Conservation Commission approves minutes, advances ordinance revisions
Conservation · Meeting of June 11, 2026
New Canaan Conservation Commission advances ordinance changes and flags a leaf blower referendum threat. Commission members Tom Frana and John led the June 11 meeting, unanimously approving May 14 minutes after correcting a name to Jennifer Holmes, whom the commission plans to consult on ordinance revisions requested by the Charter Revision Commission. John reported the town's leaf blower ordinance passed by an 8-4 Town Council vote but faces a petition drive seeking a public referendum, requiring roughly 700 to 750 signatures within 28 days.
Frana summarized opponents' position bluntly: "You can't tell me what to do, no matter what the science says." Members also heard that a May 2 well-water testing event drew about 15 residents, and one member called the session "the quickest meeting we've ever had."
In the full story:
- Who Was There
- Organizations And Documents Referenced
- The complete report — 2,032 words
Source: the Conservation meeting of June 11, 2026, reported from the official video recording and transcript.
The Full Article
Call to Order and Public Comment
The Conservation Commission opened its June 11 meeting after establishing a quorum both in person and virtually. Commission member Tom Frana moved to call the meeting to order; the motion was seconded and approved unanimously. With Frana still connecting by audio, members agreed that fellow commission member John, who had the agenda pulled up, would lead the meeting until Frana joined fully. No members of the public offered comment during the meeting's public comment items, though Robin, a New Canaan Land Trust representative, was noted as present.
Approval of May Minutes
The question before the commission was whether to approve the draft minutes of its May 14 meeting. One member flagged an error in the draft: a name rendered as "Jennifer Zonis" should instead read Jennifer Holmes. The correction was accepted, and the commission agreed to route the amended minutes to a staff member named Lola for final processing. The amended minutes were approved unanimously, with no other changes requested.
Bristol Preserve and Land Trust Stewardship
Background and stakes: The commission has an ongoing interest in stewardship activity at Bristol, a New Canaan Land Trust property, and has previously discussed decorative birdhouses installed there.
The question before the body was simply to receive an update, not to take action. Robin reported that the birdhouses at Bristol, which are owned by the Land Trust and originally stood at Still Pond, will be removed this summer for possible relocation to other Land Trust preserves as a rotating exhibit. Separately, she said the Cam Hutchins Garden at the property will need to be replanted because deer have eaten the existing plantings; Land Trust interns will be on site through the summer to help, and Robin said other plantings at the preserve otherwise look healthy despite dry conditions.
A commission member also asked Robin whether the Land Trust would be open to receiving a proposal for a drone survey of one of its properties. Robin said she would raise the idea with the Land Trust's stewardship committee and asked that the proposal be sent to her directly. No vote was taken; the item was informational, with the drone-survey idea left for follow-up between Robin and the proposing member.
Transfer Station and South Avenue Trees
This was a brief procedural item. With staff member Tiger absent from the meeting for a second consecutive month, the commission could not review the transfer-station data spreadsheet Tiger typically provides. A member said she would reach out to Tiger directly and try to have the data included in next month's minutes, though staff cautioned that timing might not allow it to be inserted retroactively into this month's record. No comments were raised on the South Avenue trees item, and the commission moved on without discussion.
Charter Revision and Ordinance Changes
Background and stakes: A charter revision overview was circulated to the commission on May 11. Per Frana's summary, the Charter Revision Commission identified nine non-charter-related issues townwide and recommended that several boards and commissions, including Conservation, update their governing ordinances. The commission had previously submitted recommended charter language, some of which body members said would now need to be adapted to fit ordinance format.
The question before the body was how to move from that charter-review input to actual ordinance language ready for submission to the town's Bylaws and Ordinance Committee, which meets monthly.
Substantive content: Frana said his intention was to carry the commission's previously approved recommendation language forward largely unchanged, adapting only its format to fit ordinance patterns, since it already reflects member feedback. Frana said he had intended to distribute specific ordinance edits before the meeting but had not completed that work. He proposed meeting with commission member John and inviting Jennifer Holmes, a town liaison who had briefed the commission earlier on the process, to walk through the draft changes.
The deliberation: A commission member pressed for clarity on procedure, saying she had checked the town website and could not find a posted schedule for the Bylaws and Ordinance Committee. Frana and John responded that the committee meets monthly and that Holmes had advised the commission to submit its request as soon as possible, since the committee reportedly does not have "a long track record of success in getting stuff done" on other boards' ordinance requests, though members noted the committee did eventually act on the leaf blower ordinance after sustained outside pressure. The same member asked whether the commission needed to hold a fresh vote on whatever language it submits, or whether its earlier approval of charter-review language already covered it.
"I owe you sort of a response, and I'm going to do a little work with people in town government, find out who has some answers for me on that, and see if we can include that in our policy or our ordinance." — Tom Frana, Conservation Commission member
Procedural steps and outcome: No vote was taken on ordinance language at this meeting. Frana said he would canvass each commission member individually after they review the draft document and determine whether enough interest exists to warrant a special meeting for a formal vote; he said even one member requesting a special meeting would be sufficient to call one.
Implications and what is next: The ordinance revision work is expected to continue into July, with Frana and John meeting with Holmes in the coming weeks and a possible special meeting to follow depending on member feedback.
Water Testing Program Report
Background and stakes: The commission ran a well-water testing event on May 2, timed to the town's farmers market.
Substantive content: A commission member identified as Susan reported that the event, staffed by a tester identified as Alex and an associate, drew roughly 15 participants who submitted water samples and received results directly. Members noted turnout exceeded expectations given the modest promotional effort, and that positioning the tester's table within the farmers market, rather than in a separate location, likely helped visibility.
The deliberation: One member asked whether the commission could include a short report in next month's minutes summarizing when the event occurred, who staffed it and how many tests were completed. Another member raised the idea of an anonymized public summary of the water-quality findings, separate from any individual's private results, so residents could know whether any broader issues were identified. Members agreed such a summary should avoid disclosing individual results and instead flag only whether any findings warranted public attention. One member offered to fold the results into a sustainability dashboard she maintains for the town if the summary is published.
"That's great. I'm so glad we did that. Thanks for making it happen." — unidentified Conservation Commission member
Procedural steps and outcome: No vote was required. Members agreed informally that whoever has notes on the event should send them to be compiled into a short report, format left open, for inclusion in a future meeting's minutes.
Implications and what is next: If the water-testing program continues in future years, members said a public-facing summary could help build awareness and participation ahead of the next event.
New Business: Guest Speakers and Committee Reporting
Commission member Anne, participating virtually, asked fellow members to send her names of prospective guest speakers for the fall, beginning in August or September, so she can arrange dates. She noted the commission has had strong guest speakers over roughly the past six months.
Separately, a member proposed that the commission begin incorporating standing committee reports into future meetings, either as written reports submitted in advance or with an accompanying live review at the meeting, citing the commission's recent stewardship and water-testing work as an example of what such reporting could formalize. No vote was taken; the idea was offered as a suggestion for future meetings.
Also under new business, a member said he plans to invite Greg Riley, a grant writer, to the commission's July meeting to discuss his grant-writing work and any potential connection to conservation-related funding.
Leaf Blower Ordinance Referendum
Background and stakes: At a member's request, the commission asked that a comment on the leaf blower ordinance be entered into the minutes.
Substantive content: John told the commission the ordinance was passed by the Town Council by an 8-4 vote. Implementation has been delayed by a group circulating a petition to force a public referendum. Members said the group is gathering signatures now, and that the effort appears centered around Greg's Nursery, though the precise count of signatures collected was not known to the commission. Members discussed a signature threshold of roughly 700 to 750, with an initial 50 signatures sufficient to pause implementation while organizers have 28 days to collect the remainder; participants said only registered New Canaan voters, of any party or unaffiliated, may sign. Members were told to contact Claudia Weber for more detail on the referendum's timing, with one member suggesting it could occur in July rather than alongside the November election.
The deliberation: Frana, asked directly about the basis for the objection, characterized it as largely one of principle rather than timing. Other members said they were less troubled by the ordinance itself than by the short runway before enforcement, noting other towns have typically allowed roughly six months' notice before similar bans take effect. Several members said a referendum, if it occurs, would likely pass overwhelmingly given the support they perceive for the ordinance, though one cautioned that a summer referendum, held while many residents are away, could complicate that outcome. Members also discussed the cost implications of a townwide vote, including the need to set up voting equipment at the high school.
"You can't tell me what to do, no matter what the science says, and I won't be convinced of any other way. It's my summary of their position." — Tom Frana, Conservation Commission member
Procedural steps and outcome: No commission vote was taken on the ordinance or referendum; the item was informational and entered into the minutes at a member's request.
Implications and what is next: Whether the ordinance takes effect as written or goes to a townwide referendum should become clearer within the 28-day signature-collection window members described, a timeline that falls in the weeks following this meeting.
Adjournment and Scheduling
Members set their next regular meeting for July 9 and discussed August 13 as a possible meeting date, with several members indicating they would need to attend remotely or could not attend at all. The commission leaned toward canceling the August meeting absent a specific need, revisiting the question in July. Commission member John moved to adjourn, seconded by Frana, and the meeting was adjourned unanimously. Members noted the June 16 Charter Revision Commission meeting as a date to watch.
Tom Frana — Conservation Commission member; helped lead the meeting, moved to call it to order, led the ordinance and leaf blower discussions.
John — Conservation Commission member; led much of the meeting's agenda, reported on the leaf blower ordinance, moved to adjourn.
Anne — Conservation Commission member; participated virtually, solicited fall guest-speaker suggestions.
Susan — Conservation Commission member; raised the water-testing program update.
Robin — New Canaan Land Trust representative; present in person, reported on the Bristol property and the stewardship committee.
Lola — town staff; receives corrected minutes for processing.
Tiger — town staff; prepares transfer-station data spreadsheet; absent from this meeting.
New Canaan Land Trust — owns the Bristol property and its birdhouses; Robin reported on its stewardship activity and a proposed drone-survey pitch.
Charter Revision Commission — issued a May 11 overview recommending ordinance updates for the Conservation Commission and other boards; its next meeting is June 16.
Bylaws and Ordinance Committee — town committee that meets monthly and will receive the Conservation Commission's proposed ordinance changes.
New Canaan Town Council — passed the leaf blower ordinance by an 8-4 vote, cited in the referendum discussion.
Greg's Nursery — cited by members as the apparent center of the leaf blower referendum petition effort.
May 14 meeting minutes — draft minutes amended at this meeting to correct the spelling of Jennifer Holmes's name before approval.