New Search
Hammitt, Bob <br /> From: Medlin, Johnny <br /> To: Norris, Linda <br /> Cc: Andersen, Chris; Weber, Doug; Etter, John; Hammitt, Bob; Staszewski, Jan <br /> Subject: RE: Benchmark Northwest <br /> Date: Wednesday, March 30, 1994 1:16PM <br /> Hi Linda, this gets a little confusing so its probably best I answer in this note so you can refer to it. <br /> We had three options under which to go after fines. <br /> 1. Administrative Civil Penalty: (based on a point system © $10 /pt) <br /> The fine under this system calculated to a little Tess the $4K total. Part of the reason it is so low is that there was <br /> no prior offences, no prior enforcements, and the location of the trees were not prime (gravity of offence). Each <br /> of those factors and in particularity the last two being multiplicative factors would have raised the amount <br /> significantly. <br /> 2. Municipal Court Civil Penalty. ($100 to $4,000 per tree) (For 19 trees the maximum possible would of been <br /> $76,000) <br /> Under this we would have had to construct a logic for the fine since the code doesn't provide one for us to <br /> establish value. What Jen's had talked about was establishing a "value" of the tree and then going for an <br /> additional as a "penalty ". The highest value of the timber we could calculate was around $7K and early on Jen's <br /> hadn't made up his mind on the rational of what he would ask as additional for penalty. I believe this was due to <br /> his recommendation that we not take this option, but take #1 instead. <br /> After the second meeting with Mike (the one in his office) and the clear determination that $4K was not a large <br /> enough fine, Jen's instructions from the city was to come up with a total fine somewhere around $20,000. He <br /> said he felt the code would allow us to ask the Judge to impose this amount but that he needed to give it <br /> additional thought since he hadn't really worked out the details on what the justification would be. He did state to <br /> me that staff costs were not really a justification, it needed to be directly tied to the event. I think the settlement <br /> came at a time that saved Jen's from finalizing this penalty justification strategy. <br /> I mentioned to you that the larger fines possible here under the code make more since in a developed property <br /> where someone removes a tree where we can use the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) tree valuation <br /> guide. Trees in urban settings can be worth thousands if the tree is a good tree in a desirable setting. However, <br /> in this case, that system would still only give us the timber value since the system doesn't give high value per <br /> tree to open stands of timber. <br /> 3. State Court. <br /> Early on Jen's stated this was an altemative but that he would need to determine a reason for us to sue. Since <br /> the trees were not City trees would could not sue for specific damage to the city. Jen's was not recommending <br /> this course, but stated that if we really wanted to use this option that he could likely find a justification under <br /> which to sue. I don't believe I ever knew what amounts could be asked for under this option. <br /> I hope this was helpful. <br /> Thanks Johnny <br /> Page 1 <br />