Proposed Leaf Blower Ban Not Likely to Happen Anytime Soon

Arguments both for and against a proposal to ban the use of leaf blowers in Greenwich for six months out of the year were voiced during a special informational forum held by the League of Women Voters of Greenwich at Town Hall on Tuesday.

In April a group of Greenwich residents calling themselves “Citizens Against Leaf Blower Mania,” or “CALM,” led by Maher Avenue resident and environmental lawyer Gretchen Biggs, requested that the Board of Selectmen impose a ban on the use of leaf blowers from April 15 until Oct. 15. The group claims that the noise and air pollution created by leaf blower use, which is prevalent in Greenwich, causes both quality of life and health concerns for residents, therefore it is seeking to further restrict their use.

Currently, Greenwich’s noise ordinance restricts the use of leaf blowers to one per parcel, regardless of size, and limits their use to 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9 a.m. to 3 p.m., Saturday, Sunday and holidays.

The Board of Health, which drafted the town’s current noise ordinance in 1984, and amended it in 2004 and 2006 to address the use of leaf blowers, has the power to amend it again and present it to the RTM for approval. However, that seems unlikely since the board’s Leaf Blower Research Subcommittee recently concluded that leaf blower noise, although annoying, “does not pose a threat to public health,” said Caroline Baisley, Greenwich director of Public Health.

Baisley said the subcommittee, comprised of three doctors, found “there’s no conclusive, well-grounded scientific data providing medical evidence of the health risks associated specifically with leaf blower use — and therefore recommended that no changes be made to the ordinance.”

Interestingly, even through the Board of Health was directly involved in the drafting of previous amendments to the town noise ordinance, this time it determined “that this is a quality of life issue, not a health issue,” Baisley said. That means any amendment to the current ordinance will have to be drafted and approved by the Board of Selectmen before sending it on to the RTM for review and approval.

To that end, the selectmen, who say they are open to exploring CALM’s proposal, recently had a town attorney draft a preliminary ordinance that reflects the group’s desires. The proposed ordinance, which is subject to further revisions, will need approval from the selectmen and the Representative Town Meeting in order for it to replace the current ordinance.

During the two-hour forum, a panel including Baisley; Biggs; Bruce Spaman, director of the Parks & Recreation Department’s Parks & Trees Committee; William Dunster, owner of local landscaping firm Dunster Landscaping; and First Selectman Peter Tesei, presented their views on the proposal and fielded questions from the audience, which, in classic LWV style, were submitted via note cards and read aloud by the moderator.

Prior to getting started, LWV of Greenwich President Cyndy Anderson clarified that “this is an educational forum — it is not a debate.” She added that the League “does not have a position on leaf blowers — we want to present as many perspectives as possible to you, the electorate, so you can make up your mind.”

Biggs said the noise from leaf blowers isn’t the only issue, it’s also the significant amount of dust and pollutants that they spread around when being used. She said she was disappointed that the health board’s subcommittee “didn’t recognize … that clouds of dust, mold, feces, soot, heavy metals, spores and pesticides” are bad for people to breathe. Biggs also said she was disappointed that the health board didn’t recognize the negative impact loud, sustained noise can have on people’s health, even though it acknowledged it.

Biggs says the ban is needed because leaf blowers are being used “excessively” and enforcement of the current ordinance is lacking.

“The things that we’re using them for we can do just as well with other tools — [rakes and brooms] worked for many, many years before leaf blowers became the tool of choice,” she said. “There were beautiful, well-manicured lawns on all the estates for many, many years before we had leaf blowers, so I’m sure we can get by without them [for the summer months].”

Biggs said “hundreds of towns in the U.S. have banned leaf blowers in the summer time” and used Hawaii as an example. She said the entire country of Israel has banned the use of leaf blowers. She said in those communities where leaf blowers have been banned, the landscapers and homeowners in those towns have not complained.

“This isn’t about causing economic harm to landscapers,” she said, adding that banning leaf blowers for the summer months would have no economic impact on area landscaping businesses.

Biggs added that CALM “is open to the idea of electric blowers, even though they still stir up the particulates.”

Spaman said Parks & Rec workers use leaf blowers regularly. He said the department currently owns and operates 52 blowers of various types, which are used to clear debris from a total of 155 acres of town-owned, managed turf (including parks and sports fields).

“The leaf blower is an innovation of efficiency that saves much of the labor of collecting and moving leaves from our 155 acres of lawn,” Spaman said. “For the past eight years the workforce of the Parks & Recreation Department has been shrinking, so better efficiency is becoming extremely important.”

During the meeting it was revealed that the proposed ordinance would not ban town departments, such as Parks & Rec, from using leaf blowers during the summer, only homeowners and commercial landscapers.

Dunster said he has about 100 customers in town. He said from what he’s seen “there are many landscapers who come into town in the evening and use blowers” without necessarily being aware of the restrictions. He said in his estimate, only about 5 percent of area landscaping firms work on Sundays.

Dunster refuted Biggs’ claim that the proposed ban won’t have any economic impact on area landscaping businesses.

“The current policy, one blower per parcel, restricts productivity,” he said. “It takes additional time to sweep and rake, rather than blow. I know that the thought of a rake and broom sounds sweet and homey, but go to someone’s house that has two acres and tell me how it goes. You’ll be there the entire day whereas down the street, where they’re using blowers, they’ll be done in an hour and 20 minutes.”

“There is just no way a landscaping company can maintain a large piece of property using just one blower,” Dunster said, adding that enforcement of the current ordinance “just isn’t working.” He suggested that, instead of implementing a ban, the town restrict the hours of use more (perhaps by eliminating evening hours of use), and do a better job of enforcement.

Mike Long of the Greenwich Health Department said he spoke with town officials in Scarsdale NY, which has had a ban on leaf blowers since 1990.

He said Scarsdale bans leaf blowers from June 1 to Sept. 30, with hourly restrictions for the rest of the year. He said the town held “many public hearings in order to get the ban implemented,” and ultimately, “the feeling was that leaf blowers are not needed as much in summer as they are during the spring and fall.”

“In the past five years police there issued about 255 summons, which is about 50 per year, each imposing a fine,” Long said. “Enforcement there has worked – it has quieted the community — and complaints are down.”

During the forum several residents asked how many complaints the town gets each year about noise from leaf blowers, however, Tesei said the town has not compiled that data as of yet.

Tesei said the Board of Health is responsible for the drafting of the current regulation.

“They can do it again — however, if they opt not to, due to a lack of found health reasons, the Board of Selectmen can draft a new one based on quality of life,” he said.

However Tesei said due to the process it is unlikely there will be any changes to the town’s noise ordinance anytime soon. He explained that it is unlikely to happen this year, since the RTM doesn’t meet again until September.

“The RTM meets three more times in 2011 — September, October and December — with December being a lame duck session, since new members will have been just elected,” Tesei said. He added, that in order to get on the RTM’s meeting agenda for September, the Board of Selectmen would need to take action by Aug. 25, which he said is not likely to happen considering that the board would need to hold two public hearings on the matter, in order to consider public feedback, and then draft the ordinance by that date.

Tesei said a “best-case scenario” would be if the board could get the proposal to the RTM in October, “but worst case scenario, I don’t see this happening until next year — if at all, because of the fact that there is an election process in place.”

He pointed out that the RTM also will need time to analyze the proposal, both from a committee perspective and legal perspective, and would likely postpone its decision.

“Our process is time consuming – but provides for ample public input,” Tesei said.