David Klavitter doesn’t blog about presidential politics, sports or trashy entertainment gossip. No, he just wants some peace and quiet, dammit.

Since February 2005, Klavitter’s blog, Quest for Quiet, has detailed his fight against loud demonstrators near his H Street NE home. The demonstrators, part of a group known as the Israelite School of Universal Practical Knowledgde, more commonly known as part of the Black Hebrew Israelite movement, had taken to a corner every Saturday and used amplification to make their opinions known to all who passed. According to Klavitter, “They choose to use a microphone and amplifier, which projects LOUDLY and CLEARLY into my yard — so much so that I can hear their droning from INSIDE my house with the windows closed. I can’t even open my windows when the weather is nice.” (FreeRide interviewed both Klavitter and a representative of the group, who called Klavitter a “racist…throwing a tantrum.”)

Well, Klavitter may soon have his victory. On January 29, D.C. Council’s Committee on Consumer and Regulatory Affairs endorsed legislation introduced by Council member Tommy Wells (D-Ward 6) that would place limits on the use of amplification in residential areas. The legislation, known as the Noise Control Protection Amendment Act of 2007, would allow for noise above 70dB — as a reference, 60dB is considered ambient noise while 90dB is the sound of a running lawnmower — to be considered a disturbance when measured from 50 feet. Currently, no such limits exist. Various other cities impose limits in residential areas ranging from 60dB in Miami to 75dB in Los Angeles.

Mayor Adrian Fenty, various members of the Council and a number of neighborhood organizations have endorsed the legislation, which is set to come to a vote before the full council in February 19. Of course, there has been opposition, though it has been muted. In testimony last year, the D.C. Guerilla Poetry Insurgency lined up against the bill, arguing, “We fear this bill could dampen the efforts of people trying to make a difference in their communities whether that be through the creation of music or organizing community marches.” James Henry, a representative of the BHI, argued that Klavitter’s complaints were about more than just free speech, claiming, “This issue is about one thing and one thing only: This is the new white residents of the 8th and H Street corridor exerting their control over the black people who they will soon oppress and push out of their neighborhood.”

If Klavitter is really a closeted racist, his comprehensive blogging on the issue doesn’t show it. And while it seems like the legislation could make demonstrations in certain parts of the District more difficult — especially those neighborhoods that are both residential and commercial, like Adams Morgan or Dupont Circle — it also seems carefully tailored to balance free speech rights against many of the concerns Klavitter has expressed.

If you love or hate the idea, give a shout — errrr, quiet whisper — in the comments.