[24 October 2015] Attorney General of Arkansas, Leslie Rutledge, has pointed the finger at Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) as having jurisdictional authority over my concerns for the vehicular NOISE debacle assaulting the citizens of Arkansas. With that in mind, I’ve asked ADEQ the following questions:

**************************************************

I am a retired 31.5 year veteran of the Houston Police Department who has been battling the out-of-control vehicular noise debacle for some seven years now – this, with an emphasis on illegally equipped, illegally modified motorcycles. I have made four attempts to receive answers from AG Rutledge and Governor Hutchinson relevant to the vehicular NOISE debacle assaulting the citizens of Arkansas. Finally, as of yesterday, 23 Oct. 2015, AG Rutledge answered my correspondence with a letter of impotence and advised me that I should contact ADEQ for assistance. Please respond to the following concerns:

1) Arkansas’ Motor Vehicle Laws strictly forbid the operation of a motor vehicle upon the roadways of Arkansas with a muffler that does not meet FACTORY OEM specifications, yet thousands of motorcycles, automobiles, trucks operate daily on our roadways with modified OEM or aftermarket exhaust mechanisms that emit incredible noise emissions. Motorcycles operate on our roadways completely unencumbered by law enforcement emitting decibel levels that are two-four-six or more times the legal total motorcycle noise emissions of 80 dB(A) – stipulated as the “minimum” level of protection for the general public as per the EPA (decibel level differentiations calculated on logarithmic scale). Why is ADEQ not interceding on behalf of the citizenry of Arkansas and stopping the audible assault on our children, our elderly, our handicapped, our families? NOISE which violates the rights of Arkansas’ citizens promised them in the Preamble to our Constitution and NOISE that has been confirmed to be hazardous to the health of Arkansas’ children, our elderly, our handicapped, our families – this physiological injurious noise assault confirmed as harmful by the World Health Organization and audiologists.

2) Why is ADEQ permitting the operation of illegally equipped motor vehicles, especially illegally modified/illegally equipped motorcycles, to operate on the roadways of Arkansas completely unencumbered while knowing full well that one (1) modified large displacement V-twin motorcycle that has had its catalytic converter removed during the installation of an illegal aftermarket exhaust mechanism emits up to ten (10) times the particulate pollutants into the atmosphere as one (1) compliant compact automobile?

3) Why is the ADEQ not enforcing the Arkansas Motor Vehicle Code restriction that clearly forbids the sale/retail of exhaust mechanisms that fail to conform to OEM-Factory specifications? How many modified-aftermarket exhaust retail/installation establishments are there in Arkansas? I would hazard to guess perhaps hundreds, yet you do absolutely NOTHING to stop this stark violation of Arkansas’ Motor Vehicle Law!

I can only assume that the Legislators for Arkansas enacted the Motor Vehicle Laws, relevant to noise and particulate emissions, as a result of “quality of life” concerns and concerns for the health and safety of the citizens of Arkansas – if so, why are these laws not being enforced? The Attorney General says that you are culpable, are you?

We have Mayors who prostitute themselves with the LOUD motorcycle cult[ure] via biker rallies where thousands of LOUD, illegally equipped motorcycles flood area municipalities and assault the tax-paying citizenry without remorse or care – WHY?

These are issues that MUST be addressed and personally, I’m am tired of getting the run-around from our impotent law enforcement community and our compromising leadership. Enough!

Your response and answers to my concerns would be most appreciated.

Rick Holtsclaw, Houston PD/Retired

Dear Mayor,
Since 2009, the West Houston area motorcyclists have been
harassed and profiled by Houston Police Department Officer
Holtsclaw (“Officer Holtsclaw”).

Officer Holtsclaw insists on violating motorcyclists’ civil
rights by issuing tickets for loud pipes and other things
over and over again to the same motorcyclists. This is
blatant discrimination against bikers, not to mention
illegal profiling. This unprofessional behavior needs to
stop now!

After numerous complaints filed with the Houston Police
Department (the “HPD”) and City Hall by taxpaying citizens
of Houston, Officer Holtsclaw was pulled off the streets
for a short period of time only to be put back on the
streets again in a different area of West Houston to
continue his campaign of harassing motorcyclists.

We are asking the HPD and its officers for uniform
enforcement of the law. One rogue officer making arbitrary
decisions is not good for community relations nor a
conducive climate of mutual respect for citizens and law
enforcement alike. Our community is outraged. We feel it
is necessary to bring this specific behavior to your
attention and ask for disciplinary action immediately
against Officer Holtsclaw.

Officer Holtsclaw has been counseled repeatedly by the HPD
and needs to be removed from his patrol officer job and
permanently put behind a desk so he can no longer write
tickets. Surely, in a city the size of Houston, there
should be some office job that meets his qualifications.

We expect and appreciate your prompt attention in this
matter.

Regards,

Paul Landers
State Chairman
Texas Motorcycle Rights Association
chairman@tmra2.org

CITY OF HOUSTON

INTER OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE

SUBJECT: Grievance Regarding Involuntary

Reassignment

I, Senior Police Officer Rickey D. Holtsclaw, Employee #68560, am currently assigned to the West Patrol Command, Westside Division, Shift 1.

On November 16, 2010, representatives from the Houston Area Motorcycle Riders (HAMR) and the Texas Motorcyclists Rights Association (TMRA) rallied at Houston’s City Hall to demand that City Ordinance 30-3, “Noisy Vehicles Generally,” be revised. These representatives accused me of using the ordinance to harass them and claimed that Houston’s noise code was too subjective and therefore “void for vagueness.”

Three days later, November 19, 2010, I was removed from my patrol assignment and placed on an administrative assignment pending a very thorough investigation. I remained on that administrative assignment for five-months and one-week until the evidence, relevant to a frivolous complaint from area motorcyclists, was shown to be utter nonsense. I was cited, via Supervisory Intervention (SI), for having protected my hearing when the illegally loud motorcycles operated by members of HAMR and the TMRA passed only feet from my position near the 611 Walker Building on the day of the rally.

On June 21, 2011, representatives from HAMR and the TMRA, once again, rallied at Houston’s City Hall and demanded that I be transferred or “fired” for having, in their opinion, harassed motorcyclists in my area of responsibility in west Houston. On June 16, 2011, I was, once again, removed from my patrol assignment and placed on an administrative assignment as per Lieutenant Paul Ryza, Westside Division. No one adequately explained to me why I had been removed from my patrol assignment, but a popular assumption suggested that another frivolous complaint from an area motorcyclist had, once again, been accepted by the Internal Affairs Division.

On July 8, 2011, in response to having been involuntarily reassigned to administrative duties, I submitted a letter titled “Request Meeting with Chief of Police and Mayor regarding Noise Enforcement Initiative,” via my Chain-of-Command, asking why I had, once again, been involuntarily reassigned. This letter was apparently stopped at Division level and returned by Captain Mary Lentschke or perhaps the letter was returned by Assistant Chief J. Chen.

On July 15, 2011, 1000 hours, I was ordered to meet with Lieutenant Paul Ryza in his office. Also present at this meeting was my Patrol Supervisor, Sergeant Michael Mikeska. Lieutenant Ryza informed me that my letter, dated July 8, 2011, would not proceed up the Chain-of-Command in its current format because he had received information as to why I was involuntarily reassigned. According to Lieutenant Ryza, someone, either in the Mayor’s Office, Chief’s Office, or Internal Affairs, was under the impression that an area motorcyclist had filed a formal complaint against me. As of my meeting with Lieutenant Ryza on July 15, 2011, the Lieutenant admitted that no such formal complaint had ever been formalized. The logical question subsequent to this information is, “Why have I been involuntarily reassigned and why do I remain on that involuntary reassignment?

According to Lieutenant Ryza, I have been reassigned from patrol duties to an administrative assignment until such time the City of Houston decides how it is going to proceed with the controversial issues related to City of Houston Ordinance, 30-3, “Noisy Vehicles Generally.” I respectfully suggest that this reasoning, relevant to my involuntary reassignment, is wholly unfair and unfounded.

While serving five-months and one-week on my previous reassignment as a result of frivolous complaints from area motorcyclists, I regularly responded to my Municipal Court subpoenas. I was successful in adjudicating perhaps hundreds of noise violations prior to the motorcycle protest rally at City Hall that took place on Tuesday, November 16, 2010. Subsequent to this protest rally, prosecutors in the various Municipal Courts began summarily dismissing my noise citations written under City Ordinance, 30-3. I learned that, according to a prosecutor who was in the process of dismissing one of my citations in Municipal Court #18, that the citations were being dismissed because “there may be a problem with our law.” Note, this is after the City Legal Department had reviewed the Ordinance in question and formalized a letter stating that I was authorized to use the Ordinance to cite motor vehicles illegally equipped with loud modified and aftermarket exhaust mechanisms.

On Sunday, May 1, 2011, I returned to patrol duty and, in addition to my responsibility to respond to calls-for-service, I, once again, began issuing citations to excessively loud motor vehicles. Since May 1, 2011, I have used Texas Transportation Code 547.604, “Muffler Required,” in lieu of City Ordinance, 30-3, “Noisy Vehicles Generally.” In other words, there is absolutely no reason for me to be reassigned pending a decision by the City Legal Department relevant to a noise ordinance…I no longer use the ordinance and evidence of this fact can be verified by reviewing the citations I’ve written since Sunday, May 1, 2011.

Also consider the fact that an HPD Circular, No. 11-0616-115 (see attached copy), dated June 16, 2011, states, “until further notice is given, officers will not issue citations pursuant to City of Houston Ordinance 30-3.” The HPD Circular then stipulates, “Enforcement and citations pursuant to Texas Transportation Code Section 547.604, Muffler Required; Texas Penal Code 42.01, Disorderly Conduct and Other Related Offenses; and other applicable laws are still authorized.” Again, there is absolutely no reason for me to have been reassigned pending a decision by the City Legal Department relevant to a noise ordinance seeing that,

• I have been using the Texas Transportation Code in lieu of City Ordinance 30-3 since I returned to patrol on Sunday, May 1, 2011.

• HPD Circular No. 11-0616-115 notifies the entire Houston Police Department that City Legal has already made a decision regarding City Ordinance 30-3 and that said ordinance “is undergoing revision.”

• It is also important to note at this juncture that, approximately two years ago, while City Legal was deciding the validity and applicability of City Ordinance 30-3, I was ordered to cease issuance of noisy vehicle citations while City Legal researched the subject. I was not removed from my patrol assignment during this five-six month period of time; therefore, the question remains, why have I now been involuntary removed from my patrol assignment pending a subsequent review of the law by the Legal Department? Especially considering the law/ordinance in question is no longer relevant to my enforcement efforts.

Personally, I am not interested in City Legal’s decision regarding Ordinance 30-3 seeing that I have finally received a valid and applicable “charging instrument” for the Texas Transportation Code. A valid charging instrument, relevant to Texas Transportation Code 547.604, will allow my noise citations to proceed to adjudication and said Code is under girded by binding legal precedent, Aaron C. Aguilar v. Texas (2008).

Additionally, I was involuntarily removed from my beat assignment, 20G86A, and transferred to 20G38A in order to appease the owner and motorcycle clientele of the “Dam Ice House,” 1710 State Highway 6 South. Why have I been removed from my beat assignment in order to pacify the owner and clientele of an establishment that actively conspire to violate the law and refuse to respect the right of all Houstonians to enjoy a peaceful environment and domestic tranquility? In addition to my request to be reassigned to patrol, I also respectfully request that my beat assignment, the beat assignment I polled for and received by means of seniority, 20G86A, be returned to me.

If Mayor Parker, Houston’s City Council, Houston’s City Legal Department, Houston’s Municipal Court and the Office of the Chief of Police, do not have the forthrightness and courage to support my efforts to protect the citizens of Houston from the unlawful intrusion of excessively loud motor vehicles, why not order me to cease and desist relevant to my noisy vehicle initiative? Why am I continually subjected to harassment and unfair treatment via involuntary reassignment? Is there any other officer serving in the Houston Police Department who has been, or currently is, subject to reassignment for having enforced the law and performed his duties to the best of his abilities? For the very short period of time I was assigned to the street, subsequent to my first five-month and one-week involuntary reassignment, I was in the “Top Performer” category at the Westside Station for “calls for service run” and “traffic citations written.” Again, why am I being punished for having performed my duties in accordance with all policies and procedures? Please, either support me or order me to stop my enforcement initiative relevant to excessively loud motor vehicles that continue to operate freely on the roadways of Houston Texas; motor vehicles that violate the right of all Houstonians to enjoy a peaceful environment and domestic tranquility.

R. D. Holtsclaw, Senior Police Officer

Westside Division

rdh:rdh

CITY OF HOUSTON

INTER OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE

R. D. Holtsclaw, Police Officer

Westside Division

rdh:rdh

CITY OF HOUSTON

INTER OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE

Dear Chief McClelland,

My name is Rickey D. Holtsclaw, payroll 68560, and I am currently assigned as a patrol officer with the Westside Division. As a 31 year veteran of the Houston Police Department, I have made every effort to serve the citizens of Houston with integrity, professionalism, concern and care. Over the last decade I have noticed an exponential increase in the number and intensity of obnoxiously loud, dangerously loud motor vehicles within my City and throughout the United States. Curious as to why these noisy vehicles are allowed to operate on the streets of Houston, obviously unhindered by law enforcement, I initiated my own personal research relevant to the affects of noise on human physiology and the environment. Second, I researched the role and responsibilities of the Federal Government, State and local governments pertaining to vehicular noise enforcement. Though there is an abundance of medical research on the subject of noise and its detrimental effect on human physiology, a succinct conclusion to my research is adequately expressed in the following letter from Dr. Louis Hagler, a retired physician with a special interest in the study of noise in the environment.

As noted by the World Health Organization, environmental noise is one of the major problems in urban settings, worldwide. This fact has been long recognized by the United States Government as well. Domestic tranquility is one of the six guarantees in the United States Constitution, a guarantee that is echoed in some form or other in every state constitution. In 1972, a Noise Control Act was passed by Congress (Title 42 United States Code Section 4901 et seq.). The legislative intent of the Act reads,

“(a) The Congress finds – –

(1) that inadequately controlled noise presents a growing danger to the health and welfare of the Nation’s population, particularly in urban areas;
(2) that the major sources of noise include transportation vehicles and equipment, machinery, appliances, and other products in commerce; and

(3) that, while primary responsibility for control of noise rests with State and local governments, Federal action is essential to deal with major noise sources in commerce control of which require national uniformity of treatment.

(b) The Congress declares that it is the policy of the United States to promote an environment for all Americans free from noise that jeopardizes their health or welfare. To that end, it is the purpose of this chapter to establish a means for effective coordination of Federal research and activities in noise control, to authorize the establishment of Federal noise emission standards for products distributed in commerce, and to provide information to the public respecting the noise emission and noise reduction characteristics of such products.” (Emphasis added.)

As noted by the World Health Organization, noise produces defense and startle reactions, damages hearing, disturbs communication, disrupts sleep, impairs cardiovascular function, interferes with teaching and learning, reduces productivity, harms relationships, provokes unwanted behaviors, and increases accidents. It is a major source of recurring annoyance, leading to stress which may not be recognized but which degrades the quality of life and adversely affects health. Many of these effects take place outside of conscious awareness. Cardiovascular effects can be detected even while we sleep.

Motor vehicles are major sources of urban noise. Individuals ride around in vehicles whose mufflers no longer muffle; instead they produce a low rumbling roar that is audible at great distances. They ride around in vehicles with sound systems whose power rivals that of major public address systems.

Chief McClelland, I am sure that you are, by now, aware of my enforcement efforts relevant to obnoxiously loud motor vehicles within my area of responsibility. I have, for the previous year-and-a-half, and at great personal and professional cost to myself, made a stand against those who wrongly believe they have the right to violate the law with impunity and violate the rights of the citizens within my area of responsibility by the operation of illegally loud motor vehicles. These motor vehicles have been intentionally altered to emit engine noise ranging from two to four times that permitted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Thus far, all I have received for my efforts is an exponential growth in the girth of my Internal Affairs/Personnel File as unprincipled men and women, specifically operators of illegally loud motorcycles, file accusations of harassment and misconduct against me via the Internal Affairs Division.

On Wednesday, November 10, 2010, Channel 26 News, in their 9:00 P.M. broadcast, aired a special investigative report regarding my enforcement of Houston City Ordinance 30-3, “Noisy Vehicles Generally.” Though my enforcement efforts are directed at automobiles, trucks and motorcycles, it is the motorcycle community, specifically those who operate illegally loud motorcycles that initiated the Channel 26 investigation. Though the content of the broadcast was inundated with lies and exaggerations, the citizens of Houston were, none-the-less, subjected to its obviously biased message.

On Tuesday, November 16, 2010, a gang of disgruntled motorcyclists rode their illegally loud motorcycles to Houston’s City Hall and addressed Mayor Parker, Chief of Police McClelland and the members of Houston’s City Council. I was, unfortunately, the topic of discussion as allegations of police harassment and improper application of the law were subsequently alleged by a spokesperson representing the advocates of loud motorcycles.

On Friday, November 19, 2010, I began my 31^st year with the Houston Police Department. On the morning of November 19, 2010, I was informed by my shift Lieutenant, Lieutenant Paul Ryza, that I was under investigation for harassment and would not be permitted to perform my assigned duties as a patrol officer until said investigation was completed. I found it very disheartening and discouraging that my Chief and my Mayor would take the time to listen to the lies, exaggerations and obfuscation of the unprincipled men and women who filled the Council Chamber that day, yet no one in the upper echelon of my police department has made any effort to sit down with me and listen to the enforcement concerns of a 31 year veteran of the Houston Police Department. I know that my Captain, Captain Mary Lentschke, has been summoned by one or more members of the Command Staff to explain my enforcement efforts relevant to illegally loud motor vehicles. I am aware that there have been numerous inquires by the Command Staff and City Legal regarding my enforcement efforts, but not once has anyone asked input from me. Why?

I believe that I am amply qualified to answer any questions you may have regarding vehicular noise enforcement. I have been riding motorcycles, off and on, for approximately 40 years. During the 1980’s, I was assigned to the Solo-Motorcycle Detail until I transferred to the Helicopter Division in 1989. I have owned 30 motorcycles since age 12, ridden professionally, and toured much of the lower 48 as well as Canada and Alaska. I have accumulated hundreds of thousands of miles on motorcycles in the past 40 years. I am very familiar with motorcycles, the motorcycle industry and motorcyclists in general. I am amply qualified to differentiate between a legal and illegal exhaust mechanism affixed to a motorcycle as well as those aftermarket exhaust systems used to increase the engine noise of automobiles and light trucks.

My legal authority to make the differentiation between the noise emitted by an OEM exhaust and that emitted by an illegal aftermarket exhaust is supported by legal precedent in the Texas Appeals Court case of Aaron C. Aguilar v. Texas (2008). I know that the illegal aftermarket exhaust mechanism on the motorcycles I have cited emit two-to-four or more times the noise emissions allowed by the EPA/80 db(A). A sound meter easily confirms the dangerous levels of noise emissions permitted by aftermarket motorcycle exhaust mechanisms such as Vance and Hines, Sampson, D&D, Porker, Rinehart, Supertrap, Screaming Eagle, Bubs and the list goes on. The sound emitted by these non-EPA non-compliant exhaust mechanisms emits noise levels that easily permeate the protective structures of businesses, residences and places of worship within my beat assignment. The dangerously loud exhaust emissions of an aftermarket exhaust can be heard for over a quarter-of-a-mile in traffic, some up to half-a-mile or more under the right atmospheric conditions.

I know that 70% of new Harley Owners make the purchase of an illegal aftermarket exhaust their very first “performance” upgrade. This is the primary reason a large number of Harley Davidson Motorcycle riders are the recipient of a noise citation. Harley Davidson Inc. has, with embarrassment, published the fact that their clientele often make the purchase of an illegal exhaust system a “kneejerk” reaction to the purchase of new motorcycle. Representatives from Harley Davidson and the American Motorcycle Association (AMA) have published documents on the Web pleading with motorcycle operators around the United States to “pipe down” and ride responsibly. Apparently, very few are getting the message.

Unfortunately, a majority of the citizenry has been exposed to the illegal noise emitted by modified motorcycles for such an extended period of time that they naively believe motorcycles are designed to be loud and obnoxious; therefore, they blindly accept the dangerous decibel levels and unavoidable annoyance. Motorcyclists have operated loud and obnoxious motorcycles, while completely unhindered by law enforcement, for such an extended period of time that there is a sense of “entitlement” in the motorcycle community. Motorcyclists in my area of responsibility cannot believe that a law enforcement officer is actually enforcing a noise ordinance and these riders become visibly angry and verbally vulgar when cited for their selfish and dangerous behavior. As a result of my enforcement efforts, contributors to motorcycle and Corvette Websites publish statements of hate and vulgarity about me and I am commonly referred to as Psycho-Cop Holtsclaw. My enforcement efforts are interpreted as harassment because no other officer in Houston has ever stood up to these purveyors of illegal noise and told them they were out of line

The Internet is inundated with the cries and demands of the citizenry throughout the United States who want law enforcement to intercede on their behalf to stop the exponential increase in the number of noisy vehicles operating in our communities. Simply Google “loud motorcycles” and read the responses of angry citizens as they describe the misery of having to tolerate vehicular noise pollution. Unfortunately, in many jurisdictions, Houston Texas included, law enforcement consistently turns a blind eye and deaf ear to the dangers of illegally loud motor vehicles. “Loud pipes don’t save lives,” loud pipes violate rights, the rights of the citizens within my area of responsibility to enjoy domestic tranquility and a peaceful environment in their homes, places of work and worship. Vehicular noise pollution is not only dangerous, vehicular noise destroys the quality of life for those who are regularly subjected to it.

I am disheartened that the Houston Police Department has failed to support me in my efforts to take a stand against this ever increasing “noise” assault on our citizenry. I am disheartened that a majority of HPD Officers make no effort to stand against the obvious dangers presented by the incredible numbers of illegally loud motor vehicles on our roadways. I find it disconcerting that the whining of those who care nothing for the rights of others has apparently negatively influenced my Mayor and Police Chief relevant to my efforts to protecting the right of the men, women and children in my area of responsibility to enjoy domestic tranquility and a peaceful environment.

Chief McClelland, why not meet with me regarding the subject of noise enforcement? Why not accompany me to an area where these bikers and their illegal machines congregate? Why not place some faith in the integrity and ability of a 31 year police veteran? Is your refusal to consult with me the result of my decision to remain a lowly police officer? I have reluctantly taken the promotional examination once in my career, but that promotion was denied me as a result of Affirmative Action, yet I strive daily to serve my community in the capacity in which I am able to serve. Why not give me the opportunity to demonstrate and explain to you the dangers of vehicular noise pollution?

Attached is a copy of my traffic enforcement efforts during the month of October, 2010. Though motorcycles do out number other vehicles written for noise violations, remember that my area of responsibility has a biker-bar, “The Dam Ice House,” within its boundaries. Also note that the majority of vehicular noise violators operate the large displacement V-twin style motorcycle followed closely by the Gang-Banger styled Acura’s, Honda’s and Mitsubishi automobiles equipped with large, illegal aftermarket slip-on exhaust canisters. Trucks, modified with “Flowmaster” exhaust mechanisms and similar aftermarket exhaust products, are also an ever increasing nuisance in my area of responsibility. The statistical differential in the attached monthly report confirms that there is a lack of substantive evidence suggesting that motorcycles are a “target” relevant to vehicular noise enforcement. No particular group or vehicle is singled out for enforcement. Any vehicle equipped with a loud aftermarket exhaust mechanism or modified OEM exhaust is subject to being stopped and the operator cited. Though other styles of motor vehicles are cited, the loud motorcycle operators have been the only group to coalesce and complain that they are being treated unfairly.

The motorcyclists cry foul and harassment while Fox 26 News spouts lies and discredits one of your own, but instead of defending me and supporting me, I feel my Chief and Mayor have cast me aside and ignored my efforts to make a positive difference in my area of responsibility. Simply stated, my desire is to do the right thing for the citizens of Houston Texas. I am enforcing the law as it is written, City Ordinance 30-3, a law that has been deemed relevant and enforceable by the Legal Department of the City of Houston.

Chief McClelland, if you consider vehicular noise enforcement a non-issue then simply advise me of that fact and will I will focus on others areas of concern within my beat assignment. As my attached work cards will show, I am enforcing the vehicular noise ordinance in my spare time, between calls-for-service. I am simply a patrol officer who noticed a significant problem in his area of responsibility and did his very best to address that problem. This letter is to inform you that there is a dangerous and illegal vehicular noise problem in the City of Houston and I am doing all that one patrol officer can do to combat it.

I need your support, I need support from Houston’s Municipal Court, I need support from supervision and my fellow officers and I need the assistance and cooperation of Houston’s City Legal Department. I have done everything but beg to incorporate the SAE J2825 stationary motorcycle test into my enforcement of City Ordinance 30-3, but City Legal refuses to allow the use of a sound meter. The motorcycle community cries foul regarding perceived subjective enforcement. The inclusion of the SAE J2825 testing procedure would eliminate the issue of subjectivity by simply confirming my initial observation that the exhaust system in question is too loud. The inclusion of the SAE J2825 testing procedure should not require any alteration to the current ordinance. Also, the City of Houston should consider adopting the “label match-up program” which would completely eliminate the subjective argument. Chief McClelland, please let me know what you want me to do and I will, of course, abide by that directive.

R.D. Holtsclaw

Westside Patrol, Shift I

.