The first issue was thoroughly reviewed in the Community Commentary, “Ordinance exists to protect majestic trees,” by Stephanie Landregan on Dec. 8, and there is nothing I can add.
The Collards’ bank-breaking fine certainly calls for a revision of the ordinance but definitely not its abolition. Probably the basic fine calculation should be kept, but the ordinance should include a cap somewhere between $10,000 and $50,000 to make sure that the violation hurts but doesn’t bankrupt. But the cap should be applicable only to homeowners, not to builders/developers, who might consider the cap amount merely the cost of doing business.
Determining whether the violation is intentional or done through ignorance of the law would open a real can of worms if incorporated into the fine determination. This matter should be left for appeals. Besides, haven’t I heard that ignorance of the law is no defense?
Wouldn’t it also make a lot of sense to fine the tree-trimming contractors, too, as they are as much at fault, if not more so, than the property owners? Any reputable contractor, wherever they’re from, should investigate what the relevant law is and what, if any, permits are required in the community where they intend to work.
It seems that a large part of the defense of the Collards is that they were not aware of the tree ordinance. They obviously haven’t been reading the Glendale News-Press during the past year.
Although this ignorance does not excuse their violation, it does suggest that the city should do a better job of communication about the ordinance.
