A proposed town noise ordinance, meant to foster peace and quiet for townsfolk, stirred up a very audible discussion by the Pahrump Town Board at its regularly scheduled meeting last Tuesday.

Ultimately the board decided to discuss the issue at a special meeting at a date to be announced, but not before a lengthy discussion that included input from the sheriff's office.

The ordinance was proposed by Vice Chairman John McDonald who said he was responding to perpetual complaints he received from residents about the disturbance of their peace and quiet.

"Since I've been elected I've probably heard more complaints about noise in this town than I have on probably any other single subject," McDonald explained. "This ordinance seeks to address that problem."

In an attempt to preempt some issues that would inevitably be brought up (noise ordinances, due in part to Pahrump's large population of animal owners, have a rather rocky history), the vice chairman emphasized that the ordinance did not address the issue of animal noises of any kind.

"It is simply noise made by human beings," McDonald said. "And it does not seek to eliminate noise that is required by human industry, commerce, or any noise that seeks to accomplish a worthwhile human purpose."

In addition, McDonald said, the ordinance was to give the sheriff's office something to enforce when they receive noise complaints.

"I have had a number of people call and tell me that the deputies, when they respond, (say) that since they have not got a noise ordinance, there's really nothing they can do unless they want to file a disturbing the peace complaint," McDonald said.

Board member Nicole Shupp voiced concerns about some of the time limits on noise, pointing out that some people who drive louder vehicles leave for work at 4 a.m. and she mowed her own lawn after 8 p.m. in the summer because it was cooler.

"Anybody can get ridiculous about this," Shupp said.

McDonald responded by reiterating that "the idea is to get rid of useless noise."

For example, McDonald said, using a weed whacker to clear your property of brush that's a fire hazard would not be a useless activity, and as such that noise would not be violating the ordinance.

Shupp then took issue with a section of the proposed legislation that addressed modifying a vehicle's exhaust system in such a way the vehicle became louder (an exemption for cars running at the Pahrump Valley Speedway during regular events was included).

She pointed out that some people modify their vehicle's exhaust system to get better mileage, and furthermore that diesel engines were generally louder.

"Anybody can find that annoying, just because you're driving by," Shupp pointed out.

McDonald replied that changes could still be made to the ordinance and urged her and the rest of the board to write down any issues they had on it so they could be worked on.

"I would ask you to bear in mind that any time you have the right to make a loud noise, you're depriving someone else to their right to peace and quiet," McDonald said.

Nye County Sheriff Tony DeMeo also addressed the board to brief them on potential problems or issues that could result from the ordinance.

DeMeo pointed out that noise ordinances have a long history, going back to the Roman empire when people complained about the clattering of horses' hooves and chariots wheels traveling down the brick roads late at night.

Back in present-day Pahrump, the sheriff said much of the problem with noise ordinances lay in "unclear language" and the lack of an objective, quantifiable way to measure noise.

DeMeo added that the same issue arose with disturbing the peace complaints, because what constituted peace, or its disturbance, was primarily subjective.

Capt. Bill Becht of the sheriff's office addressed the board as well, explaining that in order for a crime to be committed, there had to be a "unity of act and intent," meaning the act of creating a noise did not necessarily mean the person had any intent of breaking the law or disturbing the peace.

As an example, he pointed out that even though a neighbor's air conditioning unit might be loud and disturbing, the owners hardly intended to break the law.

After briefly discussing the possibility of forming an advisory board, the board ultimately decided to schedule a separate meeting for the issue open to all concerned parties, including the public.