A worthwhile debate on tree bylaw

A good article in the Standard today regarding the proposed Urban Forestry Bylaw.  I made my viewpoint clear in my submission to City Hall back here, and expressed that pretty succinctly to the reporter when contacted:

Several would-be councillors have already come out for and against the idea of a private property tree bylaw. We contacted St. Patrick’s ward candidates for their thoughts.

Teacher Mat Siscoe has posted his opposition to the bylaw online, arguing homeowners deserve the right to make changes to their properties “with minimal interference from the city.”

I also tried to be pretty clear that this seemed like a bit of a no-issue – I don’t believe there’s been a rash of old, large trees being cut down, so I’m not sure why the City feels the need to start infringing on property owners rights to fix a problem that doesn’t exist.  We all see the value of trees on our lots – they’re not just nice to look at, they actually add monetary value to the property.

Given the state of trees on public property, it seems to me the City has its priorities misplaced.