Council to hold workshops after contentious public hearing on tree protection ordinance

Council members on Tuesday directed staff to hold three public workshops and return Oct. 27 with recommended revisions to a proposed tree protection ordinance after more than three hours of staff presentations and 19 public speakers.

The ordinance, presented by Assistant Parks & Recreation Director Emily Fox and planning staff, would create five protected‑tree categories — including “heritage” trees defined as 29 inches or greater in diameter at breast height (DBH) — establish administrative and discretionary permit tracks (with coastal‑zone variants), require replacement plantings or in‑lieu fees based on tree size and create penalties for unauthorized removals. Staff said the program will include an interactive map and educational materials and emphasized voluntary compliance and a staged implementation.

Speakers from conservation groups and certified arborists urged broad protections for native species and monarch overwintering habitat, recommended adding disease tracking (for pests such as golden‑spotted oak borer) and asked for pre‑work biological checks during nesting season. The Ventura Tree Alliance, Native Monarchs and independent arborists emphasized that mature groves and eucalyptus stands used by monarchs are effectively irreplaceable at human timescales.

Homeowners, property managers and the Ventura County Coastal Association of Realtors urged simplification. Multiple residents said the proposed permit timelines and monitoring requirements could force routine trimming to be done without permits, or discourage planting of large canopy trees. Realtors and property managers asked for clearer over‑the‑counter or instant permit options and warned that high fees or five‑year monitoring obligations could deter homeowners from planting large trees.

Council members emphasized the ordinance’s twin aims — protecting the urban canopy and avoiding undue burden on property owners. Several members asked staff to clarify how in‑lieu fees would be set, what documentation would satisfy fee‑hardship requests, and whether the city would be held to the same permitting standards it applies to residents. City staff told council the city currently documents public‑land tree work in the ArborAccess inventory and proposed keeping the city exempt from the permitting steps while following the ordinance’s standards; council asked staff to instead require the city to apply the same standards and to clarify replacement commitments.

Council Member Jim Duran moved to continue the item and direct staff to convene a minimum of three public workshops (target stakeholders: homeowners, neighborhood representatives, arborists/landscape contractors, the Realtor association, environmental groups, insurers and other interested parties) and to return Oct. 27 with amendments reflecting workshop input; Deputy Mayor Halter seconded. The motion carried 6–0 with Council Member Schumacher absent.

The next steps directed by council include: clarifying fee hardship criteria, publishing guidance on when permits are required, evaluating options for faster administrative review or online over‑the‑counter permits, refining in‑lieu fee calculations and defining when replacement planting monitoring would be required. Staff also committed to expanded community outreach and user‑friendly guidance prior to any ordinance adoption.

Council’s action does not adopt the ordinance; it directs a public process and a return with a revised draft.