The fight this timeline records. Newport Beach cites vehicle noise under its own municipal ordinance, a matter California Vehicle Code section 21 reserves to state law unless the code expressly authorizes otherwise, and it does not. The city's own hearing officer wrote that the preemption argument "may be true" and that a correct ruling "would invalidate the entirety" of the program, and the question is now before Orange County Superior Court. The full case is on the main page. If you received one of these citations, you have 21 days from service.
A dated record of the case and the campaign. Newest first. Dates are kept at month level where the underlying event is part of the anonymized case. Documents referenced here are described on the main page and sourced on the resources page. Follow along at @newportnoise on X and Instagram.
October 2026
The citation figures on this site were updated with a second city ledger production covering citations issued July 11 through September 22, 2026. It lists 52 citations under section 10.28.007, bringing the total in the city's ledger productions to 814.
August 2026
The appeal under Government Code section 53069.4 was filed in Orange County Superior Court, on the route the decision pointed to. The review is de novo, meaning the court decides the citation fresh, with no deference to the administrative ruling, and this is where the preemption question gets briefed to a judge for the first time. If the appellant wins, the city must reimburse the filing fee.
August 2026
The hearing officer's written decision was finally served, a month after the hearing. It upholds the citation while stating that the preemption argument "may be true," that ruling on it is outside an administrative hearing's purview, and that a correct ruling "would invalidate the entirety of the City's regulation as to noise emanating from vehicles." The decision itself points to the appeal: "An appeal of this decision to a higher court may provide such relief." The date stamps show the hearing officer signed promptly and the city held the signed decision for weeks before serving it. The full decision is hosted here, redacted for personal information. The Superior Court appeal under Government Code section 53069.4 followed.
August 2026
New records requests went to the city: one for the complete case file, hearing audio, and correspondence around the withheld decision, and one for the body-worn camera footage and operational records behind the July enforcement wave. The police department closed the second with a blanket investigatory-records exemption. A reconsideration is pending, resting in part on a simple fact: the city published body-worn camera footage of one of these very stops on its own social media, and disclosure to the public waives the exemption for that record.
August 2026
newportnoisetickets.com launched with the full case file: the law, the city's citation ledger and hearing decisions obtained under the Public Records Act, contest templates, and the document generator. The @newportnoise account followed.
July 2026
The administrative hearing was held by Zoom. No facts were contested. The entire defense was the city's lack of authority. The code requires the hearing officer to issue a decision within ten days. What followed instead were weekly written follow-ups and a city position, stated in writing, that no deadline governs serving the decision on the person who paid the deposit.
July 2026
The city's productions under the Public Records Act: a citation ledger showing 762 section 10.28.007 citations since 2021 (6 in all of 2024, then 221 in 2025, 525 through July 10, 2026), $129,719 collected, and a payment-status field that records no hearing outcome, refund, or reversal. Written hearing decisions on 42 citations followed, including the March 6, 2026 decision (citation ADM24419D) overturning a vehicle noise citation on the evidence, in a case where the driver also raised preemption.
Spring 2026
A $200 administrative citation under NBMC 10.28.007 for two momentary engine revs. No meter, no measurement, no inspection. The contest was filed within the 21-day window with the full deposit: a written statement, a records request for the body-worn camera footage, and an evidence submission arguing the citation is invalid under state law. The recording, when produced, showed the citation was decided before contact and presented as a favor.
March 2026
In the decision the city would later produce under the Public Records Act (citation ADM24419D, hosted here, redacted for personal information), a hearing officer overturned a section 10.28.007 vehicle noise citation for insufficient evidence, writing that an officer's "subjective interpretation that the engine or exhaust noise was too loud is not viable to sustain the citation" for a stock vehicle. The appellant had also raised preemption, which the officer did not reach. The city's enforcement continued at scale: the ledger records 352 further citations under the section from that date through July 10.
2025 through 2026
The ordinance last changed in 2001. Citations under it ran 1, 4, 5, and 6 per year from 2021 through 2024. Then 221 in 2025 and 525 in the first half of 2026, concentrated on weekends and holiday enforcement waves the police department described in its own social media posts.
This page is updated as the case and the campaign move.