Editorial from Aug. 17, 2007

“What’s the rush?”

By Danielle Seckler

   Even since Dick Kun spoke to the Big Bear Lake City Council in June, it has been pushing to get the vegetation ordinance on the books. Passionately, Kun has spoken to the council and to the public about the threat that looms around us and the fire that one day will come. It is inevitable that a fire will come into this valley some day and there is urgency about the issue. To do what needs to be done, will take time and lots of it. This forest and our neighborhoods have gotten this way over decades and it will take decades to correct the problem.

   After the Old Fire in 2003 and our evacuation, a valley committee was created called Healthy Urban Forest Initiative (HUFI) to start working on the problems; inter-agency cooperation, removal of dead trees and reduction of fire fuel vegetation, and making the public aware of what they can do. On the Federal, State, and valley wide community level, a community urban wildlife plan was completed, which is needed for these agencies to assess the threat and possible financial assistance. Fire Safe Council created Chipper Days, which started the education of what the people could do and that program has been a success, with ten of thousands of tons of vegetation having been removed. Continuing on that thought, the fire departments realized that people had difficulty in getting yard waste to the collection site; they expanded the program into neighborhoods with curbside collection. The forest on top of the entire mountaintop has removed 1 million dead trees. All are excellent beginnings to a looming problem.

   The biggest problem to the vegetation ordinance it that nothing like it has ever been done; any where in this country. This left the Big Bear Lake committee with a daunting task and puts it into uncharted territory. City attorneys say that the ordinance can be created under public health and safety; however, it places the city up against private property issues. Even though most of the people are in favor of some kind of ordinance with some teeth in it; they feel insecure about implementation, appeals, and especially the cost. There are many stories about neighbors who do not clean up their yards, hide the overgrowth behind fences, and just don’t care.

   The cost to property owners can be staggering, let alone the people don’t have an exact picture of how to improve their yards, while still keeping them drought and fire tolerant vegetation. This ordinance doesn’t combine what the water departments have been asking people to do, reduce the amount of water used. Conservation may be in direct conflict with what the fire department is asking, just because the trees they want use so much more water. Nurseries and stores will still sell plants and trees that are now considered unwanted, yet there is nothing to include them in the process.

   We agree with both Councilman Rick Herrick and Michael Karp that the City Council needs to slow down and consider all these voiced problems as well as having a cohesive vegetation ordinance. Let’s face it, it took our founding fathers two years of discussion before they drafted and compromised on the Declaration of Independence and almost ten years to create the US Constitution.

   So far the subcommittee of the City Council, which includes Mayor Bill Jahn and Liz Harris, has had meetings with the fire department and city staff to come up with the vegetation ordinance. It is their conception of what the ordinance should contain, however there have been no meetings with other groups, such as the DWP’s conservation department, landscapers, tree removal contactors, and waste management, let alone anybody from the taxpayers. This ordinance puts all costs for removal of trees on the property owner, with the hope that somewhere down the line some kind of assistance will be available to those who live on fixed and low-incomes. One of the reasons why no where in America an ordinance exists like this, is because the complexity of the issue and the ramifications to the private property owners.

   If a government body is to create an ordinance which is by everyone’s opinion “ground breaking”, why not do it right the first time? Why are three of the city council members rushing into this ordinance, knowing that it will have to be changed later on? No one knows at this time, how much yard waste will need to be collected if everyone does exactly what this ordinance states that must be removed. The cost ramification of disposal is not known or where and how it will be removed. No one knows if there are enough contractors available to remove the unwanted trees or at what cost to the property owner. Even if this ordinance is passed on Aug. 27th, it can’t go into effect until the middle or end of September and the fire department is not geared up to take on the massive effort. There are more questions than answers in this ordinance.

   The public wants a comprehensive ordinance that gives them specific guidelines for both fire and drought tolerant plantings, time for them to learn and apply them to their properties,  and most of all they do not want another government department policing them. The City of Big Bear Lake is known for bullying residents and businesses. If a business wants to replace the roof, suddenly the entire building is being inspected for other compliance issues. Recently, the code enforcement department has changed its policy from being complaint driven to seeking out incompliance issues. Having the fire department running around on private property deciding what must be yanked out, seems heavy handed and dictatorial.

  So what’s the rush? We believe that since Dick Kun spoke up, three council members have jumped into action; blindly and ignoring what the people are telling them. At the meeting from Aug. 13th, over three hundred people were on hand, applauding what many had to say. Yet, when it came to going forward at full steam, they squeezed in another meeting for Tuesday, Aug. 21st. This is the exact opposite scenario from when the businesses came to the city council about their water rate increase. The City Council chastised the DWP board for not including the public input and sent them back to the drawing board, twice. With this fire ordinance, they are ramming this down the throats of the property owners.

   We hope that the City Council will slow down and get this right, the first time. This is reminiscent of the federal government recent approach to immigration; we want it all and we want it now. No one in America seems to trust their government to do it right. The only way to get the people on board is to do this comprehensively and in stages; proving to the public that after stage one is done, that the government did it correctly; once that is done, then on to the next stage. If this City Council could come down so hard on the DWP board, they should take their own advice; take it slow, be comprehensive and most of all inclusive of all the people.

Back to Front Page