Rhode Island Senate Bill S0520

Rhode Island 2023 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/7/23
• Refer: 3/7/23

Caption

Joint Resolution Making An Appropriation Of $1,000,000 To The Office Of Energy Resources To Fund A Rebate Program In Conjunction With The Passage Of An Eligible Ordinance That Would Ban The Use Of Gasoline-powered Leaf Blowers (this Joint Resolution Would Authorize An Appropriation Out Of The 2022-2023 Budget Surplus Of $1,000,000 To Fund A Rebate Program In Conjunction With The Passage Of An Eligible Ordinance That Would Ban The Use Of Gasoline-powered Leaf Blowers.)

Impact

If enacted, the legislation will directly affect state regulations regarding environmental health and public noise control. By providing financial incentives for localities to enact bans on gasoline-powered leaf blowers, the bill promotes a shift toward more eco-friendly practices in urban and suburban landscaping. The allocated funding will allow cities and towns to implement and manage the transition from gasoline to electric alternatives, potentially improving air quality and reducing noise pollution significantly. Additionally, this could lead to broader discussions and future legislation around emissions and urban environmental practices.

Summary

Bill S0520 is a joint resolution proposing an appropriation of $1,000,000 to the Office of Energy Resources. This funding is designated for a rebate program aimed at communities that pass ordinances banning the use of gasoline-powered leaf blowers. The intent behind the bill is to mitigate the environmental and health impacts associated with gasoline-powered leaf blowers, which are known to emit harmful pollutants and generate significant noise levels. The program aims to encourage local governments in Rhode Island to adopt measures that promote cleaner, quieter alternatives for yard maintenance.

Contention

While the bill generally has support for its environmental goals, there may be points of contention related to the impact on commercial landscaping businesses that rely on gasoline-powered equipment. Critics may argue that such bans could lead to higher operational costs or complications for businesses that would need to transition to electric tools quickly. Moreover, the practicality and affordability of electric alternatives may be questioned, raising concerns about whether local governments can equitably implement the ordinance without overburdening residents and businesses.