ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
May 2, 2002
DAVID L. WEBER and RACHEL B.
WEBER,
Complainants,
v.
CISCO UNITED METHODIST CHURCH,
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
PCB 02-157
(Citizens Enforcement – Noise)
ORDER OF THE BOARD (by M.E. Tristano):
On March 18, 2002, David L. Weber and Rachel B. Weber (complainants) filed a noise
pollution complaint against Cisco United Methodist Church (respondent).
See
415 ILCS
5/31(d) (2000); 35 Ill. Adm. Code 103.204. Complainants allege that respondent violated
sections 900.102 and 901.104 of the Board’s noise regulations (35 Ill. Adm. Code 900.102 and
901.104). Complainants allege that respondent violated these provisions by (1) broadcasting
recorded church bells or chimes through loudspeakers located on the top of the Church bell
tower; and (2) ringing of actual bells at various times and days of the week.
Section 103.212(a) of the Board’s procedural rules directs the Board to determine
whether a citizen’s complaint is duplicitous or frivolous. 35 Ill. Adm. Code 103.212(a). On
April 8, 2002, the respondent filed a motion to strike and dismiss the complaint.
BACKGROUND
Complainants state that they live at 245 West North Street in Cisco, Piatt County,
which is in close proximity to Cisco United Methodist Church. Comp. at 1-2.
1 Complainants
allege that the broadcasting of church bells or chimes through loudspeakers and the ringing of
other bells from the bell tower of the Church cause noise pollution. The complaint states noise
was noticed by Mr. Weber when he took occupancy of the property in 1996 and was noticed
by Mrs. Weber approximately one year prior to her marriage to Mr. Weber in 1998. Comp.
at 2.
The Webers report that the loudspeakers play everyday of the week at noon and 6
p.m. On Tuesdays, the loudspeakers play at 9 a.m. On Sundays, the loudspeakers play at
approximately 9 a.m., 10 a.m., and 11 a.m. in addition to the regular noon and 6 p.m. The
1 The complaint filed by David L. Weber and Rachel B. Weber will be referred to as “Comp.
at __.”
2
actual bell rings at 9 a.m. and at the end of church service on Sunday. All loudspeaker
broadcasts last approximately five minutes and the ringing of bells has a duration of less than
one minute. Comp. at 3.
The complainants allege that the noise from the broadcasting of church bells/chimes
through loudspeakers and the ringing of the bells from the bell tower of the Church have
resulted in an unreasonable interference with the use and enjoyment of their property.
Complainants state that the noise disturbs and prevents sleep during the day, interrupts family
conversations, interferes with Mrs. Weber’s ability to conduct her home business, and risks
depressing the value and resale potential of the property. Comp. at 4.
Complainants request that the Board enter an order directing the respondent to cease
and desist from further violations of applicable statutes and regulations and, more specifically,
to permanently discontinue the use of the loudspeakers and bells. Comp. at 4.
In its April 8, 2002 motion to strike and dismiss the complaint, the respondent argues
that 35 Ill. Adm. Code 901.107 exempts it from 35 Ill. Adm. Code 901.104 because the
alleged violations do not apply to sound emitted by land used for religious activities as
specified by the Standard Land Use Coding System Code 691. Mot. at 2.
2
DUPLICITOUS/FRIVOLOUS DETERMINATION
Section 103.212.(a) of the Board’s procedural rules implements Section 31(d) of the
Act, providing that the Board shall schedule a hearing upon receipt of a citizen’s complaint,
unless it determines that the complaint is duplicitous or frivolous. 35 Ill. Adm. Code
103.212(a).
Duplicitous
A matter is duplicitous if it is “identical or substantially similar to one brought before
the Board or another forum.” 35 Ill. Adm. Code 101.202. The Board has not identified any
other cases, identical or substantively similar to this, pending in this or any other forum.
Frivolous
An action before the Board is frivolous if it requests relief that the Board does not have
the authority to grant or if the complaint fails to state a cause of action upon which the Board
can grant relief. 35 Ill. Adm. Code 101.202.
2 Respondent’s motion to dismiss will be referred to “Mot. at __.”
3
Section 901.104 Allegation Stricken as Frivolous
The Board finds the alleged violation of Section 901.104 is frivolous. Complainants
allege that respondent is violating Section 901.104 of the Board’s regulations, which restricts
impulsive sound emissions. Respondent argues that Section 901.107 of the Board’s regulations
does not apply to sound emitted by land specifically used as specified by the Standard Land
Use Control System Code 691. Code 691 is defined as “religious activities” with sub-code
6911 further defines the category as churches, synagogues, and temples. The motion asserts
that the respondent is a religious corporation, which was incorporated pursuant to the Religious
Corporation Act. As a result, the respondent argues it is exempt from the Section 901.104.
The Board finds that it cannot grant the relief requested here. By the terms of Section
901.107 respondent is exempt from the numerical noise provisions of Section 901.104. The
alleged violation of Section 901.104 is frivolous, and the Board strikes and dismisses it.
Section 900.102 Allegation is Not Frivolous
Section 900.102 of the Board’s regulations prohibits any person from causing or
allowing noise pollution, such as noise that unreasonably interferes with the enjoyment of
another’s life or property. 35 Ill. Adm. Code 900.102. The complaint alleges that the noise
generated by the loudspeakers and bells has resulted in an unreasonable interference with the
use of the complainants’ well-being and property.
The Board has consistently found that the exemption under Section 901.107 from the
numerical noise limitations does not extend to the noise nuisance action under Section 900.102.
See
Kvatsak v. St. Michael’s Lutheran Church PCB 89-182 (Aug 30, 1990). Since this
allegation states a cause of action upon which the Board can grant the relief that complainants
have requested, the Board finds that the alleged violation of Section 900.102 of the Board
regulations are not frivolous.
Conclusion
The Board finds that, pursuant to Section 901.107 of the Board’s regulations, the
alleged violation of Section 901.104 of the Board’s regulation is frivolous, and strikes it from
the complaint. The Board finds that the remaining alleged violation of the Board’s regulations
is neither duplicitous nor frivolous, and accepts it for hearing. The Board directs that this
matter proceed to hearing as expeditiously as practicable.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
4
I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board, certify that the
Board adopted the above order on May 2, 2002, by a vote of 7-0.
Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
