Edison Proposes Bamboo Ban For New Plantings After Months Of Debate

EDISON, NJ — Edison is trying again to settle its fight over bamboo.

At its Oct. 26 meeting, the Township Council introduced an ordinance that would repeal the township's current bamboo law. In its place, the new rules would ban new running bamboo across Edison, protect bamboo that's already planted, and keep the township out of disputes between neighbors over bamboo that spreads.

Subscribe

A public hearing and final vote are scheduled for Thursday, Nov. 12.

The proposal comes months after the council voted on Sept. 9 to rescind the bamboo ordinance it had unanimously adopted in March 2025. Mayor Sam Joshi vetoed that vote on Sept. 15 and told the council to fix the ordinance rather than drop it, Patch previously reported.

What the new ordinance would do

The proposed ordinance would remove the township's existing bamboo section from the code and move bamboo rules into the property maintenance chapter.

Under the proposal:

• No new running bamboo: No one could plant or grow running bamboo anywhere in Edison, on public or private land. Running bamboo is defined as species that spread through underground rhizomes, such as those in the genus Phyllostachys. The one exception is bamboo grown in an above-ground planter or container built to keep the roots from spreading.

• Existing bamboo is grandfathered: Property owners with bamboo planted before the ordinance takes effect would not face township penalties, inspections or violations for that bamboo on their own property.

• Neighbor disputes go to civil court: The township would not get involved in disputes over bamboo roots or stalks spreading from one private property to another. Those cases, along with questions about who planted the bamboo first, would have to be settled in state civil court.

• Public property is still covered: Grandfathering would not protect bamboo that spreads onto township land, sidewalks, roads, easements or utility lines. Owners would get written notice from the township and have 14 days to clear the bamboo or arrange for a barrier. After that, they could be fined $100 per violation, with each extra day counting as a separate offense.

According to the ordinance, enforcing bamboo rules on private property has caused "severe administrative burdens" and investigative problems, and has pushed "escalating private neighbor disputes" onto code enforcement officers.

The council says questions about underground root spread, who planted what and when, and who is responsible are "fundamentally private civil property interactions" that are best handled in court.

The bamboo rules have divided the council for months.

In September, Councilman Ajay Patil said the council had spent hours on the ordinance and found gaps in how it handled existing bamboo and enforcement on private property. He pointed to the number of summonses issued and to cases tied up in court, and said the township should save money on litigation.

Councilman Richard Brescher backed pausing the ordinance while township attorneys drafted language that could be enforced.

"We recognize this ordinance was a problem, I don't think it was created properly," Brescher said at the time.

Councilman Asaf Shmuel opposed rescinding the ordinance, saying the township still gets bamboo complaints.

"I would look at amending this ordinance rather than rescinding it at this moment," Shmuel said.

Council President Joe Coyle said most complaints came from a small group of residents.

"We haven't had 300 complaints; we've had about five people come here," Coyle said.

In his veto, Joshi criticized Brescher and Patil.

"This is another example of Councilman Brescher and Councilman Patil walking away from an issue rather than resolving it," Joshi said.

Have a correction or a news tip? Email sarah.salvadore@patch.com