Oakland sued over nearly $1 million fine for property owners accused of cutting down 38 trees

Oakland sued over nearly $1 million fine for property owners accused of cutting down 38 trees Attorney Chance Weldon alleged the city’s fine represents an ‘arbitrary overreach’ - Bookmark - CommentsGo to comments A couple is suing Oakland, California, in an effort to challenge a costly fine from city officials, who claimed they cut down 38 trees on their property without a permit. Residents Matthew Bernard and Lynn Warner — represented by lawyers from the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a conservative think tank — filed the complaint Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The lawsuit, which was first reported by the San Francisco Chronicle, seeks to challenge the city’s Protected Tree Ordinance, under which they were fined nearly $1 million. Bernard and Warner were ordered to clear “dead and dying trees” from their land in 2020, but after they removed them without a city permit, the city council “levied a staggering $915,135.40 fine for the prior tree removal, threatened to place a lien on the property and halted all building permits,” the Texas Public Policy Foundation said in a press release. Oakland’s Protected Tree Ordinance requires residents to obtain a permit for the removal of “any tree on public or private property,” according to the city’s website. Violators are liable “for all costs associated with the investigation and enforcement,” the ordinance states. The fine was imposed in May, following a City Council vote. Chance Weldon, the think tank’s litigation director, accused the city of “arbitrary overreach.” He added: “Folks have a right to do basic property maintenance on their own land without risking penalties that will ruin their lives.” When reached for comment, Weldon told The Independent his clients claim to have only removed “eight to14 trees from their property, depending on how broadly you define tree.” ”The City's $915,000 fine is based solely on trees allegedly removed from my client's property. That fine is what forms the sole basis of this lawsuit,” he said. The couple has alleged the city’s actions “constitute an uncompensated taking of private property, impose unconstitutional permit conditions without any nexus to actual public harm, and violate the Eighth Amendment’s protection against excessive fines.” “This penalty, calculated by a preset formula without any evidence of actual public harm, is roughly five times the total value of the land itself. Astonishingly, it is also eighteen times higher than California’s maximum statutory fine for the malicious arson of an entire forest,” the Texas Public Policy Foundation said in a release. A spokesperson for the Oakland City Attorney’s Office said the agency plans to defend the ordinance, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. The office’s spokesperson declined to comment when contacted by The Independent. Bernard is facing a separate legal challenge from a neighbor who claims their trees were cut down, and Oakland officials have alleged he also removed trees from nearby city-owned land, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. Regarding the neighbor’s ongoing litigation, Weldon said he does not represent the couple in that case, but believes they “deny those allegations.” Oakland’s City Council voted to impose the fine in May following an investigation and a series of hearings. “We have to decide whether Oakland will continue to have the reputation that people can do whatever they want without consequences,” City Council President Kevin Jenkins said at the time, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. Join our commenting forum Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies Comments