Tree Huggers Rule Led By Joe Pantaloonie

Ombudsman's bark needs bite

She finds the city's tree policies are being arbitrarily applied, but can't stop council from doing it

By SUE-ANN LEVY, SUN MEDIA

You might consider this a minor victory -- although hollow -- for a retired city of York couple who have found themselves at "log-gerheads" with council's hypocritical tree-huggers for more than a year now.

In a July 28 letter to the Grandville Ave. couple -- Perry Thompson and Norman Graham -- new city Ombudsman Fiona Crean agrees that city council has been rather "arbour-trary" (my words, not hers) in its application of its private tree bylaw.

"I am concerned about what appears to be inconsistent decision-making around the application of council's (tree) policy," she told me yesterday.

But, and this is a big but, Crean goes on to say that even though she has a "great deal of empathy" for the couple's situation, she is precluded from ruling on city council decisions.

"The ombudsman does not have jurisdiction over city council," she says, contending that she can really only rule on how policies and bylaws are applied by the civil service.

HOME DAMAGED

Crean's findings stem from a Jan. 7, 2009 complaint by Thompson. In it, he claims he was treated unfairly by council in January, 2008 when it adamantly refused to allow him to remove an 18-metre city-owned Norway Maple from his front yard after its roots had invaded the foundation, pipes, basement walls and flooring of his 600-square-foot dollhouse, causing $17,500 in damages.

The weed tree is located in Coun. Frances Nunziata's ward, a known critic of Mayor David Miller.

Yet at the council meeting 15 months later, this past April, council voted to allow the owners of a Trehorne Dr. home to remove their Norway Maple after claims were made that their tree had also caused costly damage to the home's foundation and drains.

That home is in the ward of a loyal member of the mayor's inner circle, Gloria Lindsay Luby.

To support his decision in April, Tree Emperor Joe Pantalone, who'd arrogantly led the charge to deny the Grandville Ave. request, claimed the Norway Maple is an "invasive species which really is not a desirable tree species in this city."

Crean notes in her letter to Thompson she is "not clear" why the removal of a tree would be sanctioned in one instance and not in another.

"Both trees were the same, the only distinguishing factor being that your tree is on land owned by the city and the tree (on) Trehorne was on private property," she writes. "The distinction however seems immaterial as the policy and process governing both situations are the same."

Crean told me she's written city manager Joe Pennachetti asking for his views on the matter. I asked her if it would be appropriate to write the mayor and city councillors to advise them as well of her findings.

"I want to hear from the city manager first," she responded, noting she hasn't made a decision yet as to whether her findings will be made public.

Thompson said he is grateful to the ombudsman and her staff for all their hard work.

Nevertheless, he's dismayed with her decision, noting the mayor and council appear to have given the ombudsman "no teeth."

"What's the whole point (of having an ombudsman) when things are being done council's way?" he asked. "This council has rewritten all the rules and do what they please whenever it suits them."

Coun. Mike Del Grande said he also found Crean's decision "very disappointing." He thinks she's got to "push the envelope" and at least suggest that the ward councillor, Nunziata, be allowed to bring the decision on Thompson's tree back to council for a "second airing."

Adds Nunziata: "This shows that at the end of the day, no matter what the integrity commissioner and the ombudsman say, council reigns supreme."

SUE-ANN.LEVY@SUNMEDIA.CA