Special magistrate orders $5,000 penalty after protected banyan was substantially trimmed at 716 South 12th Street

Special Magistrate Jamie Burrow ordered a $5,000 civil penalty Wednesday after finding that a protected banyan tree at 716 South 12th Street had been substantially altered without a permit.

Burrow said testimony and photographs presented by city witnesses showed roughly two-thirds of the tree’s canopy had been removed, and cited state statute 162.09 as the legal basis for treating the alteration as irreversible. "Ignorance of the law is not an excuse," Burrow said when announcing the ruling. The magistrate ordered payment to the city tree fund within 30 days and explained respondents have 30 days to appeal.

City public-works manager Mark Green testified that a member of his team observed the tree and determined it met the city’s threshold for protection because of its size and the extent of canopy loss. "At least two-thirds of the canopy had been removed," Green said under oath, and he told the court the city requires a permit before substantially altering a protected tree.

Property owner Pearl Ingram and the respondent who trimmed the tree, identified in the city file as Francisco Gonzales, gave conflicting accounts. Ingram showed photographs she said demonstrate new branch growth and told the magistrate she didn’t know a permit was required. Gonzales, through the court interpreter Luis, said he trimmed only branches that posed a safety risk and that city staff had told him trimming (not removal) would not require a permit. "I only cut off the branches that could potentially harm the house," the interpreter rendered for Gonzales.

Clerk Catherine Calderon testified she would have referred a question about pulling a tree permit to the building department because code enforcement does not issue tree-permit approvals. The city argued that, regardless of what Gonzales was told, the extent of trimming constituted a substantial alteration under the municipal code and state statute.

Burrow concluded the available evidence did not show the tree would return to its prior condition and therefore assessed the maximum penalty allowed. The magistrate also noted that if the ordered amount is not paid, a lien may be imposed against the person found responsible. The ruling may be appealed within 30 days.

The city asked that any penalty be paid to the city's tree fund; the magistrate’s order reflects that instruction.