O-713-15 ORDINANCE NO. 713-15
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE COUNCIL AMENDING
CHAPTER 10, "HEALTH AND SANITATION" BY AMENDING SECTION 10-5
"MAINTAINING SOURCE OF NOXIOUS ODORS OR GAS, DISTURBING NOISE OR
OTHER NUISANCE" RELATING TO CERTAIN PROHIBITIONS AND LIMITATIONS ON
USE OF LOUD NOISE DEVICES WITHIN THE VILLAGE; PROVIDING FOR CRIMINAL
PENALTIES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS,the Village Council finds that a series of reports of loud noises near the homes
of Village residents has resulted in residents fearing for their safety as well as the safety of their
family members and unable to enjoy the privacy of their homes;and
WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has recognized that "it can no longer be
doubted that government 'has a substantial interest in protecting its citizens from unwelcome
noise.' " Ward v. Rock Against Racism, 491 U.S. 781, 796, 109 S. Ct. 2746, 2756, 105 L. Ed. 2d 661
(1989) (quoting City Council of Los Angeles v. Taxpayers for Vincent, 466 U.S. 789, 806, 104 S.Ct.
2118,2129,80 L.Ed.2d 772 (1984);and
WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has held that restrictions on noise classified
as speech are proper if 1) the restrictions are content-neutral; 2) they are narrowly tailored to
serve a significant governmental interest, and 3) they leave open ample alternative channels of
communication. Ward, 491 U.S. at 791; see also DA Mortgage, Inc. v. City of Miami Beach, 486
F.3d 1254, 1266(11th Cir.2007); and
WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has stated that the government has a great
interest when it "seeks to protect the 'the well-being, tranquility, and privacy of the home,' "
Ward, 491 U.S. at 796 (quoting Frisby v. Schultz, 487 U.S. 474, 484 (1988). However, the
government's substantial interest "is by no means limited to that context, for the government
may act to protect even such traditional public forums as city streets and parks from excessive
noise." Ward,491 U.S.at 796; and
WHEREAS, the restrictions presented in this ordinance amendment are intended to be
content and viewpoint neutral and, neutral with respect to time, place and manner restrictions;
and
WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court also recognized that a "special benefit of the
privacy all citizens enjoy within their own walls, which the State may legislate to protect, is an
ability to avoid intrusions." Frisby v. Schultz, 487 U.S. 474, 484-85 (1988). Moreover, the Supreme
Court has "repeatedly held that individuals are not required to welcome unwanted speech into
their homes and that the government may protect this freedom."Id. at 85; and
WHEREAS,the Village Council enacts this ordinance for the primary purpose of protecting
and preserving a feeling of safety, well-being, tranquility, and privacy for its residents, while
narrowly tailoring the prohibitions contained in this ordinance so as to continue protecting the
constitutional right of free expression for all individuals; and
WHEREAS, the proposed ordinance does not prohibit any particular type of speech
content and is directed to the protection of public fora and citizenry within the Village; and
WHEREAS, the Village Council finds that this ordinance is in the best interest and welfare
of the residents of the Village.
NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE COUNCIL that:
Section 1. The foregoing "whereas" clauses are hereby ratified and incorporated as
the legislative intent of this Ordinance.
Section 2. Chapter 10,Sec. 5(b) and Sec.5(c)(1)of the Village's Code of Ordinances is
hereby amended and shall read as follows:
Sec.5 (b) it shall be unlawful to maintain any source or cause of noxious odor or
gas or other nuisance,or to cause the same to exist. It shall be unlawful for any person to make,
continue or cause to be made or continued any noise disturbance. For purposes of this
subsection, the term "noise disturbance" shall mean any loud, raucous, or unreasonably
disturbing noise which are or may be potentially harmful or injurious to human health or
welfare, or which unnecessarily interferes with the enjoyment of life or property, including
outdoor recreation,of a reasonable person with normal sensitivities.
Sec. 5 (c)(1) Excessive noise. Any noise which is of such character, intensity or
duration that it constitutes a noise disturbance,as defined in subsection (b).
Section 3. Chapter 10, Sec. 5 (c) shall further be amended by the addition of a
new sub-paragraph (3) and the remainder of the sub-paragraphs shall be renumbered
accordingly in sequence. Sub-paragraph (3)shall read as follows:
(3) Megaphones and sound trucks. The use of a megaphone, defined as an electronic
voice amplifying device for public address, or a sound truck, defined as a vehicle with a
megaphone attached, is impermissible if it rises to the level of a noise disturbance, as defined in
subsection (b). Use of a megaphone or a sound truck in a residential district after dark is
presumptively prohibited.
Section 3. If any section, clause, sentence, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any
reason held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, the holding shall not
affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance.
Section 4. All Sections or parts of Sections of the Code or Ordinances, all Ordinances
or part of Ordinances, and all Resolutions or parts of Resolutions, in conflict with this Ordinance
are repealed to the extent of such conflict.
Section 5. This Ordinance shall be effective immediately upon adoption at second
and final reading.
PASSED on first reading this 6th day of October .2015.
PASSED and ADOPTED on second and final reading this 3`d day of November ,2015.
lice Burch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Barbara A. Estep, MMC
Village Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Richard Sarafan
Village Attorney