NewCanaanite.com recently received the following letters. Send letters to editor@newcanaante.com to have them published here. (We will publish letters related to the leaf blower ban and referendum through July 22.)
***
The single biggest weakness in the Gas Powered Leaf Blowers ordinance is that the ordinance’s stated objective is reducing impacts from leaf blowers, yet its exemptions allow many of the same impacts to continue based solely on the identity of the user (resident, DPW, utility, etc.) rather than on measurable factors such as noise level, decibel output, duration, or proximity to homes. It says the noise is unacceptable when a contractor uses a leaf blower however is acceptable when a homeowner does. That distinction is difficult to justify based on the stated environmental or quality-of-life objectives.
The ordinance exempts Department of Public Works, Utility companies, Storm cleanup, and Safety operations. It does not clearly define when DPW use is necessary, whether routine maintenance qualifies, whether the same activity would be prohibited if performed by a private contractor. City crews may perform activities that private contractors cannot, which raises questions regarding equal treatment. Ordinance violations will be assessed against property owners while the equipment operator is often a landscaping company, a subcontractor or a seasonal worker, yet the homeowner receives the citation?
Gas blowers are prohibited during the summer season and electric blowers are permitted only during narrow operating windows. The ordinance encourages electrification while simultaneously restricting the alternative technology. A landscaping company may have to invest heavily in electric equipment only to find a six-hour weekday operating window and a four-hour weekend operating window. Also, landscapers will likely pass through equipment conversion costs, reduced productivity cost and additional travel time due to returning to complete jobs that fell outside the permitted time. If smaller landscaping firms decide to avoid New Canaan accounts and limit service areas, residents will lose the benefits of multiple job bids and pay more due to less competition.
The ordinance requires extra reinforcement costs for investigations, warning notices and fine collection however does not identify the funding source, personnel or methodology. The practical effect is that the Gas Powered Leaf Blowers ordinance regulates who is using the blower more than the actual noise being generated, which is difficult to reconcile with its stated quality-of-life rationale.
Vote No – It doesn’t make sense.
Shannon Marciano
***
Dear Editor:
Amidst everything written about the leaf blower ordinance, one question remains unanswered. Why is the town’s Department of Public Works exempt? Little, if anything, has been offered by way of explanation. Is it cost? Inefficiency of the required equipment?
If it’s burdensome and impractical for the town, then the same considerations should be allowed to other commercial operations. Yet as it stands, it has the look of the town exempting itself from the very requirements it’s imposing on others.
Catherine O’Neill