Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environment Trees Critical Area topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council considers ordinance on tree pruning, habitat plans after public debate over fees and ANSI standards
Summary
Anne Arundel County heard public comment and approved amendments to a proposed ordinance (Bill 6-725) that clarifies definitions for 'clearing' and 'pruning,' requires department reference materials be available, and removes fees for vegetation-management filings after public concern over cost and access to ANSI standards.
A contested ordinance intended to clarify county rules on clearing and pruning in the critical-area buffer won several technical amendments at the Anne Arundel County Council’s Oct. 6 hearing, but the underlying bill will return for further consideration on Oct. 20.
What passed: The council adopted three administration-proposed amendments and one council amendment after public comment. The council voted to adopt Amendment 8 (definition clarifications referencing ANSI pruning standards) on a 6–1 vote; adopted Amendment 9 (requirement that the department provide reference materials and guidance upon request) unanimously, 7–0; and adopted Amendment 10 (removing fees for habitat enhancement plans and vegetation management plans) unanimously, 7–0.
Public comment and concerns: The public hearing attracted residents and stakeholders from homeowners’ associations and environmental groups.
- Fletcher Thompson, a resident commenter, said: "This is now the third time this bill has been presented to the council. There has yet to be articulated a reason for it," and urged council members to identify the specific problem the bill addresses before adopting it.
- Don De Vries, speaking for Sherwood Forest, said the neighborhood supported the ordinance because it would adopt national ANSI standards for proper pruning.
- Steve Miller, a waterfront property owner, urged the council to remove the $75 fee for Vegetative Management Plans and the $250 fee for Habitat Enhancement Plans, calling the fees a disincentive for property owners who want to do invasive-species removal or preserve trees.
Administration response and staff clarifications: Ethan Hunt, speaking for the administration, explained the bill would "clarif[y] existing county practices with regards to tree trimming or pruning especially in the critical area buffer and steep slopes." Eric Michaelson, senior environmental policy officer, said the ANSI standard language was added to provide clarity.
Several council members pressed the administration over access to the ANSI A300 standards referenced in the bill. Kelly Kenny, supervising county attorney, said the ANSI standard is a copyrighted document; the county cannot simply post the copyrighted text online but could produce a guidance document that summarizes the relevant pruning guidance.
Fees and outreach: A central dispute at the hearing was whether to require fees for the new plan reviews. The administration said the proposed fees would cover staff time; staff estimated the county reviews roughly 1,000 vegetative-management plans per year and expects about 30 new habitat-enhancement plans annually if the ordinance creates that new streamlined option. Councilmember Fiedler moved and the council approved an amendment removing the new fees (adopted 7–0), citing concerns that fees would deter property owners from doing invasive‑species removal and habitat work.
Next steps: The council did not adopt the ordinance on Oct. 6. The administration and council members agreed to additional outreach and clarification for property owners — especially about how to access guidance derived from ANSI standards — and the bill is scheduled for further consideration at the Oct. 20 legislative session.
