Newbury RFC, The truth Options

[anotherNWNreader]

As a member this is very concerning .....please read link below.

http://decisionmaking.westberks.gov.uk/doc...or%20Review.pdf

[blackdog]

As a member this is very concerning .....please read link below.

http://decisionmaking.westberks.gov.uk/doc...or%20Review.pdf

http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/2012/newbury...each-of-licence
What are you concerned about? The club's behaviour or WBC's?

[Simon Kirby]

As a member this is very concerning .....please read link below.

http://decisionmaking.westberks.gov.uk/doc...or%20Review.pdf

I don't see the report of the sound level measurements taken by the Environmental Health officers. They talk about deeming the level to be a nuisance, but they don't appear to report what the measured level was. Did I miss it?

[Andy Capp]

I understand that the main problem was Friday night, and in particular the bass level. During the night (Friday), levels of 71db at the boundary and 67db on Monks Lane were recorded by the organisers.

On Saturday, after explaining that the noise was too high, the organisers turned it down to an acceptable level agreed by an EH officer, this corresponded to be an alleged level of 65db at the mixing desk. That night, readings of 48db and 55db were recorded in Monks Lane at a time when the levels were considered acceptable.

Taken from pages (hand written) 8, 9 and 10.

[Simon Kirby]

I understand that the main problem was Friday night, and in particular the bass level. During the night (Friday), levels of 71db at the boundary and 67db on Monks Lane were recorded by the organisers.

On Saturday, after explaining that the noise was too high, the organisers turned it down to an acceptable level agreed by an EH officer, this corresponded to be an alleged level of 65db at the mixing desk. That night, readings of 48db and 55db were recorded in Monks Lane at a time when the levels were considered acceptable.

Taken from pages (hand written) 8, 9 and 10.

Yes, but like EH say, the Rugby Club organiser was untrained in the use of the sound meter and the metre was uncalibrated and in the words of EH for indication only, and in any event 67dB in Monks Lane is likely within the 65dB limit at the Monks Lane property boundaries. The report says that EH set up monitoring stations, and yet the only readings reported by EH are the 48dB and 55dB levels which are well within what EH consider to be acceptable.

[Andy Capp]

There us no complaint about the 65db, the complaint is about Friday and Saturday afternoon when it was louder. The (acceptable) 65db was at the mixing desk, it should be a lot quieter at the boundary. Initial readings that were taken before the acceptable threshold was established was ~70db at the event boundary.

The organisers stated at the outset that they would have a sound engineer, but he had 'let them down' on the day. I think the council are getting their knickers in a twist, as a complaint was made, then remedial action was taken at the time. I really don't see the need for the Spanish Inquisition.

[Simon Kirby]

There us no complaint about the 65db, the complaint is about Friday and Saturday afternoon when it was louder.

That would appear to be the suggestion, but where is the evidence? If I get a speeding ticket from the police they give me the evidence of the speed camera, and they show me the camera's calibration certificate, so I'd expect no less from EH. They say they were there with their monitoring equipment, so where is the evidence of the readings they took?

[Andy Capp]

That would appear to be the suggestion, but where is the evidence? If I get a speeding ticket from the police they give me the evidence of the speed camera, and they show me the camera's calibration certificate, so I'd expect no less from EH. They say they were there with their monitoring equipment, so where is the evidence of the readings they took?

It was a subjective analysis brought about by a number of complaints. What EH seem to be concerned about is one of the organiser's apparent intransigence and a lack of the advised sound engineer.

I have to say, I went both days, and in my opinion, is was too loud for the environment it was staged. I also enjoyed the event.

[Simon Kirby]

It was a subjective analysis brought about by a number of complaints. What EH seem to be concerned about is one of the organiser's apparent intransigence and a lack of the advised sound engineer.

I have to say, I went both days, and in my opinion, is was too loud for the environment it was staged. I also enjoyed the event.

Yes, that's my problem - It can't be subjective, they need to have followed up the complaints and measured the noise in an approved process with a certified aparatus; whether or not the organiser was pissed as a fart has nothing whatsoever to do with the alleged noise nuisance, and the complaints in themselves don't prove nuisance - nuisance here has a specific meaning, it doesn't just mean anoying, it means intrusive to such a degree that neighbours lost the ordinary enjoyment of their property, and that threshold is quite high and needs to be objectively measured.

[On the edge]

Must admit one of the reasons why I don't think gathering evidence and enforcing law should be down to council officials. That is in any such matter - not just noise. Should be the province of those paid and trained to do the job - the Police. There were other subjective comments such that could imply serious consequences. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the matter (and to be brutally honest, I'm wholly on the side of the complainants) the way the matter was handled was less than satisfactory. Calls into question the veracity of some of the other (non related) actions taken by officials, such as the stings on shopkeepers selling fags to under 16 year olds, dishing out penalty tickets to drivers passing prohibition signs.

[Simon Kirby]

Must admit one of the reasons why I don't think gathering evidence and enforcing law should be down to council officials. That is in any such matter - not just noise. Should be the province of those paid and trained to do the job - the Police. There were other subjective comments such that could imply serious consequences. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the matter (and to be brutally honest, I'm wholly on the side of the complainants) the way the matter was handled was less than satisfactory. Calls into question the veracity of some of the other (non related) actions taken by officials, such as the stings on shopkeepers selling fags to under 16 year olds, dishing out penalty tickets to drivers passing prohibition signs.

Agree on all points. My sympathy is with the householders, if the event was as noisy as you say then it was very inconsiderate of the rugby club and they deserve to have their entertainments licence restricted.

I've aslo wondered about all the variety of enforcement organisation - and there are many - that there would be some ecconomy of scale and certainly a consistent professionalism if it was all brought under the umbrella of the police service, I certainly don't see the sense in hobbling most of what is done by local government with the baggage of feckless self-serving local politicians.

That said I'm a little surprised to see this from Environmental Health because my experience of them is that they are professional and competent, and I certainly wouldn't say that about other branches of our local state apparatus such as the miserable bag of rags that calls itself Trading Standards.

[Andy Capp]

I disagree. There was an allegation of a noise nuisance, and without alerting the stretched resources of the police, the matter was dealt with. Before the visits, there were complaints, after the visits, there were no complaints. I just don't see a need for the post event investigation. Lessons have seemingly been learned.

[blackdog]

Must admit one of the reasons why I don't think gathering evidence and enforcing law should be down to council officials. That is in any such matter - not just noise. Should be the province of those paid and trained to do the job - the Police.

But, in the case of noise nuisance, it is the council officials who are paid and trained to do the job, not the police.

Reading the papers it seems to me that it was the attitude of one individual that brought most of the trouble down on the RFC - not helped by their failure to have suitably trained/qualified personnel on site to monitor/control sound levels.

[Simon Kirby]

I disagree. There was an allegation of a noise nuisance, and without alerting the stretched resources of the police, the matter was dealt with.

My point was more general. I wasn't saying that the police should have been called, it is clearly a matter for Environmental Health, my point was that Environmental Health, and a wide variety of other enforcement agencies, should become part of the police service and not spread around in quangos and local government.

[Simon Kirby]

Reading the papers it seems to me that it was the attitude of one individual that brought most of the trouble down on the RFC - not helped by their failure to have suitably trained/qualified personnel on site to monitor/control sound levels.

Unless the RFC individual was being unusually loud I don't see how his attitude has any bearing on the alleged noise nusance - an allegation that Environmental Health don't seem to have substantiated, despite having trained and qualified people on site with measuring equipment.

[Exhausted]

Bring out the killjoys. People having a bit of fun should not be tolerated. Bit of music noise and perhaps a few annoncements really make life unbearable for a few old twits who can't bear it if when they step outside their pile of bricks and mortar have to listen to sounds of people enjoying themselves.

[Andy Capp]

Bring out the killjoys. People having a bit of fun should not be tolerated. Bit of music noise and perhaps a few annoncements really make life unbearable for a few old twits who can't bear it if when they step outside their pile of bricks and mortar have to listen to sounds of people enjoying themselves.

But it doesn't have to be partisan. After some discussions, an acceptable compromise was had. I was at the event, and despite the Paul Weller tribute act being louder, the Rolling Stones tribute was just as enjoyable from a sonic point of view.

[Newbelly]

Bring out the killjoys. People having a bit of fun should not be tolerated. Bit of music noise and perhaps a few annoncements really make life unbearable for a few old twits who can't bear it if when they step outside their pile of bricks and mortar have to listen to sounds of people enjoying themselves.

So, no noise would annoy you - as long as others were having a good time?

[On the edge]

But, in the case of noise nuisance, it is the council officials who are paid and trained to do the job, not the police.

Reading the papers it seems to me that it was the attitude of one individual that brought most of the trouble down on the RFC - not helped by their failure to have suitably trained/qualified personnel on site to monitor/control sound levels.

The Council may well have experts (someone who knows their way round a sound meter in this case) who can be called on to help - just as they have in any other investigation. Fact is that local officials are not trained to investigate or enforce law. As has been amply demonstrated locally - even in recent times. Police resources are not over stretched - again as demonstrated by their own statistics. Specialist expertise can come from other places as well. The Police also swear an oath - which gives them authority, council employees, with the best will in the world can only be bureaucrats.

From what is being said on this thread, there were two quite different themes. First, making a noise beyond apparent statutory limits and Second the credentials of the party responsible for a public event.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of this particular case, the encroachment of petty officialdom into what is properly the province of law enforcement is, for me, a serious and significant issue. The separation of government and judiciary (in the widest sense, is a fundamental freedom - which is being eroded by stealth.

[On the edge]

Bring out the killjoys. People having a bit of fun should not be tolerated. Bit of music noise and perhaps a few annoncements really make life unbearable for a few old twits who can't bear it if when they step outside their pile of bricks and mortar have to listen to sounds of people enjoying themselves.

Got any books you need to burn?