Judge dismisses Belfast noise case

BELFAST – District Court Judge John Nivison has dismissed the city’s noise complaint against Rollie’s Cafe.

Nivison ruled Monday that the ordinance police used to cite Rollie’s for allowing its bands to play loud music did not apply to the bar and restaurant.

The ordinance detailed a specific boundary within downtown as being noise-free, and Rollie’s, at 37 Main St., is outside that line, the judge concluded.

City police issued a summons to Rollie’s, owned by Randall Cook, on Aug. 5 after receiving a half-dozen complaints from Earl Beard and Elaine Albright in the weeks preceding it.

The couple live in a second-floor apartment in the building next door to Rollie’s.

Beard and Albright testified that they made the complaints because the bands were keeping them up at night.

“It makes it impossible to sleep,” Beard testified.

Police Chief Allen Weaver said he tried to mediate by speaking to Cook about his neighbors’ concerns. He said he tried to convince Cook to reduce the noise to a level the neighbors “could live with,” but was unable to do so.

Weaver said he visited Beard and Albright’s apartment in July and determined that the noise from the nearby amplified band was excessive. Sgt. John Gibbs issued the summons a week later, after another complaint.

Throughout the hearing, Cook’s attorney, Edmond Bearor of Bangor, repeatedly insisted that the city’s noise and public conduct ordinance did not apply to his client.

He pointed to the boundary map as proof that Rollie’s was outside the designated area.

City Attorney William Kelly said the ordinance was initially passed in 1994 to deal with excessive noise in the downtown. It was updated in 1998 to add a prohibition against skateboarding and in-line skating. He said the map was added then.

He said the overall intent of the ordinance was to maintain peace and quiet downtown.

“It deals with noise. It deals with disturbing the peace. And it deals with a specific area,” Kelly said.

While expressing satisfaction with the court decision, Cook said, it cost him plenty to fight the issue. He said his legal fees would total around $4,000. Had he been found in violation, he would have been subject to a $250 fine.

Nivison noted that while the city may have “done something inadequate” when it updated the ordinance, the existence of the map could not be overlooked.

He said the map was referred to in the ordinance and that the map was what any business owner who wanted to find out which measures were applicable to the downtown would confront.

It was clear that Rollie’s was outside the designated zone, he said.

“For whatever reason, the City Council drew a line,” said Nivison. “That’s what the ordinance says.”

Monday’s ruling marks the second time this year the city has lost a court fight over noise.

A Superior Court justice found in June that the city’s attempt to block the Lookout Pub at 37B Front St. from having outdoor entertainment was unconstitutional.

Cook said he had made “considerable” alterations to Rollie’s in light of the noise complaints. He also said he has told the city on numerous occasions that if it established a noise level that could be measured by monitoring equipment, he would abide by it.

“This puts the [police] officers in a situation where they have to make the call,” Cook said. “How do you decide somebody’s sensitivity level? … All I’m asking for is a standard.”