Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Leaf Blower Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Madison residents and landscapers clash over proposed limits on gas-powered leaf blowers
Summary
An extended public-comment period at the Madison Borough Council focused on a proposed public‑health ordinance to restrict and eventually phase out two‑stroke gas leaf blowers; physicians and environmental advocates cited noise and health risks while landscapers and property owners warned of high equipment and charging costs and operational limits.
A lengthy public-comment period at the March 9, 2026 Madison Borough Council meeting centered on a potential ordinance to restrict and ultimately end use of two‑stroke gas leaf blowers in town.
The debate brought competing claims about community health, environmental impact and small‑business costs. ‘‘Gas blowers are not just loud, they're too loud,’’ said Dr. Sarah Murray, a Madison physician, arguing the devices typically operate “10 to 35 decibels louder than” the borough's 65‑decibel noise limit and describing health risks she attributes to prolonged exposure. ‘‘This is a health issue,’’ she said, and urged a phased transition allowing residents and landscapers time to adapt.
Landscapers told a different story. Jerry Frossell, owner of Frossell Landscaping, said switching to battery‑powered equipment could cost ‘‘over $25,000’’ and questioned battery life, charging logistics and the ability of electric tools to match current performance. Several landscapers and property owners added local examples: one resident said a landscaper told her conversion costs could reach ‘‘upwards of $24,000,’’ and another attendee said a nearby town’s experiment with a ban was reversed after complaints.
Speakers on both sides cited other municipalities’ experiences. Supporters pointed to year‑round prohibitions in nearby towns, and opponents cited places where restrictions were rolled back or found impractical. Residents and public‑health advocates also raised particulate pollution and noise estimates; speakers referenced studies and agency summaries but presented those as supporting evidence rather than settled fact.
Mayor Robert H. Connolly closed the public‑comment segment by saying the council would ‘‘sit down with a couple of landscapers’’ and review findings from other towns before any ordinance text is drafted. ‘‘There is no ordinance to share at this point because it has not been developed,’’ he said.
Why it matters: the council is balancing worker and business impacts against alleged public‑health harms and nuisance noise. Advocates say restrictions protect workers who operate blowers and nearby residents; opponents warn of steep equipment costs, battery‑charging limitations and potential loss of local small‑business livelihoods.
What comes next: Mayor Connolly said staff and council members will meet with landscapers and continue research; no ordinance was introduced during the meeting and no formal vote on a leaf‑blower regulation was held.
