44° F
6 Editor:
I am doing my best to get word out concerning our Bastrop trees and the proposed City of Bastrop tree ordinance.
The issue is slightly complicated. I am still studying the draft document, but am alarmed enough at this proposed revenue project and new level of proposed bureaucracy that I need to get word out to key people who can share with others to prevent this tyrannical double taxation on private property – and quite possibly bankrupting our town from lawsuits.
First, know this: In the past I have worked as a professional ecologist for state government, protecting and re-populating endangered species habitat. I love nature, and now make my honest living working the soil of Bastrop, planting, beautifying and caring for things professionally that will outlive me. The fact that this proposed mandatory tax is called the “Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance” I find logically deceptive and equally offensive, given the true revenue-generating nature and function of the proposal.
Imagine this: You satisfy the typical annual property tax assessed each year on your private property in a timely manner. But after February of 2010 due to the attached secret ordinance (not to be voted on by the people of Bastrop, only approved by the city council) you have to ask permission to cut down a tree on your own land. And no, the tree is not a state or federally endangered species; it is simply a Texas native or any tree over a certain diameter in size (excluding a list of ten individual species and commercial fruit trees).
That isn’t all.
You pay to apply for the permission application that costs $10. You pay to have it inspected or certified. You have to wait for their decision about your private property (30-60days). And that isn’t all. Then you pay $100 or $200 or $250 or $275 per inch of diameter of the removed tree to the new city tree fund. The example stated in the ordinance is a 40″ diameter tree, which incurs a fee of $33,000.
You see my alarm because I feel this will be devastating to property owners, families and even the city due to lawsuits. But wait, that isn’t all. You may then have to pay to have a replacement tree certified and planted. If it dies in two years, then pay to have it replanted – after, of course, all the above steps are satisfied. And again, that is not all. This will pertain to the City of Bastrop and any property they may decide to annex in the future.
The end of hometown tyranny begins with you. It is now in your front yard. Please inform yourself with the 19 pages of the proposed ordinance. Speak about it with your neighbor. When the city council decides to vote on this in February*, show up and demand justice for our grandchildren.
I’m not an organizer or someone who knows a lot of people, I weed my way through the right and wrong in life just like you; the injustice of this being, I believe, secretly pulled over the property owners of Bastrop is intolerable. Whatever grassroots grow from here, God bless, I’ll be there holding a sign beside you. Beside the erosion of natural private property rights, in my professional ecological experience I foresee not a protection of our ancient native trees species here at Bastrop, where people are encouraged to plant natives, but instead due to the financial future burden of replacing a 10-inch tree at $1000 or a 12-inch tree at $6000 or a 40-inch ancient native at $33,000, people will in turn begin planting more and more from the invasive foreign species listed as exemptions.
I believe an amendment to this ordinance must be made to clearly exempt all private property without exception. If the city desires to tax corporate clear-cutting of our trees for parking lots or state departments for pouring oceans of asphalt where our public trees once stood, may God bless them for doing their duty. But no to this unlawful double taxation of private property.
Todd Jordan
Bastrop
*The city council will meet on Tuesday, Jan. 12, where they will review the proposed tree ordinance. See page 1 in today’s edition of The Advertiser for a story about this issue.
I’m all for property rights, but not everyone has good sense. So what do we do if someone in the neighborhood decides not only to try to stuff an extra house in their front yard, but they decide to cut down some healthy big old Pecans just to lay some concrete for an extra car space. ..oh wait that just happened on Cedar Street. Well it appears we can’t do much.
Understand that property values in a neighborhood are interconnected. Aesthetically pleasing neighborhoods, are worth more. When one bozo decides to start cutting old trees willy-nilly, it can alter the aesthetics of the neighborhood and the surrounding home values.
Trust me, I want bureaucrats out of my life as much as possible, but something should be done to preserve the flavor of our old neighborhoods. …and that means protecting trees.
-I.B.McGinty
Money grab!
Private property is private and you should be able to do what you want. If you don’t like what someone is doing on their property buy them out and plant all the trees you want.
California should be a good example of what happens (fires) when you keep landscapes “wild”.
Besides this is not about saving trees, it’s about collecting money after all if you pay the price you may cut all the trees you want. Who gets the money and what do you do with it? And they answer to who?
“Private property is private and you should be able to do what you want. ”
Well yes, that is until what is that you do starts impacting my property values negatively. In other words, your freedom to flail your arms about, ends where my nose begins.
“California should be a good example of what happens (fires) when you keep landscapes “wild”.”
No one’s talking about keeping things in a “wild” state. This is about reasonable, and common sense management. A perfect example of the county and city dropping missing the boat is Hwy71. A bit of foresight would’ve prevented 71 from looking like just another IH35 mish-mash collection of strip malls. If zoning requirements would’ve been in place that required builders to build to a determined aesthetic standard, whatever WE chose, the builders would’ve grumbled but they would’ve done it. Take a look at Bee Cave road in Austin. The zoning requirements didn’t prevent companies from building. But the community still has a good looking hill-country feel. Population density attracts businesses. Bastrop is growing, like it or not. The question is what do we want our city and neighborhoods to end up looking like.
Been in this position myself, Green freaks telling me I cannot cut down trees on property that I owned. Well, simple, a 12 GA. and a few well placed Marine Corps Howels worked well.
If you owen it, do as you please with it, time we stand up and show we have a pair.
Typical example, of people, who think they have an obligation, to intrude upon your life. Sorry- if you don’t like what I do on MY property, move. If it effects the “value” of your home- move to some “convented” neighborhood. “If you mind your own business, you’ll be busy, ALL the time”.