One of the best suggestions you received (below) regarded engaging the American Lung Association, at least in theory. I work closely with their Central California chapter so I have some insights that are worth passing along. In general, I have found that enviro groups in this region (which is more impacted by air pollution than Orinda) have a blind spot when it comes to lawn care emissions in general and leafblowers in particular. They would much rather go after large dairies, diesel trucks, power plants, all of which merit regulation of course, and they are being regulated. And this is what their funders support as well, e.g. the Hewlett Foundation.
I would go further and say that enviro groups as well as AQ regulators see lawn care/LB emissions as kind of a black hole. Who has regulatory authority over which aspect of these operations and their emissions? Regulatory coverage is both fractured and incomplete. With limited resources, how does an organization tackle the problem? So while in theory a group such as ALA could achieve cleaner air while building a grateful constituency of the silent LB-hating majority, in practice there is no legal foundation for such an effort.
This sector is where agriculture was 20 years ago in CA and the San Joaquin Valley--largely unregulated by federal, state, and local agencies for air quality. Since that time, step by step, agriculture was brought (screaming and kicking) into the fold. A key step was the passage of a series of bills in 2003 known as SB 700, which ended agriculture's exemption from Clean Air Act purview. My agency, as regulator of stationary and area sources (ag is the latter, where you have emissions rising from fields, feedlots, lagoons, etc.) took on the thankless task of adopting a host of regulations that incrementally established controls on field operations, feedlot/sewage lagoon design, pesticide application, etc.
A key element in the regulatory mix are what we call BMPs, best management practices. For example, dairies are now required to cover their feed piles to limit VOC emissions that contribute to ozone. As noted below, one of the policy forks in the road for groups such as QO is whether to ask for a BMP approach that limits how LBs are used vs. an outright or indirect ban on their use. For example, the use of LBs to clear sidewalks, gutters, and parking lots along heavily traveled commercial roadways and business districts is particularly undesirable from a health risk perspective due to the chemical characteristics of respirable road dust--the science is sufficient to make a strong case.
Unfortunately, there has been little research on the health effects of LB engine emissions and bioaerosols. To this end the Valley Air District is funding UCSF-Fresno's Center for Clinical and Translational Research to measure ultrafine particles (UFPs) from lawn care and several other sources. Ultrafine particles (less than 100 nanometers or 0.1 microns, or 1/25th the diameter of a 2.5 micron fine particulate) represent the new frontier in aerosol regulation. Their small size allows them to cross epithelial boundaries that would otherwise block uptake into the bloodstream and brain. We know, for example that they lead to greater heart rate variability and promote further sensitization of the immune system for those who are genetically predisposed, e.g. asthmatics.
Just to give you a sense of how they vary, we have found in our preliminary field work the following:
1. Residential neighborhood with no sources: 5,000 to 8,000 particles per cubic centimeter
2. Freeway with windows rolled down: 30,000 to 40,000 p/cm3
3. Roadway behind (smelly) gross polluting vehicle, windows down: 300,000 to 400,000 p/cm3
4. 30 ft downwind from a LB (emissions can be smelled): 300,000 to 400,000 p/cm3
5. 100 ft downwind from LB operation: 30,000 to 40,000 p/cm3
We have found that anytime you smell something, a smoking vehicle, LB, diesel truck, etc., you are being exposed to very high levels of UFPs. All this is very preliminary of course. Currently UFP are not regulated, but are recognized by EPA as meriting further research. The European Union has already moved to regulate UFPs. From my view of the literature, one can make a case that the large body of epidemiological research showing higher rates of asthma among children and adults who live close to freeways, is pointing to UFPs as the culprit as much as PM 2.5. (ozone levels are actually lower near freeways) UFPs, drifting over time and space, morph into larger particles, into the PM 2.5 category and larger. So those nearby heavy UFP sources are ingesting a much higher proportion of UFPs than those a half mile away, for example.
As a final note, I have just received the green light from my boss to organize later this year (or early 2012) a conference on the future of lawn care. We will be covering a range of topics, including health impacts at the occupation and neighborhood levels, emerging technologies, economics, regulatory authority issues, etc. Local struggles to improve community quality of life via LB bans will be part of the mix. As I have noted above, at this juncture you have little choice but to pursue a better QOL at the level of the municipal jurisdiction.
David
David Lighthall, Ph.D.
Health Science Advisor
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
1990 E. Gettysburg Ave.
Fresno, CA 93726
Phone: 559 230-6105
Fax: 559 230-6061
Mobile: 559 285-7113
From: Quiet Orinda [mailto:quietorinda@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 6:31 PM
To: susankendall@comcast.net
Cc: 4 Quiet; Amanda Ferguson; Annette Ellgaard; Barbara Stross; Barry; boneysteele; brownie; Burlington Willes; dale walwark; Darlene Patch; Diane; David Lighthall; Eco Magic David Schrom; ehudson; Eileen Arts; ejajeh; Henry; Herb Brown; Jack Miller; JD O'Connor; Jeanne Herbert; Jeffrey Segall; JoAnneh Nagler; joanrpinto@comcast.net; Johnwindle; Jon Lake; Jonathan Greenberg; Kate Burkart; Katharine Barrett; Lark Hilliard; Linda Hudak; Lisa Summers; Louis Hagler, MD; Lynn Brewer; Maya McBride; mayamcbride@gmail.com; medapets@aol.com; Mike Kron; milesdenniston@hotmail.com; Mr. Bill; mxanto@yahoo.com; Paul Barnhart; Ray Peters; revdmother@aol.com; Roger Wilson; Sarah M Lee, Maya's friend (asthmatic); Scott Zeller, MD; Shepherd Bliss; Steve Davies; stitchboyle@yahoo.com; W Wayer; Walden Browne; Walwark Dale; Waranoff; Yannick Phillips
Subject: Quiet Orinda's Comeback
Quiet Orinda: The Comeback, Part One
First, let me start off by apologizing for my extreme procrastination. I could cite my new job, dealing with my mother’s advancing dementia, doing my taxes, and a suite of other distractions, but the fact remains I promised you this two months ago, and here we are….
If there’s a silver lining to the protracted pause, it may lie in the additional perspective and feedback received since November 15 (when we presented to the City). Emails from members and outsiders continue to arrive; letters to the editor appear in print and online; residents still call our home to plead for relief. Our cause is known to all who perform a simple Google search.
We’ve inflamed the passions of a stubbornly libertarian band of Lamorindans, too. Just visit the Lamorinda Patch website, where Chris Nicholson cheerleads a band of pro-blow types repeating the same old argument: “if the noise and dust bother you, just deal with it.”
All this publicity about Orinda is largely negative, which in the short-run is a good thing (in my opinion).
I’m not sure how you’ll react to the following, but there are consequences to publicizing our debris blower pollution problem in Orinda. Here’s a recent email exchange I had with someone from Illinois considering moving to Orinda:
“Is there a leaf blower ban in Orinda? We are looking for a home in a quiet community that has at least a seasonal ban on leaf-blowers.
Any information would be appreciated.” (signature omitted)
Here is what I wrote back:
“Unfortunately, Orinda has no ban on leaf blowers- yet. The City Council denied our appeal for a total ban, and we are planning a second approach to the City for relief. As it is now, we have chronic leaf blower pollution six days a week, both gas and electric varieties. On Sunday, you can run lawn mowers (gas-powered) and electric leaf blowers too.
The City is run by volunteers connected to the real estate market – agents, attorneys, and architects. They need to realize that our community’s reputation and desirability are linked to more than good schools and proximity to San Francisco.
If we knew how Orinda would be so negatively transformed by the innumerable mow-and-blow gardening crews that stream in six days a week, we would not have chosen the town. Mill Valley has a gas-blower ban, and we are considering retiring there, if Orinda won’t change.
Thanks for writing us, and please let us know how your decision process is progressing, Peter”
And here is her last reply:
“Dear Peter,
Many thanks - we live in Evanston IL, and have the same gas blower problem but do have seasonal restrictions in place.
I wish there was a national website that listed "quiet and clean" communities. Grateful for your efforts.
We will look at Mill Valley.”
I was saving this email for future use (like sharing it with the Council), but you deserve to see it now. It’s a powerful testimony.
As the heading states, this is “Part One.”
Changing the noise ordinance to severely restrict debris blowers (if not ban them) remains the goal. We’ve no shortage of brilliant ideas; we do have (at present) a loosely-organized bunch of like-minded folks without the requisite organization, responsibilities, and strategy. So…
Job One: Approach the City Council, Again
Notify Orinda’s Council that their “decision” is unacceptable and demand a proper hearing. I think a letter on QO letterhead, signed by a few dozen of us, should be prepared and sent ASAP. I as much as stated this on January 2nd, 2011 when I spoke to the Council (again) with Maya and Barbara.
Job Two: Upgrade our technology.
The QO website was designed and coded by a gentleman who’s no longer in the area. It wasn’t really what we envisaged to begin with. It’s too muted, hides important reference materials, and uses a Forum module (freeware) that doesn’t invite participation. Moreover, we’ve been peppered with sign-up requests by Chinese and Slavic hackers (about five per day)!
By the way, we pay $15 monthly for web hosting.
Someone should be in charge of technology (Bill Ayer, I nominate you) and work to create a new Forum/Blog/Listserv/Facebook page where we can exchange ideas, debate, and communicate, and hold virtual meetings. I realize this is a considerable undertaking, but I’m no techie and we need someone like you (yes, of course you’re far more than just a techie!).
Job Three: Enlist members, and let them focus on what interests them most:
For example, I would like to focus on media and on outreach to the various environmental and health groups. I know I can interest the press in our cause; I’d like to try to connect us with the non-profit groups like Sierra Club, the NRDC, American Lung, CARB, etc.
We need someone to spearhead our campaign with the Orinda City Council. I’ve already pushed them pretty hard; it’s time for some of you to take over all the communications, interviewing, planning of speaking events, etc.
We need someone to conceive and implement strategies to pressure the City to respond. For example, regular visits to every City Council Meeting to speak during the Public Forum time; letter-writing; Farmers’ Market signature- gathering; real estate agent contacts (to persuade them that home values are tied to Orinda’s reputation and liveability).
A new website (part of tech. above ?) should be created. I’d like to be able to have it be much more vibrant. The home page might include a video montage of blower-crew activity; quotes from our council members; quotes from the EPA and others; and links to gallery pages where you can view short videos of neighborhoods under siege, our own 4-minute QO video, etc.
I’d also like to see a gallery page of documents, reports, and brochures, so users can download the file just by clicking on the image of the document.
We need several people to maintain the communication flow to our members- literally, a news staff. We have several superlative wordsmiths – Eileen, Jeffrey, and others come to mind- to help out. Just witness how long it’s taken me to get this out to you!
I’ll stop here. I hope you’ll agree that I’ve done my share of talking, writing, meeting, and planning; it’s time for me to step aside and to follow you as we launch our next phase. I’m as committed as ever, fired up and ready to go – so please, please take the initiative and let me know how you’re going to pitch in. And tell me what you need me to do!
Yours in a Quieter and Cleaner Orinda,
Peter
p.s. below is the summary of your suggestions, first emailed to you back in January 2011
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First Compilation of all the Suggestions from QO Members re: “Moving Forward”:
(Please review, comment, add, edit, suggest one more time!)
Most Recent Thoughts:
“I think a highest priority is to build wider public sentiment for our position. That would involve some pragmatic scaling back of our request from the total ban position. There is wide public empathy regarding the noise. Not so much regarding the pollution. That's my observation.
The biggest knock is the assumed increase in cost. Perhaps a poll on that subject in Sebastapol would help. A lot of work too.
Also, avoid engagement with Chris on your forum or others. Every response to his rambling rationalizations encourages him and drives the casual reader away. I suspect”
“I think we ought to try to develop a specific proposal, such as a ban on gas powered blowers and a ban on a certain noise level measured at a certain distance. We should find the components common to the greatest number of enacted ordinances, and rally behind that as a compromise. “
New Name, Mission, Objective
though Quiet Orinda has a great ring to it, it only conveys the noise, not air, pollution message.
How about Environment Orinda? A broader name might give you more credibility, however, on the blower issue because it would show that's NOT all you care about. You care about the entire environment -- water, air, land (and people and other animals). Besides, airborne emissions affect not just air quality, but also the waterways. Chemicals is chemicals).
GreenOrinda –“ GO”!
Ecorinda"?
"Clear Air Orinda"?
"Green Orinda" ?
"Eco-smart Orinda"
"Eco-friendly Orinda"?
"Sustainable Orinda?”
Bucolic Orinda
Zero Air Pollution is too broad -- it seems to cover ALL polluting aspects; and it is an unreasonable goal. The "environment" suggestion was too broad, too.
Update from one member: “My two cents worth: I’m not sure changing the name of Quiet Orinda to broaden the appeal is such a good idea. Diluting the focus would, necessarily, dilute the message and the main message, I think, is that the noise is unacceptable.
Certainly the particulates kicked up are bad and this is another reason the use of blowers needs to be curbed, but the organization would not exist were it not for the noise. There are many environmental groups lobbying on air pollution issues; what sets us apart is our focus on the noise issue.
Would the New Yorker article have been written about yet another all-inclusive local environmental group?”
Membership Building and Fundraising
large map of Orinda with every property and every homeowner shown, and start filling it in with red, yellow, and green dots
. As mentioned above, we should seek out the yard maintenance service consumers and convince them to join us. If necessary, we should compromise with *them*, not with the city council.
. Reach out to as many people as we can. One thought is to put up the funds for a direct mail campaign to encourage new members to join. I for one would be happy to join with others in funding this.
Develop a more interactive e-mail system for communicating between ourselves. I'm in the IT business and I can donate a server and software for running a listserv
I have always felt that the key to our success was community organizing: identifying those individuals and groups who might be sympathetic to our cause and enlisting their support. Mapping our community's neighborhoods and doing grassroots organizing are crucial. IT JUST TAKES SO MUCH TIME AND ENERGY, AND WHO AMONG US HAS ENOUGH?
Technology, digital media, video
What about creating a Facebook page, either specifically for Quiet Orinda (although any non-Orindan could join) or more broadly, for the movement?
Creating a Facebook group is free and simple, and it can grow organically (thus not requiring much time for administration). A blog (also free, at blogpost.com), could be useful for disseminating more info....
Develop a more interactive e-mail system for communicating between ourselves. I'm in the IT business and I can donate a server and software for running a listserv
Alternatives, Gardener Relations/Promotion
: Forge alliances with yard maintenance companies. To help build our coalition of citizens, we need yard maintenance companies to offer blower-free options and publish openly the pricing for these options. This is very important.
Could you get an established gardening goup to do a non-blower "workshop"? Maybe at the farmer's market; sign-up in advance, maybe a small donation (to be sure they show up) - even if it is refundable if they DO show up.
I like William's ideas. My friend led a campaign for a seasonal ban in Rye, NY (NYC suburb similar to Orinda) and she advises us to get as many landscapers on board as possible
I like William's ideas. My friend led a campaign for a seasonal ban in Rye, NY (NYC suburb similar to Orinda) and she advises us to get as many landscapers on board as possible
Government, Legislation
. Glazer seemed willing to consider a seasonal ban
We need to attract influential members of the community who might have more clout with the city council
I like Maya's suggestion that we team up and approach individual council members in meetings. But what is our agenda? More importantly, what power do we wield?
Do you know if anyone is going to "sign-up" to meet Glazier or any of the other council members? I think we should meeti with everyone asap, while it is fresh in their minds. Mainly to remind them:
1) they made the wrong decision
2) This issue will surface again while they are in office
Can someone schedule a meeting with the others?
Consult with legal experts about ways to pressure the City to redress the problem (i.e. a lawsuit to enforce the stated purpose of the Noise Ordinance, a lawsuit to protect our health)
Begin exploring the Nuisance Dust claim-filing procedure with the BAAQMD (they do have a formal mechanism whereby we can ask for an investigation)
Approach the City Manager for advice, rather than the Council, as to how to revisit the matter
Consider compromises to an outright ban
Education Outreach
I think we need an extensive education campaign, so that people understand what's harmful to our health about leaf blowers.
educate through local garden groups; through high school science/environment classes; through area moms/parents groups. Young families need to be targeted.
Emphasize the workers' health issues in a much more intense manner
Don’ts
Plow the fertile field: find those most ready to join with you. Some will resist to the end. You've better things to do than spar with them.
Opposition Research and Engagement
Your "opponents" are just like you, well-informed about some things and ill-informed about others. Like all of us, each of them may be very stubborn about clinging to certain misinformation. Instead of viewing this as stupidity or venality, recognize that they're doing their best, and muster every bit of compassion you can for them.
Get to know the opposition. At the city council meeting, apart from the council members themselves, our primary opponents appeared to be do-it-your-selfers (blow-it-yourselfers?). These yard maintenance consumers present an opportunity for us This group probably outnumbers the blow-it-yourself group and we want those numbers.
Just a comment on the anti-ban folks at the meeting: in addition to the mow-and-blow homeowners, there were quite a number of landscape company owners. They are also a vocal force to be reckoned with.
Meet with some pro-blower types to personalize the issue and reach accommodations of some sort.
Fallbacks and Compromises
I have compunctions about promoting a seasonal ban. Aren't most of the cities who have gotten these bans those with four distinct seasons? Obviously, we don't have that climate here. We have leaves and blossoms falling in all the seasons. I think it would introduce a loophole from which we would have to extricate ourselves.
Consider compromises to an outright ban
Opinion Leaders locally, Luminaries and Elders:
Reach locals whose opinions matter (Identify them first…); Forge relationships with other experts who can advise us – including those community reps whose cities already have a ban in place (i.e. Diane from zapla.org, Steve Davies from Takoma Park, MD, etc.)
Science/Medical/Environmental Connections
Health care providers and health care agencies are KEY to advancing our case. Doctors, pediatricians especially, and their professional organizations. The American Lung Association. These individuals and groups are respected; they would add credibility and lustre to our cause.
Civil Disobedience/Negative Imagery/Embarrassment
We do have the power to embarrass the council and the community through media attention. I am sure neither the Council nor the Orinda Association (publishers of The Orinda News, which has been strangely silent on Nov.'s meeting) wants the negative publicity that a vocal, continuing campaign will generate. Do we begin this push-back? Do we threaten a concerted media campaign?
Continue to cast the City, the Ordinance, and the few Orindans who defiantly and publicly proclaim their pollution rights in unflattering, embarrassing ways (witness the online ridicule!)
Reinforce the negative effects on home values from excessive pollution and negligent City management, and hold out the promise of "redemption" once the problem is dealt with
Publishing/Writing
Maybe articles, fliers, email, facebook...
