Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Providence council approves phased ban on gas-powered leaf blowers after equity debate
Summary
The Providence City Council voted to pass, as amended, an ordinance phasing out gas-powered leaf blowers with a city pilot this fall and a broader seasonal phase-out beginning in 2030; supporters cited air-quality and worker-health benefits, opponents warned of harms to small businesses and workers.
Providence — The Providence City Council voted to pass, for the second time and as amended, an ordinance to phase out gas-powered leaf blowers after councilors debated implementation and equity concerns.
Councilor Anderbrock, who explained the amendment, said the measure begins with a city-run pilot this fall and stages a citywide seasonal phase-out beginning in 2030. She said the amendment moves enforcement to the Department of Public Works and adds an education-first approach so residents and businesses receive warning and outreach before fines are imposed: "there will be a number of instances of education before enforcement so that folks aren't surprised or given a fine".
Supporters framed the ordinance as a public-health and environmental step. Councilman Gansaoffs told colleagues the proposal protects air quality and workers, adding a numerical comparison to highlight pollution: "Using a gas powered leaf blower for an hour is equivalent to 1,100 miles in a gas powered vehicle." He also said workers who operate the equipment inhale "neurotoxic chemicals and fine particulate matter."
Opponents warned of economic and equity impacts. Councilman Oscar Vargas argued the ordinance could remove income for small, often low-income operators who rely on gas-powered equipment and said battery technology and charging logistics were not yet sufficient for widespread use. "We're not ready yet," Vargas said, urging the council to consider effects on Latino and other minority residents who he said relied on this work.
The clerk called the roll and the motion carried with 9 ayes, 3 nays, 1 abstention and 1 absent. The council recorded the outcome as passing the measure for the second time on a roll-call vote as amended.
The ordinance’s supporters said the phased approach and outreach are intended to ease implementation; opponents asked for additional support and time to avoid unintended economic harm. The council did not specify a program to subsidize equipment replacement in the record.
