With a 3-3 split on the city council over leaf burning, unless a councilor changes their mind, the future of leaf burning in Albert Lea rests on the vote of Mary Kron, who holds the tiebreaking vote but was absent from Monday’s council meeting.

Kron said she has made up her mind, but wasn’t ready to share that information.

Banning has many opponents and proponents. Some feel that the health problems caused by burning outweigh the benefits of a quick and easy way to get rid of leaves.

Don Sorenson, who lives in rural Albert Lea, said he has a very large lot which has many trees.

&uot;I could fill two semis with the amount of leaves I have on my lawn,&uot; he told the city council Monday night. &uot;But I mulch, compost and burn sometimes.&uot;

Sorenson said for him, burning isn’t necessary and that he’d give it up if asked without much hardship.

&uot;People who have very large lots could compost and get some great black dirt,&uot; he said.

He added that people with yards that are very large should have enough room for a compost pile.

Keith Register, who lives outside of Albert Lea, represented family members on Monday when he addressed the council.

&uot;I am for leaf burning 100 percent,&uot; he said. &uot;I have a son that has 15 acres on Frank Hall Drive. There is no way he could rake them all up and haul them all to the compost.&uot;

The main reason most cited in support of a ban is burning’s effect on health. Asthmatics and others with respiratory problems have complained about breathing difficulties.

Bob Moffitt, communications manager for the American Lung Association branch of Minnesota, says burning causes many health problems.

&uot;There are some very legitimate health concerns,&uot; he said. &uot;One of the main things is the visible smoke that comes off of leaf burning is made up of fine particulates. These very fine particles are more hazardous to the lungs than we had previously thought.&uot;

Moffitt said that the effects seen from burning are definite increases in the chance of respiratory infection, reduced air inhalation and an increase in the amount of asthma attacks.

But another problem caused is not directly respiratory. Moffitt said that the smoke also contains carbon monoxide, which can be absorbed into blood stream through the lungs.

&uot;That reduces the number of red blood cells in circulation, which hurts the elderly and people with heart problems,&uot; he said.

Burning does have its benefits, as well. In Albert Lea, the city spends less money than other cities because of burning. There is no cost for disposing of leaves when property owners burn them.

In Austin, where leaf burning is prohibited, the city pays for leaf disposal.Austin has a leaf collecting program, with four or five sites available to residents in different areas. The collection is done on weekends through most of October and into November. Local community groups, such as youth groups and sports teams, man the sites and get $800 a weekend. The street department picks up, loads and brings the bags out to the dump.

Owatonna has also banned leaf burning, according to the city offices. They have a compost site to which residents can bring their leaves.

This will most likely by Albert Lea’s alternative to burning, if it is banned.

City Manager Paul Sparks said the city does not have the money to institute a new program for picking up leaves. That means if burning is banned, people would have to bring their leaves to the city landfill. Extending the hours of the landfill was mentioned as a possibility, but other mechanisms for disposing of leaves are not possible, Sparks said.

The burning issue may not come up again at the council for a few more months.