Barking Up the Wrong Tree It’s Not That City Government Doesn’t Care

By Rick Kriseman

It’s not easy being a Floridian. We may live in paradise, but rising property insurance rates, elusive home ownership, and culture wars make it seem like we’re always fighting something. As our country grows hotter by the day, we struggle to enjoy our beautiful surroundings. Come summer, we continue to enjoy the outdoors by becoming shade seekers. Who hasn’t noticed the 10-degree difference when walking down a canopied neighborhood street, under the shade of 100-year-old oaks?

Some choose to not to believe that climate change is real. Those who do seek to preserve our environment by planting trees and engaging in other conversation measures. However, some Florida lawmakers have made it easier for people to remove trees simply because they don’t want them.

Stories about regulating trees don’t sell papers or attract lively Twitterverse banter, so perhaps you weren’t aware of HB 1159, filed by former State Rep. Mike LaRosa. Rep. LaRosa’s legislation limited the ability of local governments to “regulate tree pruning, trimming, or removal” when a residential property owner obtains documentation from a certified arborist or a Florida-licensed landscape architect that the tree presents a danger to persons or property.

After that bill passed, local governments could no longer require that notice be provided of the removal, approval for the removal be received, an application for removal be filed, a permit for removal be obtained, or a fee be charged to the homeowner for the removal of the tree. Additionally, the local government could no longer require the homeowner to replant a new tree to replace the tree being removed. Translated, if a homeowner could convince an arborist to attest that a tree needed to be removed, it was a done deal.

In 2022, Rep. Stan McClain filed HB 1555, which amended 2019’s

HB 1159 by adding language which stated that local governments may not create a burden on a residential property owner’s right to prune, trim, or remove trees on his or her own property if the tree in question “poses an unacceptable risk to persons or property.” Additionally, because the 2019 bill created confusion around the definition of “Residential Property,” Rep. McClain included clarifying language around what defines property as “residential,” defining it as “a single-family, detached building located on a lot that is actively used for single-family residential purposes…”

Absent from HB1159 and HB1555 is any consideration of the age of the tree, which could deem it historic and/or iconic. Aesthetic aspects, such as shade and beauty, are also discarded. Further, local governments, neighbors, and historical societies are prohibited from engaging in actions to prevent the pruning, trimming or removal of trees.

You’re barking up the wrong tree if you try to engage powerless mayors, city council representatives, city managers or county commissioners. It’s the Florida Legislature who you need to sway. I encourage you to reach out to your representative if you don’t want to see the demise of another beautiful, shade producing, historic tree.

Rick Kriseman served as the 53rd mayor of St. Petersburg from 20142022. Prior to becoming mayor, Rick served for six years in the Florida House of Representatives, and from 2000-2006, he represented District One on the St. Petersburg City Council and served as the council chairman in 2005.