Lawmaker Seeks More Protection for Oak Trees

A Ventura County supervisor known for her staunch environmental views wants to make it tougher for people to chop down oak trees.

Supervisor Linda Parks said the county’s existing rules to protect the graceful, towering valley oaks dotting the county’s unincorporated areas are riddled with loopholes.

“There are over a dozen exemptions,” Parks said. “Most people can go and just get a permit over the counter right now. Even trees designated a historic landmark can be removed with an over-the-counter permit.”

But Supervisor Judy Mikels questioned a proposal sought by Parks to amend the rules, saying it would infringe on property owners’ rights and be too costly to oversee.

Under amendments backed by Parks, developers and homeowners would have to go through a public hearing with the director of planning before receiving permission to cut down three or more protected trees, a designation that includes valley oaks, figs and walnuts.

A request to remove more than three protected trees would trigger a full Planning Commission hearing.

The full commission also would weigh in whenever even one historic tree was targeted for removal. That rare designation applies to trees identified by authorities as having historical significance.

Parks said she was concerned that the county’s distinctive oak groves would slowly dwindle unless tougher regulations were put in place. Although the new protections could affect homeowners, more likely targets are developers of commercial and residential projects, she said.

If developers know they will be forced to go through a public hearing before removing protected trees, they will have good reason to design projects so the trees are not uprooted, Parks said.

“You can maybe rotate a building a few degrees or realign a road,” she said. “This law would tell them that the Board of Supervisors puts a priority on protecting our trees.”

Two Ventura County cities, Thousand Oaks and Ojai, have adopted tough tree protection laws. Even with those rules, controversy often flares when a chain saw is fired up.

Three years ago, sheriff’s deputies were called to Libbey Park in Ojai to coax down an environmental activist who had shimmied up a tree marked for removal.

In 2002, residents of the Lang Ranch neighborhood in Thousand Oaks mounted a futile attempt to stop the destruction of 40 oak trees by county flood control engineers to make way for a dam.

The standoff occurred before Parks was seated on the county board last year. But the experience spurred her to action, she said.

“They didn’t need a permit to remove an entire oak grove,” she said.

Parks acknowledged that the changes she is backing would not have affected that case; exemptions for public and school projects would remain in place.

Other exemptions permit a tree’s removal if it endangers the public, interferes with utilities or is part of a farm operation, she said.

Mikels said she sees no need to change the law that supervisors enacted in 1992.

“Why should I have to ask permission to cut a tree on my property?” Mikels said. “Unless I am coming in for a permit as developer, I don’t see that there is a need to inconvenience the private property owner. I see absolutely no evidence or indication that we have a problem.”

Mikels also questioned the costs that would be involved. The additional layer of review would require more staff time to hold public hearings, she said.

With the county facing up to $34 million in cuts this year and layoffs being considered, it makes no sense to add to the workload, she said.

“We don’t have the money for new stuff,” she said.

The county’s planning staff had already begun looking into an update of the tree ordinance, Parks said. If the board agrees at its meeting Tuesday, the planning staff will simply add the amendments she is suggesting to its review, she said.

She disagreed with Mikels’ contention that the changes would increase red tape for the average homeowner.

“For most homeowners, it would not come up,” she said. “And if it does, it’s appropriate.”