Partisan Free Politics

I know I usually focus my posts on highlighting abuses of power from, and the overreaching nature of the Federal Government, but this time I am going to switch it up a little, and take a pot shot a little closer to home.

One of my major summer projects this year has been to landscape my mom’s yard, and in the process find places for the fifty or so different trees, shrubs, and perennials that I have accrued over the last seven or eight years.  One of the final touches left in the transformation is the removal of an old, unsightly, gnarled pine tree that my mom has complained about for years.

  Now I knew that many cities in Oregon have regulations over such tree removals, but when I found out the details I was appalled.  In order to remove this single tree, or any tree that has a 10″ diameter within the City of Lake Oswego (measured at breast height or in the case of a tree with multiple trunks like ours 10″ at the base of the split,) you must first fill out a “Tree Removal Application,” a “Tree Removal Questionnaire,”design a mitigation plan, and then grant the city permission to enter the property to inspect the tree and investigate for any signs of previous unlawful removals (5″ trees, dead trees, or trees that may cause a hazard require a smaller fee and a slightly less strenuous process.)  Then you have to file the application, which of course costs $120 plus $10 per tree, mark the trees, post a sign and maintain it for at least a month, during which time “the public” can request a hearing.  The City Manager then has a very wide degree of latitude to deny, or alter the proposal in any way, or mandate that you get a report from a certified, and government licensed of course, arborist.  Section 55.02.094 covers the “Conditions of Approval”:

   1.    The City may impose conditions of approval on any tree cutting permit if the condition is reasonably related to preventing, eliminating or mitigating a negative impact or potential impact on natural features or processes or on the built environment of the neighborhood which is as created or contributed to by the approved tree removal.

    2.    Conditions of approval may include, but are not limited to:

        a.    Cutting a tree or stump flush with the grade instead of grinding or fully removing a stump;

        b.    Requiring modifications in the location, design or intensity of a development or activities on a site or to require or prohibit certain construction methods;

        c.    Requiring vegetation not requiring a tree removal permit to remain in place or be planted.

        d.    Requiring the removal of injurious vegetation (English Ivy) from other trees on the property.

In short the City Manager now has the final say in all your landscaping decisions, I’m just glad I’m not making an addition to the house.

  Beyond just the basic problems inherent when a society doesn’t have established and protected property rights, barriers like these work to drive housing prices up (imagine the hurdles and costs that developers face, which is obviously borne out in the final cost to home buyers,) but that is exactly what Lake Oswego is looking for.  This is a place that in 1844 mandated that all Blacks, free or slave, within the then Oregon Territory be whipped twice a year until they “shall quit the territory” (the punishment was deemed too harsh and “reduced” to forced labor later in the year.)  This was the first state to be admitted to the union with a exclusion law written directly into the State Constitution, a clause that wouldn’t be removed until 1926.  In short, this is a people who have long expressed desires to keep their country the way it is.

  When will people realize that this sort of regulation is the new racism? and classism for that matter…  When governments get this kind of discretionary power they get to choose the winners and the losers.  I for one, would rather see these decisions left up to the people.

  I understand that there may be some trees that the city has an interest in protecting, but shouldn’t it be the burden of the city to prove that the tree is an essential part of the city, and if such a decision is made, shouldn’t the city then pay to preserve the tree?