The Orange County Grand Jury's call earlier this year for cities, school districts and the county to ban leaf blowers appears to be more hot air than substance, with spotty enforcement and few citations to show for the effort.
The report found that gas-powered blowers emit toxic fumes, create high-velocity winds that whip dust and pollutants into the air and generate noise that endangers the operators and bothers residents. It harshly criticized the devices, saying the health hazards that citizens face "outweigh the questionable economic benefit" of blowers for local governments.
Yet most cities have yet to address the issue, and Laguna Beach, the only Orange County city to ban the blowers, issues only warnings, not fines.
Steve Balogh, owner of Bio-Scapes Landscape Services, said he still uses a leaf blower, and "I've never been caught. I see others use it too. The law doesn't change anything."
Since its invention in Japan in the early 1970s, the leaf blower has achieved widespread use in California. Experts estimate that there are nearly 1 million used across the state, half of those in the Los Angeles Basin.
In 1975, Carmel became the first California city to ban the blowers. Beverly Hills followed the next year. Now 20 California cities outlaw gasoline-powered devices and 80 others have slapped noise limits or hourly restrictions on their use.
Yet a Times inquiry shows that outright leaf blower bans are largely problematic.
Laguna Beach has perhaps the strictest ordinance in Southern California. The 1993 measure bans leaf blowers of any kind: gasoline, methanol, electric. City Manager Kenneth C. Frank said electric blowers, though quieter and less polluting, were banned because they still spread harmful dust that can include fecal matter, pesticides, chemicals, fungi and street dirt that can contain lead and carbon. Workers instead must use rakes and brooms or the so-called clean machine, a gas-powered vacuum.
The grand jury report said 95% of residents, gardeners and landscapers comply with the Laguna Beach ordinance, but those in the business dispute that.
Balogh said he simply could not operate without leaf blowers. "If I didn't have them, it would either put me out of business or I would have to double all my rates," he said.
Irvine considered a similar ban, but instead the city crafted a compromise in 1990. Businesses that use leaf blowers must register the machines for $25 apiece and put the equipment through a noise test. To be certified, a blower must be equipped with a limiter that restricts the motor to no more than half-throttle and must produce less than 70 decibels of noise from 50 feet away.
Operators also must take a one-hour class on blower use and etiquette, said Eric Tolles, the city's chief building official.
"There was concern in the community about leaf blowers and noise and dust and so on," Tolles said. "Rather than an outright ban, the city chose to try to limit the amount of noise they would produce."
Lake Forest's response to the grand jury report was typical: "The recommendation will not be implemented because it is neither warranted nor reasonable."
Officials in several cities said that one recommended alternative, electric-powered blowers, is not a viable option because most work occurs in areas far from electrical outlets. Another suggestion--a rake and broom--is too costly and inefficient, they said.
Eliminating Anaheim's gas-powered blowers would cause "a tremendous financial hardship," City Manager James D. Ruth wrote. Anaheim's cost for maintaining its 41 parks, two golf courses and 300 acres of landscaped medians and parkways would increase $480,000 under such a ban, he wrote.
Local governments, however, need to do more research about leaf-blower regulations before shooting down the grand jury's recommendations, said Erwin Anisman, a grand juror who helped research the report.
"Until they really analyze it, I don't see how they can come to a conclusion," said Anisman, who has read many of the responses.
Some Are Adopting Alternate Means
Officials in other cities, however, say that their ordinances have not been completely empty exercises. Societal pressure brought to bear by new rules has prompted fewer people to rely on the devices and manufacturers to develop quieter models.
Even so, officials in some cities such as Los Angeles, which banned gas-powered leaf blowers in early 1998, are facing reality. For Los Angeles, reality is spotty enforcement, few citations and a major loophole that leads judges to dismiss cases.
"It's just as bad as before [the city] put the ordinance in place," said Gerald A. Silver, president of the Homeowners of Encino. "It's a total failure. . . . Three, four, five days a week, we always have a leaf blower going full blast."
