Section 7.3, Subclause (b) of the Municipal Acoustic Governance Act
The complaint arrived at 3:17 p.m. on a Tuesday, typed in triplicate on Form HD-4289 (“Unwanted Sonic Absence”), which had not been revised since 1972 when the original drafters assumed silence was a self-regulating phenomenon. The petitioner, one Reginald P. Hargreaves of Flat 4B, listed the offense as “persistent and deliberate auditory vacuum between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m., with particular emphasis on the corridor outside my door, where the absence of footsteps constitutes a dereliction of civic sonic duty.”
Archivist K-7, assigned to the case, discovered that the 1984 amendment to the Act technically permitted action against “any measurable deviation from baseline municipal soundscape.” The baseline itself had been lost in a 1998 office flood, but the principle remained sound. Initial attempts to serve notice encountered difficulties - silence demonstrated a troubling tendency to recede when approached. A subcommittee recommended reclassifying it as a “non-corporeal acoustic entity,” requiring Form HD-4289a (“Intangible Nuisance Addendum”), last printed in 1991.
Enforcement proposals collapsed under cross-committee scrutiny. The white noise emitter clashed with Art Deco guidelines. The coughing intervals violated workplace safety standards. When Mr. Hargreaves moved above a tram depot, the file was marked “Resolved: Lack of Standing” and placed in the “Precedents: Hypothetical” drawer.
Three weeks later, Archivist K-7 discovered the drawer ajar. Inside, a new form had materialized: HD-4289b (“Retroactive Violation Notice”), citing the silence’s ongoing noncompliance with ordinances 7.3(b), 12.8, and the previously obscure 14.2(e) regarding “ambient entitlement expectations.” The archivist stamped it “Received” and filed it beside the original complaint, where it began, very slowly, to fade at the edges. This was noted on Form HD-4289c (“Document Degradation Report”), which required approval from the Building Aesthetics Committee.
The caretaker’s report of a faint sigh was logged under “Incident: Unverified.” The reference number assigned was one digit longer than the department’s standard format allowed. No one remarked on this. The printer jammed when attempting to produce a copy.