The idea of quiet enjoyment of one’s home is something all of us are entitled to. However there are serious issues and unintended consequences of the proposed ordinance.
The first is the implementation date which is too soon for everyone to ramp up and comply.
The second are the dates when gas blowers are banned. May first is too soon, especially if there is a cold April and September 30 is too late. Those of us with wooded properties can sometimes see leaves falling in mid September.
The third is the true economic impact in the form of higher law maintenance costs. Electric leaf blowers are not as powerful as gas and the batteries only last for about 20 minutes. This means more labor costs to clean up the same lawn, in addition to the costs of the blowers and batteries. This should not be subsidized by a bureaucracy that would add administrative costs but instead passed on to the consumer in exchange for quieter yards.
Fourth is the unintended consequences of the ordinance. Since it is unlikely that the landscapers will have sufficient batteries to last the entire day, they will need to recharge the batteries. This will be accomplished by the landscapers using gas powered generators on their trucks. These generators are noisy and will cause their own noise problems.
The current proposed ordinance does not take all these issues into consideration. Every RTM district should hold a publicized public meeting in their district so that all stakeholders are offered the opportunity to speak and comment. After these meetings the ordinance should be revised and then voted on.