Some City Council
members say it's time to take another look at Jacksonville's tree
law -- including the fee charged for cutting down trees -- after the
state Department of Transportation said last week that it would stop
complying with the regulations.
The department's Northeast Florida district cited high cost as
the reason it was going to stop its voluntary compliance. City
lawyers are researching whether the law is binding on the
department, setting the stage for a possible legal battle to compel
compliance.
Beyond the legal issues, the state's decision could redebate
at City Hall about the nitty-gritty regulations in two conflicting
pieces of tree protection regulations -- the charter amendment that
voters passed last November, and the ordinance the City Council
approved in 1999.
The charter amendment established a set of minimum standards, but
it didn't repeal the ordinance. In some respects, the ordinance has
tougher regulations, and wherever the ordinance is more stringent,
those rules apply.
For instance, the ordinance would require the state to pay $122
for each inch of tree it cannot replace by planting new trees. In
the case of trees cleared for the new interchange linking Florida
9A, Interstate 295, and Interstate 95, the state would have to pay
almost $5.6 million, according to the department.
The charter amendment, which voters OK'd by a 3-1 margin, sets
the rate at $85 per inch. If that rate were in effect, the state's
cost would have been $3.9 million.
Even at the lesser amount, the state would have still gone
through with its decision to stop complying with the city's tree
protection law because of the cost, said Aage Schroder, head of the
state DOT for Northeast Florida.
The smaller check "would have been easier to swallow," but it
still would have diverted too much state money from transportation
projects, he said.
City Councilman Lad Daniels said he favors changing the city's
ordinance so it has the same rate as the charter amendment.
"I'm in favor of anything to modify what we've got out there,"
Daniels said.
"Anything that we can do to simplify the ordinance, that should
be done," City Councilman Lake Ray said.
On that point, Ray, who has been a critic of the tree law, and
John Crescimbeni, who helped lead the petition drive that got the
measure on the ballot last year, agreed. Crescimbeni said he
supports taking the charter amendment and adopting it as ordinance,
replacing what's on the books.
"I'm kind of perplexed that they haven't done it already,"
Crescimbeni said. "Lets get this all under one umbrella and get all
the stars lined up."
City Council President Matt Carlucci said it's worth considering.
"At first blush, I probably would be supportive of that, just
because the charter amendment is the one the people spoke to most
directly," Carlucci said, adding that it will require more study
before he makes a final decision.
He said he opposes the state's decision and thinks the
overwhelming support shown by voters for the charter amendment
should have convinced the department to continue complying.
"How much more of a message does the DOT need?" he said.
"Sometimes tree protection may cost some money, but it's an
investment back into our community and an investment back into our
quality of life. It makes a difference."
But Schroder said he has gotten more praise than criticism for
the decision. He said the district will follow state law that at
least 1 percent of total construction dollars go toward landscaping,
increasing to 1.5 percent next year. Beyond that, he said the state
cannot pay into City Hall's tree fund when it has a backlog of
transportation work that needs state funding.
"It's public dollars that are coming from gas taxes that were
collected for transportation," he said.
