By Shakira Ericksen

Tempers flared and emotions rose when Des Moines residents voiced their opinion during a public hearing related to tree regulations.
Over 50 people packed into City Hall to unanimously condemn the proposed ordinance 14-043-A. The ordinance was criticized for lack of clarity, lack of view protection, unclear permitting processes, unclear permit fees and technical and confusing language.

The proposed ordinance could cost citizens anywhere from $150- $13,000 in permits to cut trees and clear land. Cost is determined by what area the land is located on. If the trees in question are in a shoreline or critical area the cost rises significantly because various reports that may be required.

No clear cost or permitting criteria was provided in the ordinance – which led to general confusion among the audience and city council members.

One Des Moines resident was on the verge of tears while another stormed out after declaring themselves to be disgusted with the council.
While the ordinance pertains to all trees in the Des Moines, it was clear that people were most concerned about protecting their views.
Several audience members showed pictures of how their views have been eroded over the years, leading to reductions in property values and in some cases a complete loss of any kind of view.

The overall consensus was that the ordinance was unnecessary and that property owners should have the right to deal with their trees how they saw fit.

Councilmembers tried to remain neutral as the hour long public hearing continued.

Mayor Dave Kaplan had to twice remind the audience to hold their applause and to show respect to speakers who may disagree with their point of view.

All the speakers who spoke at the hearing were strongly against the ordinance.

“I think that in all the public hearings I’ve seen and heard in the last 19 years, this is the one that’s had the most misstatement of facts coming from testimony,” said councilmember Bob Sheckler.

Councilmember Sheckler said that the majority of testimony and sentiment he had heard was incorrect, much to the dismay of the crowd.

“I heard so much this evening that was simply a misstatement of fact, I don’t know how to comment on it. I agree with the intent of the committee and I think it’s a good ordinance,” said councilmember Sheckler.

Councilmember Jeanette Burrage disagreed saying that unless there was evidence provided there was no need for tree trimming code in Des Moines, as tree trimming is not considered development work.

“We’re making an arbitrary and capricious law,” said Councilmember Burrage. “I think we should avoid bullying our citizens and avoid the possible legal effects of enacting this ordinance and I suggest we all vote no.”

This was greeted by applause.

Mayor Pro Tem Matt Pina and Councilmember Melissa Musser said that although there were a number of positive changes in the ordinance, they did have some concerns and would like more clarity.

“We’re moving forward with an ordinance that leaves private property owners with no real means to mitigate challenging areas, “said Mayor Pro Tem Pina. “I think it’s our role to help with that.”

He added that the intent of the ordinance was to clarity confusing details and said that private property owners should be able to deal with trees however they wanted providing they were not located in a critical area.

“I really am listening and I’m trying to process all the questions that have come up here, I appreciate your patience,” said Mayor Pro Tem Pina.
Councilmember Musser said that they needed to address permitting processes and fees and make sure the guidelines were clear.

Although there has not been an ordinance of this nature before in Des Moines, state laws and state agency rules are now requiring stricter protections for particular areas.

“There needs to be and ordinance so staff has clear direction of exactly what they should enforce. The challenge is the balance between letting people preserve their view and the responsibility the city has to protect shoreline and critical areas,” said Mayor Kaplan. “We have an obligation under state law to enforce critical areas and shoreline management.”

Mayor Kaplan added that given the discussion there were definitely areas of the code that needed to be clarified. The majority of the council agreed to move the ordinance to a second reading and postpone the vote.