The history of the ordinance has been a long one, to say the least. It was passed by the Saratoga City Council during the first reading in September, rejected by some members of the public during the second reading and sent back to the drawing board for further revision. However, Councilman Norman Kline, one of the five members who served on the tree ad hoc committee, said that the city has been trying to revise the original ordinance for the past 15 years.

"The original ordinance contained a lot of vague language, which made it difficult for city officials to enforce it. This resulted in a number of large trees being taken out from several properties for no apparent reason," Kline said. "This updated version is not exactly perfect, but it is better than what we had before. It has more teeth, which makes it more difficult for people to destroy protected trees."

The revised ordinance addresses certain concerns that some residents had regarding property owners' rights and penalties for any tree violation.

The ordinance allows residents to remove protected trees from their properties for economic or enjoyment purposes given that there are no other feasible alternatives. If a tree is to be removed, or if more than 25 percent of a tree's canopy [the part of a tree that contains foliage] is to be pruned, residents must obtain a permit from the city, which will then notify affected neighbors.

Kline said that it may be difficult to determine what 25 percent of a tree's canopy is and suggested that residents should first consult with an arborist.

Under the ordinance, residents who violate any of the tree policies will be charged with an infraction, rather than a misdemeanor as suggested by the previous subcommittee. However, Kline said that the city will have the option of taking the individual to court for increased penalties. In addition, the individual may be subject to up to $5,000 in fines.

Francis Stutzman, who spoke at the Dec. 3 city council meeting, said that he is satisfied with the revised document, but thinks that the financial penalty should be higher.

"Trees are a marvelous work of art by nature. We should make every effort we can to preserve what we have," Stussman said. "Five thousand dollars is not a big enough penalty. It should be $100,000 for one tree and double that amount for two trees."

However, Robert Zager, who also served on the ad hoc committee, said he is not ready to accept the revised ordinance.

"The ordinance needs more fine-tuning," he said. "This is a complex issue."

At the meeting, Councilman Stan Bogosian suggested that the city give first-time offenders a warning and charge second-time offenders with an infraction. He also suggested that the city move forward with the idea of developing a forestry plan.

Kline disagreed with Bogosian on giving warnings to first-time offenders.