Letters to Editors
Outdoor music is no big issue
March 04, 2008
In his Feb. 29 letter, Norman Lederman suggests that the latest draft of "house concert" regulations is "especially permissive." It is nothing of the sort. Indeed, it takes us from having limited regulation of these community-building events (based on existing noise, sanitation, and commercial-nature statues) to having more stringent and unnecessary rules, all because of a few busy-bodies like Mr. Lederman.
Lederman implies that that we have a problem with "amplified outdoor house concerts" even though such events are quite rare, especially in my and his area. The outgoing land use director, Graham Billingsley, said that there were "one or two problem concerts" a year in all of Boulder County. He also admitted they could be regulated under existing laws. There is no epidemic of outdoor raves demanding of a clamp-down of people's basic property and free-association rights.
Mr. Lederman's complaints imply that he has suffered through amplified outdoor concerts, which he hasn't. The concerts in our neighborhood are indoors and not audible beyond the house.
Lederman says that current land-use codes do not allow house concerts "with paying attendees." This is a matter of interpretation, and it was the outrageous interpretation of Mr. Billingsley that voluntary donations to help offset the cost of hiring musical entertainment composed commercial activity. This whole problem could be solved if the county commissioners simply ruled that Billingsley was wrong.
The idea that busy-bodies should be able to keep citizens from using our own property as we choose, without actual harm to anyone, is something that could only get this far in a place as far beyond reason as Boulder County.
by Ross Kaminsky, Boulder Daily Camera Letters to Editor - 04 March 2008
