Chico gets tree protection

On a 4-3 vote, the council passed a law to protect trees of 24 inches or more in diameter that grow on undeveloped properties of a half-acre or larger located within the city limits. City-owned properties, schools and the Chico State University campus are exempt. Staff was directed to come back with clarification on how orchard trees are affected.

The three councilmembers who voted against the ordinance—Larry Wahl, Dan Herbert and Steve Bertagna—argued that the law trod on private-property rights, was unnecessary and created a “slippery slope"—an expression Herbert used no fewer than six times—toward overreaching government.

The three councilmembers, who two years ago said they supported such an ordinance after developer Andy Meghdadi cut down more than 100 oak trees on his Terra Bella subdivision in southeast Chico, tried to pick apart the law as drafted by Tony Baptiste, the city’s community development director.

In particular they questioned why a “multistemmed perennial plant,” or shrub, as Wahl called it, needed protection. Herbert added his concerns.

“This is just an example of the slippery slope we are on,” he warned. “First we thought it was just trees. Before long it’s going to be groundcover.”

Marilyn Ditmanson, representing the Green Party, said trees are a community resource. Catherine Fish reminded Wahl, Herbert and Bertagna of where they stood on the issue two years ago and chided Wahl for referring to those on the citizen tree ordinance committee as “socialists.”

Wahl responded, “I didn’t call you socialists; I said that this [ordinance] was creeping socialism.”

Alan Gair scolded the resisting councilmembers as “out-of-touch reactionaries.”

Jason Bougie, representing the local chapter of the Building Industry Association, called the ordinance “restrictive to the development community” and warned it was only “a few words away from affecting every piece of property and tree in this city.”

After a lively debate about slippery slopes, shrubs and whether such an ordinance would have stopped Meghdadi—Councilmember Scott Gruendl said it would have at least given the city the mechanism to fine him $420,000—the council passed it.

As it stands, a permit will be required before a property owner can remove affected trees. It will cost $95 to remove up to five and $165 for more. In rare cases the removal may require a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review, $364.

The fine for illegal removal will be assessed based on the appraised value of the tree or $5,000, whichever is greater. The law goes into effect in 30 days.