Frequently Asked Questions About the Leaf Blower Ordinance Amendments October 10, 2008 draft Why should the Council adopt amendments at this time? The current ordinance was adopted in December 1994. (The only part that has been amended since then concerns the dates that leaf blowers are allowed, which was amended in February and May 1995, and in February 2000.) Since 1994, Montclair and the rest of the nation have experienced a large increase in the use of leaf blowers by professional lawn maintenance businesses and others, not only to blow leaves, but also to clean dust, pollen, and debris from many surfaces. About 3 million leaf blowers are now sold every year in the U.S. Leaf blowers have well known adverse effects, and the public perception of the leaf blower problem has led to repeated efforts by Montclair residents to gain restrictions, or even a ban, on the devices. Moreover, advances in leaf blower technology and in federal EPA pollution standards have made available leaf blowers that are much quieter and much less polluting than older models. The Township's 2006 Master Plan Reexamination Report called for the township to "reduce excessive noise caused by the use of mechanical devices such as leafblowers" and called for a reexamination of the leaf blower ordinance.1 Why should we limit the noise output of leaf blowers to 65 dB? Noise is probably the most frequently mentioned adverse effect produced by leaf blowers. A large proportion of Montclair residents are home during at least part of the day, and thus are exposed to leaf blower noise. Of Montclair's approximately 15,000 households, about 37% include children under the age of 18, most of whom are home part or all of the day, and about 22% of the households include individuals who are over the age of 65, most of whom are retired and in their homes for much of the day.2 In addition, a significant and growing proportion of residents work at home, including artists, writers, editors, producers, and therapists. The Township's 2006 Master Plan stated "[a]s more and more residents work at home and spend more leisure time at home, a peaceful environment becomes more important."3 Leaf blowers that are rated by their manufacturers to produce no more than 65 dB have become commercially available in recent years. (An ordinary conversation is about 60 dB, while a vacuum cleaner is about 70 dB.) Echo currently lists seven internal-cumbustion models of this type, Stihl lists two, and Red Max lists one. Although this much quieter technology is available, most leaf blowers in use in Montclair are older, noisier models. Other communities, including Maplewood, N.J., Cambridge, Mass., and Montgomery County, Md. allow landscapers to use only the quieter leaf blowers. Hence, Montclair's amended ordinance allows only leaf blowers that are rated at 65 dB or less. Why should we limit the emissions of leaf blowers? Urban air pollution is a significant health hazard, with many studies showing that it causes increased rates of respiratory and heart disease.4 The pollutants emitted by leaf blowers, most of which use two-stroke engines, include particulate matter, carbon monoxide, and a number of hydrocarbons, including benzene, which is carcinogenic, and 1, 3-butadiene, acetaldehyde, and formaldehyde, which are probable carcinogens.5 Gas-powered leaf blowers are much more polluting than cars; a leaf blower produces in one hour as much particulate matter as a 1999- or 2000-model car driven for 49 hours at 30 miles per hour (1470 miles), as much carbon monoxide as that car driven for 26 hours (780 miles), and as much hydrocarbons as that 2 car driven for 510 hours (15,300 miles).6 Moreover, unlike cars, another major source of urban air pollution, leaf blowers are used for extended periods in particular locations that are in close proximity to residences, on both the property on which they are being used and neighboring properties. Residents who are in yards or walking on sidewalks are exposed to harmful fumes. Recognizing the problem, the federal EPA has developed "Standards for Small Spark Ignition Hand Held Engines." These standards have gone through two phases, with Phase 1 beginning in 1997 (projected to reduce emissions by 32%) and Phase 2 implemented from 200207 (projected to reduce emissions by an additional 70%).7 Leaf blowers that meet Phase 2 standards are now readily available. However, many leaf blowers in use in Montclair are the older, more heavily polluting models. Other communities, including Maplewood, N.J. and Westchester County, N.Y., now require landscapers to use only the less polluting leaf blowers. Hence Montclair's amended ordinance allows only leaf blowers that meet the EPA's Phase 2 standards. Why are there different phase-in periods for different types of users? Commercial lawn maintenance businesses, the Township, and the Board of Education have the capacity to renew their equipment within six months. Homeowners and other property owners such as religious congregations should have one year to do so, in order to avoid unduly burdening them. Why include electric leaf blowers in the ordinance? The 2006 Master Plan called for an examination of whether the ordinance should be extended to electric leaf blowers.8 Since the ordinance was written in 1994, electric leaf blowers have grown in use. While they do not produce the hydrocarbon emissions noted above, electric leaf blowers produce noise and dust problems similar to those of gas-powered machines. . Why should we further limit the dates of use in the Spring? The existing ordinance allows leaf blowers to be used from March 1 to June 30, a full four months. This is longer than the two and a half months currently allowed in the fall, which is when most leaves are falling and leaf blowers are most needed. The amended ordinance would reduce the spring period to one and a half months, from March 15 to April 30. This would allow for an ample period of spring cleanup of leaves and other debris that are present at that time of the year. Other communities have similar restrictions; for example, the Village of Pelham, in Westchester County, N.Y., limits leaf blowers to Oct. 15 to Dec. 15 and March 15 to April 30.9 Why add the Police Department to the agencies doing enforcement? Current enforcement of the Montclair leaf blower ordinance is widely seen as inadequate. Enforcement is hampered by inadequate staffing of the Code Enforcement office and by the fact that no one in that office is available after hours or on weekends. By contrast, the construction noise section of Montclair's noise ordinance provides for enforcement by the Police Department, and enforcement of that section is more effective than for leaf blowers. The amended leaf blower ordinance states that enforcement is by the Police Department and Code Enforcement. This would permit Code Enforcement to take the primary enforcement role, with the police as a backup. If a Code Enforcement officer is available, he or she would make the visit to the site of the alleged offense. If no Code Enforcement officer is available 3 because they are all out on calls, or if it is after hours or on the weekend, those making complaints would be directed to call the police.10 Why specify a minimum fine of $100, and an accelerated fine structure? Compliance with the current leaf blower ordinance is poor. Lawn maintenance businesses may be more highly motivated to comply if the penalties for offenses were clear and if those penalties increased markedly for repeat offenses. The current ordinance states only that a fine of up to $2000 can be levied by the Municipal Court Judge. This seems unnecessarily open-ended. The amended ordinance would state that the fine would be a minimum of $100 for the first offense, $250 for the second offense, and $500 for the third offense. In addition, violators would lose their licenses to operate in Montclair after a third offense. What else can be done to improve compliance? The Division of Code Enforcement has limited resources and many responsibilities. Hence it is important that the division is directed by the Town Manager or Mayor to make enforcement of this ordinance a priority. It is equally important to use the division's resources carefully. Code Enforcement can be directed to carry out periods of intensified enforcement, including patrols, perhaps for several weeks at a time, in order to communicate clearly that the township is serious about enforcing this ordinance. This was done successfully with traffic enforcement (crosswalks) in Summer 2008.11 For the leaf blower ordinance, intensified enforcement periods could occur just after the new ordinance takes effect, at the start of seasonal ban periods, and at other times. In addition, Code Enforcement personnel could be directed to give citations for leaf blower violations which they observe while they are travelling to other calls. A patrolling approach has been used successfully in Maplewood. Since the Town Clerk's office handles licensing of landscaping businesses, this office would need to maintain records of violations that would lead to a loss of license. When issuing license, the Clerk should provide landscapers with a summary of the leaf blower regulations written in plain English and Spanish. 4 Notes 1 Master Plan Reexamination Report 2006, prepared for the Montclair Township Planning Board by Karen A. Kadus, p. 32, 33. 2 U.S. Census Data, 2000; available at http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/QTTable?_bm=y&geo_id=06000US3401347500&-qr_name=DEC_2000_SF1_U_DP1&-ds_name=DEC_2000_SF1_U&-_lang=en&redoLog=false&-_sse=on. 3 Master Plan Reexamination Report 2006, prepared for the Montclair Township Planning Board by Karen A. Kadus, p. 32. 4 For example, see L Cifuentes, V H Borja-Aburto, N Gouveia, G Thurston, and D L Davis, "Assessing the health benefits of urban air pollution reductions associated with climate change mitigation (2000-2020): Santiago, São Paulo, México City, and New York City." Environmental Health Perspectives. 2001 (June); 109 (Suppl 3): 419–425; AHA Scientific Statement, Air Pollution and Cardiovascular Disease: A Statement for Healthcare Professionals From the Expert Panel on Population and Prevention Science of the American Heart Association (available at http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/full/109/21/2655); J. Sunyer, "Urban air pollution and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a review," European Respiratory Journal 2001; 17:1024-1033. 5 California Air Resources Board, "A Report to the California Legislature on the Potential Health and Environmental Impacts of Leaf Blowers," February 2000, pp. 16, 42; report is available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/mailouts/msc0005/msc0005.pdf. The hydrocarbon emissions are largely due to the exhausting of unspent fuel. 6 California Air Resources Board, "A Report to the California Legislature on the Potential Health and Environmental Impacts of Leaf Blowers," February 2000, p. 50; report is available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/mailouts/msc0005/msc0005.pdf. 7 United States Environmental Protection Agency, "Regulatory Announcement: Final Phase 2 Standards for Small Spark-Ignition Handheld Engines," EPA 420-F-00-007, March 2000; available at http://www.epa.gov/oms/regs/nonroad/equip-ld/hhsfrm/f00007.htm. 8 Master Plan Reexamination Report 2006, prepared for the Montclair Township Planning Board by Karen A. Kadus, p. 33. 9 "Pelham Village Leaf Blower Law Proposals Tabled," Pelham Weekly, September 21, 2007; available at http://www.pelhamweekly.com/index.php?current_edition=2007-09-21. 10 11 A similar approach is taken by the city of Cambridge, Mass. Compliance with the state crosswalk law rose from 22% to 45% over a six-week period of intensified enforcement; Dan Pronti, "Their Day in Court," Montclair Times, August 21, 2008; available at http://www.montclairtimes.com/NC/0/486.html.