Couple fined $347,600 for trimming their trees

Couple fined $347,600 for trimming their trees at the request of the fire dept

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Out on a limb over trimming fiasco

Everybody's got a horror story about a bureaucratic nightmare, but if you can top this one, call me collect at your earliest convenience.

Ann Collard was seven months pregnant with her third child in June when an abatement notice came from the Glendale Fire Department. She and her husband, Mike, were ordered to clear some foliage and maintain 5 feet of "vertical clearance between roof surfaces and overhanging portions of trees."

The Collards knew their oaks and sycamores needed a trim. And so they talked to neighbors, did a little research and called a recommended tree trimmer based in Orange County.

For $3,000, the guy said, he'd remove about 15% of the foliage and they'd be in the clear.

The Collards asked if a permit was necessary.

Not at all, said the licensed trimmer, who told the Collards he'd done lots of work in Glendale.

On the third day of the three-day job, the city's urban forester happened to be in the neighborhood, and noticed the tree trimmer doing his thing.

"She saw what was happening and said, 'Stop! Cease and desist!' " says Mike, a work-at-home software and computer guy.

Glendale has an indigenous tree protection ordinance that dates to the 1980s. It was enacted to discourage developers and homeowners from bulldozing or hacking trees willy-nilly. Earlier this year, because of citizen complaints that native trees were still being ruined, the city approved more restrictions and bigger fines.

None of which the Collards knew about.

They now admit that had they read the Fire Department notice closely, they would have seen in small print that a free permit was required to trim oak and sycamore branches larger than 1 inch in diameter. But it was an understandable oversight.

A week after her first visit, the urban forester was back, telling the Collards an arborist would come by soon to assess the damage. The Collards recall being told they might want to hire an attorney.

"That's when we realized the gravity of the situation," says Ann. "I was pregnant and crying, but it didn't help."

In August, the Collards got a visit from the arborist. She looked at the trees, took measurements and jotted down notes.

How bad could it be? The Collards began to anticipate the possibility of a fine, but it wasn't as if the trees were mauled. They looked pretty good, in fact.

Finally, on Oct. 1, a letter arrived. It was from Glendale's Neighborhood Services administrator.

"Dear Owner," it began. "The city of Glendale is committed to maintaining a community with quality streetscapes that include the care and well-being of protected indigenous trees."

The letter informed them they had improperly pruned 13 trees, some of them on city property because they were near the street, and some on their own property. The fine was listed on Page 2, where the Collards were informed they would be charged "two times the value of the damaged tree(s)."

"Total: $347,600."

"I about passed out," says Ann.

She'd been worried they might get fined as much as, say, $3,000.

"But this wasn't like 'Oh no, we won't be able to go on that vacation we were planning,' " she said.

Fortunately, the city did not ask for the Collards' newborn son as part of the settlement. But the prospect of financial ruin had the former high school sweethearts wondering if they could serve jail time instead of taking out a second mortgage.

The Collards began dialing City Hall for help.

"Is there somebody who could adjust the amount?" Ann recalls asking, without ever getting an answer.

"But even if they met us halfway, that's $170,000. We can't pay that, either."

Ann points out that White House aide Lewis "Scooter" Libby was fined $250,000 for perjury, obstruction of justice and lying to investigators in the case of CIA operative Valerie Plame. She adds, with appropriate exasperation, that Glendale Memorial Hospital drew a $25,000 fine in October for a medical error in which "a person was killed."

The Collard home is in a relatively high danger zone for wildfire, so I can understand why the Fire Department told them they needed to trim back flammable plants. But if the city's going to go after anybody, they'd be better off citing the Collards' next-door neighbor, whose branches are perilously close to the house.

"It's ridiculous," said Frank Ramos, who lives across the street and can't believe City Hall could leave the Collards hanging like this. The yard looks good, he said. It's not like the trees were butchered. He said he'd have done the same thing in their shoes. "They're a nice couple."

The Collards are $1,200 in to an attorney who got hold of the arborist's report, which alleged they'd had up to 60% of the foliage whacked on some trees. The trimmer used spiked shoes, too. A no-no.

The Collards are sorry they didn't know about the required permit, but they dispute the 60% allegation and have before-and-after pictures to argue their point.

The report also said some of the trees were worth as much as $100,000. I'd like to go on the record as being in favor of trees, but if the Collards really have more than $1 million worth of trees, maybe they should declare their property a national forest and secede from Glendale entirely.

And how about that team of geniuses who bloodlessly produced a $347,600 fee notice and blithely stuck it in the mail without a single person saying, "Hey, wait a minute. Isn't this insane?"

The Collards called City Hall repeatedly to see if someone might offer them an option other than robbing a bank. When they got no satisfaction, they started a website, www.glendaletreefines.com, to lay out their case and call for revision of the tree-cutting ordinance.

Glendale residents quickly weighed in, slamming City Hall.

"Absolutely ridiculous," wrote Stephen.

"Two words -- common sense!" wrote Jonathan.

The Collards soon found out they weren't the only victims of excessive fines.

"I was fined $175,000 for cutting two sycamores after my architect contacted the city and was warned not to touch oak trees," says John Oppenheim, a registered nurse and single dad. "I am not a criminal, though because of a string of bad advice, I did make a mistake."

Only after the tree fine story got some attention did city officials step up. City Councilman John Drayman told me the Collards shouldn't have to pay a nickel. Councilman Frank Quintero called the whole thing a fiasco and an embarrassment.

When I got hold of Mayor Ara Najarian, he said I was the first to learn that City Atty. Scott Howard had decided to drop the case against the Collards.

So they're completely off the hook?

For now, Najarian said. But they'll be called in for a conference at some point.

And might they still be fined?

Possibly, he said, but nowhere near $347,600.

How much, then?

Maybe $10,000, maybe less, Najarian said. And maybe the tree trimmer should get stuck with the bulk of the fine.

Yeah, and maybe the city should apologize to the Collards, pay their lawyer fees, and clear the deadwood out of City Hall


http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-lopez28nov28,0,7375819,full.column

Unbelievable !!! Bureaucratic red tape, once again...

IMHO, the tree trimmer who actually did the work should have been more on his toes, especially if he claims he does work in Glendale.

What if the opposite had happened? What if the "city trees" caught fire and destroyed those peoples' home? Would the city have paid them an equal amount? I doubt it.

These people shouldn't have to pay a penny. They complied thinking they were doing the right thing. The city should have been EXPLICIT with directions and SPECIFICS about all of it.

This whole thing is a travesty.

WOW... I can't imagine how shocked and upset that poor couple must have been! Going public with the problem was certainly the way to handle it though. Besides getting help for themselves, they have alerted the whole community and may have prevented problems for other innocents!

WOW! I thought our little city was bad, but in no way compares to these poor people! They are lucky they didn't end up causing themselves to have a wrongful death lawsuit with her being pregnant! I would have flipped my lid, especially if I was in her shoes being pregnant! So sorry to hear someone having to deal with something of this nature.

I'd move out of that town and never look back!

this is the true example of someone with a bit of power going mad, where is the fire department in among all of this burocratic mine field, they told them to get the trees trimmed, I assume for health and safety reasons, would their home been covered with insurance if it got burned down and it then became clear they were warned by the fire dept to cut the trees to a safe clearance from there property, I dont think so, what if these trees in any way caused loss of life to the family or their neighbours, would the city councilors have said. too bad about your loss, but these trees are under a protection order so you should have saved the trees instead of yourself, it is probably a nice easy way for the city to have a permit to print money. how can so called sensible elected city councilors justify pulling on a jobs worth hat in a situation like this, like they are saying I am only doing my job so brains are not necessary. We all want to save trees, we all need educated about trees when we do plant them as ten to fifteen years later, these same trees can become monsters, but common sense must always prevail also, yes protect the trees growing in cities and towns, God, we all need then to admire, clean the pollution from the air etc, but we should also have a responsibility to save lives as well. who better than the fire department to know if lives or property is in danger, I would trust their judgement better that some suped up power maniac from the tree preservation department, I hope each and every person in that town signs a petition for common sense to be used and not bankrupt anyone who was given advice from a fire department, yet ended up killing this couple with worry. The fire department should be fighting the couples corner also. I cant understand why any place wants to get so carried away about dangerous trees, yet I bet they dont think to stop building work extending to the outskirts of the city where trees will be felled in the name of progress, Please, Please Please save as many trees as can be done safely without endangering lives, but please save us also from pea brained bureaucrats who have nothing better to do than frighten a pregnant woman, bankrupt her family and feel there is no way of discussing the best way to sort things out, I just hope these folks get booted out of office at their next re-election time and someone with common sense can earn their fat salaries doing the job with dignity, fairness and some form of guts and normal thinking. WeeNel.

http://www.glendaletreefines.com/wp/

This link will work, the former included a comma that made the link not open.

Real horrors happen to people who love their trees! Sad!

Christie

So sad. I learned the lesson to always read the fine print and always read before you sign. I don't care if it means the other guy has to sit sit sit while I'm reading. To bad you never really own something these days.

I can see how this happened. We have many laws about trees of large sizes especially live oaks. The problem is for a developer the fines were to low and just a cost of doing businees. We had a Best Buy clear cut all the trees in front of their new store. I believed they got fined $400,000 but they didn't seem to care so the county has been reviewing the tree laws. Best Buy had to pay the fine (a stop work order was put on the whole site) and replant something like 200 trees. LOL. Problem is the amount of money you need to fine a developer or large business has to be large for the them to actually care. That same fine applied to a home owner is just insane.

The couple is from California however. They tend to have the strictest environmental laws in the country don't they....

In UK, you can sometimes get permission or are told to cut a tree IF it is considered dangerous but there are extra laws that make sure you plant another tree (young one) to replace the one you have to take down, some areas, make you plant 2 trees as replacement, but at least common sense can prevail in these situations, I absolutely love trees, but they can become a danger to you or your neighbours, people dont seem to do enough research when planting trees, sometimes they know they will never live there long enough to see it to maturity, others just like the look of the tree, then ten years later realise there house is being invaded by roots, conservation is needed in to-days world, but it has to be done with common sense, if a fire department warns you that a tree is endangering your life and home, then I would go along with them rather than Wanda, the wicked witch going along the street and not allowing for any leeway. best wishes WeeNel.

We DO have some weird laws about trees where I am. Back in the late 40's and early 50's, the city planted Ficus nitida, Califonia pepper, Chinese elms, and host of other now HUGE trees on parking strips that were barely 3 feet wide in many cases. The surface root problems are extensive and have destroyed curbs, driveways, plumbing, gas lines, etc...and the city refuses to remove them.

They fine you if you prune them and tell you that you have to wait to have the city tree crew do it...which can take YEARS...and by then, the problem is worse. They will only come out to address the issue when huge limbs fall or someone's car or house gets damaged as a result. It's insane.

When we get strong winds, Palm fronds fly all over the place and hit cars, people and homes. The orange fruits they drop make a huge mess and people drive over them and they ricochet out from under tires and break windows on houses, and are a constant source of litter, as well as a huge temptation for kids to throw them...they're like rocks.

Whoever said "You can't fight City Hall" said a mouthful.