation imposing new laws, it is a result of;
1)The ORV community recognizing that the development of residences in an area adjacent to designated ORV trail systems historically means the new homeowners will try to chase out any recreation.
2)The ORV community as a whole does not like unneccesarily loud exhausts.
3) To ride at any group event such as a Poker Run, ORV's have long been subject to noise tests by the event sponsoring club.
This bill puts limits on ORVs (they have to be literally inaudible standing outside any residence) that are not imposed on and could not be met by lawn mowers, chain saws, automobiles of any sort, bicycles, and sewing machines.

The fines - up to $800!! are equivalent to DUI, Negligent/Reckless Driving, and Grand Theft.

Senator Karen Fraser is well known as an enemy of recreation in this state. Her attacks on the the Straddleline Park gained her infamy statewide.

This bill is nothing more than the continuation of her vendetta against the Offroad Recreation Vehicle committee.

There is no reason for it, and no call for it.

There are already groups that bring the forest managing entities (DNR, Forestry) and the public user groups together to discuss and plan ways to make the trail systems in this state a safe, peaceful, and wholesome family experience.

To the best of my knowledge, Senator Fraser has not yet been to one of these meetings, nor has any of her co sponsors.

There is more than draconian noise levels in this bill.

Section 1(g) criminalizes any "erosion, or overturned dirt".

This language is so vague as to making walking in hiking boots a crime.

The language in this bill is impossible to comply with and must be rejected.

Every hour I have spent with my son recreating on Washington's shrinking trail system has been an hour that he has not been subjected by peer pressure to do drugs or any other crime.

He has never had any contact with the police.

Every hour he spends on the trails gets him in great physical shape.

Every hour he spends working after school or some weekends for gas and tires and other parts for his ORV give him a sense of self worth.

He is now an accomplishment oriented youth.

Every hour he spends volunteering to clear wind fallen trees and repairing trails destroyed by logging makes him enjoy the blessings of giving to the community and forest.

The state should be doing more to promote Offroad Recreation, not impose the vindictive will of one senator who will not even meet with the groups who have been working so hard for decades to make this a wholesome family recreation.

More opportunities would get more kids off the street.

Less opportunities would put more kids on the street.

This is an unnccesary and ill conceived bill.
Reply New Comment

Line

8) Noise abatement [by Anonymous Citizen on January 24, 2007]
Yes! Pass it! I've dealt with this issue for years - 4-wheelers, dirt bikes, etc. in our neighborhood; and parents allowing it! Drives me crazy, but doubt police would even respond if called.
Reply New Comment

Line

9) Anonymous Citizen [by Anonymous Citizen on March 25, 2007]
You are right, the police DO NOT respond when called!!
Reply New Comment

Line

10) yes [by Anonymous Citizen on March 19, 2007]
we need to have fun every now and then
Reply New Comment

Line


Copyright © 2008 USA Votes, Inc.  Patent Pending.  All rights reserved.  Terms of use

Capitol Building

Search legislation: