« May 2009 | Main | July 2009 »

June 12, 2009

Noise Ordinance Complaint at Shady Grove

Austin-American Statesman: Noise complaint shuts down Unplugged at the Grove

For the first time in its 16-year existence, KGSR’s “Unplugged at the Grove” series at Shady Grove was shut down Thursday night after a noise complaint from a neighbor. Shady Grove owner Mike Young said the restaurant is in the process of applying for a variance that will allow a ceiling of 85 decibels. According to the current noise code, Shady Grove is classified as a restaurant that must comply at 75 decibels.

Thursday’s opening act Sahara Smith was in the middle of her set when Austin Police showed up with a decibel meter and ordered the show stopped. Headliner Jimmy LaFave never played in front of a crowd estimated at 600. “Unplugged” booker Marsha Milam said the complaint came from a neighbor who told Shady Grove management that he’d call the cops next week, too.

Copyright 2009 The Austin-American Statesman. All Rights Reserved.


I learned about this through a friend's Tweet. She suggested people contact the City Council and complain. Despite my libertarian issues regarding the legitimacy of noise ordinances, I still find it outrageous the government does this.

Here's what I wrote to the City Council, the first time I think I've contacted them directly:

Other than violating private property rights, the noise ordinance is giving rise to other absurdities. For example: people who, after choosing to live near or in the downtown area of a city known for its after-dark music scene, complain about the loudness of that very scene. Though the person who complained about Shady Grove is the immediate source of concern, ultimately it is the local government's imposition of the noise ordinance that should take responsibility.

Neighbors should be able to resolve their problems without calling on people with guns to shut the other side down. How about we not give them that rather violent option?

-Charles Hueter

Vital Differences

Consequentialism is the bread and butter of modern state justifications. Why embrace one of their central premises? If convincing others something is wrong because it doesn’t “work” then your opponents will logically cloud the discussion with various ways it does work…if only SoAndSo was in charge, if only NewLaw was passed…if only we acted for the benefit of others rather than ourselves…if only the human experiment was tweaked via collective coercion….etc.

I agree libertarian state reform is a functional contradiction and can’t work. But its morality isn’t affected by its pragmatic potential.


My comment at Let a Thousand Nations Bloom.

June 11, 2009

Regular Photography Feature, Flipside 2009 Edition

So Do I

Black Light Horticulture

*schlink*

Fotorosso and Bellonna

Elevate Your Third Eye

My flickr set of these featured pictures is here.