By Gretchen Webster

WESTPORT — The ordinance proposed to regulate local use of leaf blowers faced its last Representative Town Meeting committee hearing Wednesday, as the Ordinance Committee approved the controversial rules — but not before making changes.

The committee ultimately voted unanimously to pass the revised version on to the full RTM, which is scheduled to vote on the ordinance next Tuesday, Nov. 1. 

Proposed restrictions on leaf blowers — primarily those devices that are gas-powered — have been almost two years in the making. 

Disagreement over the regulations has divided residents who want the noise and pollution created by gas-powered blowers to be restricted, and landscaping businesses and town agencies that use the equipment in their work.

The hours and days that gas-powered machines can be used; requiring that gasoline-powered leaf blowers be replaced by electrical or battery-powered equipment, and what constitutes an “emergency” requiring cleanup with gas-powered blowers, have been among the issues debated.

A final version of the ordinance, as revised Wednesday night, was not immediately available.

Predicament over enforcement

Enforcement of the ordinance has been another problematic issue. 

Some RTM members and police officials objected to initial suggestions that police enforce the restrictions, which prompted a revision that assigned the enforcement role to the town’s Conservation Department.

At Wednesday’s Ordinance Committee meeting, questions over enforcing the rules arose again when Anna Rycenga, chairwoman of the Conservation Commission, said the Conservation Department “is understaffed and overworked” and in no position to take on enforcement of another ordinance.

“It still confuses me as to why it has fallen to the Conservation Department solely … It should be in the Planning and Zoning Department,” Rycenga said. An enforcement officer, even one who is a “floater” enforcing both conservation and zoning regulations, should be hired, she said.

“We don’t have enough enforcement capacity in this town, period,” agreed Kristin Schneeman, District 9, one of the sponsors of the leaf blower ordinance.  

She told the committee that although many on the RTM are not comfortable with police enforcement of the ordinance, others doubt the Conservation Department has adequate staffing to ensure compliance.  

A compromise — having the ordinance enforced by the conservation staff through an educational process, rather than taking a punitive stance — was offered by Liz Milwe, District 1, another sponsor of the ordinance. 

“There will be an educational campaign for a year before it goes into effect,” Milwe said, including workshops and other events to inform the public. “When most people know there is a law, they will abide by it,” she said. “The Conservation Department will not be putting out violations, they will be sending out a letter explaining what the law is.”

The proposal’s provision on “education” now reads: “Upon receipt of a written complaint (via email or hard copy) of a potential violation … the Conservation Director or their designee should provide written information and educational materials … to the property owner.”

That revision, which removes a penalty and enforcement phase, reduces the time and energy required of conservation staff, said Colin Kelly, the town’s conservation director.

Exemptions questioned

Other concerns for committee members included two exemptions in the ordinance. 

One was the use of the word “emergency” as an exemption to the regulation, which some committee members said was too broad a term, and could allow people to use their leaf blowers, bypassing the intent of the regulation.

Another concern was an exemption from the ordinance was for property larger than 20 acres. 

Peter Gold, District 5, said his condominium complex and other multi-unit residential developments on large parcels of land would then be exempt from the ordinance, despite the small individual yards of each unit.

Assistant Town Attorney Eileen Lavigne Flug suggested revised wording for those issues.

 She used the term “emergency situations” as an exemption for permitted use of leaf blowers in special situations, and excluded “residential communities” from the exemption on plots larger than 20 acres.

Putting together the ordinance “has been a remarkable job,” Stephen Shackelford, District 8, said before the committee voted to send the ordinance to the RTM. “I want to thank the sponsors for sticking with this for many months, if not a year.”

Co-sponsors of the ordinance, in addition to Schneeman and Milwe, are Jessica Bram, District 6; Harris Falk, District 2; Nancy Kail, District 9, and Cathy Talmadge, District 6.

Recent RTM committee votes on the ordinance have varied, with most of the panels approving the proposal, but at least one, the Finance Committee, voted 4 to 1 to reject it as presented.

Freelance writer Gretchen Webster, a Fairfield County journalist and journalism teacher for many years, was editor of the Fairfield Minuteman newspaper for 10 years and currently teaches journalism at Southern Connecticut State University.