In late January, a tree was cut down. This tree happened to be on somebody’s private property, and the property owner is now in trouble with the city because they didn’t get a permit before they cut it down.

Don’t get me wrong – I thought it was a nice tree. But, judging by how many people were outraged by this, it is a perfect example of “not in my backyard” and an opportunity to reflect on the role of government in our lives.

People are so busy getting upset that they haven’t thought to ask the property owner why they cut it down.

People thought the tree was a neighborhood landmark, but it wasn’t on their property.

Does anyone know whether the tree was sick or not? Was it stable? Did tree branches fall off during windstorms? Were its roots messing with the foundation of the house?

Would you want to live a few feet away from a huge tree that could fall on your house and kill you and your family? What if it fell into the street and killed someone?

Why should a property owner be compelled to keep something on their property that was quite possibly a nuisance and a danger to them merely because it brings enjoyment to others?

Regardless of whether the tree was really interesting or not, the fact remains that it was on someone’s private property. Therefore, it was their property, and they could do with it what they wished.

The city issued notices of violation to the property owner and the tree removal company for what happened to the monkey tree.

The city says that trees on private property that are considered exceptional can only be removed after the Department of Planning and Development “assesses” them.

What is even worse is that they want the property owner to replant a tree with a similar canopy cover.

What if the property owner wants to actually look out their window and not see a huge tree? Maybe they wanted to see a rosebush or a modern art sculpture instead.

This is a textbook case of government overreach on the part of the city. They have no right to tell anyone how they should landscape their property.

You may not agree with the property owner’s aesthetic choices, but they own their land, and last time I checked, the City of Seattle wasn’t a homeowner’s association.

I hope the act of cutting down of this tree without permission will make everyone think about what are the necessary and proper functions of government.

This isn’t just about a tree being cut down; it’s about whether the government has a right to interfere with what citizens do on and to their private property.

Do you have a column suggestion or a comment for Brian Le Blanc? Leave a comment on this story or reach him directly at brianleblanc76@yahoo.com.