City Advances Its Appeal of Tree Removal Case Ruling

Also Read:

The saga involving the city of Poway and two Powegians takes another step forward as the city's litigator filed a brief to appeal the civil violations ruling.

The city is appealing a 2009 court ruling that Lee Tartre and Diane Armstrong's civil rights were violated when trees were cut down from their property.

The city presents two arguments in the case, which originally stems from the necessary removal of trees near Avenida La Valencia to make way for pipelines in 2007 and resulted in the unnecessary removal of 24 trees from Tartre's property and 18 from Armstrong's.

Filed on Feb. 8, the city's brief appeals two previous decisions in the case: The first is the trial court’s decision that the city violated due process rights by intentionally using outdated maps to cut down trees on the property, as well as the decision that the city must stop asserting rights to that part of the easement because the city had issued a permit in 2002 for a tennis court to be built on Tartre's property. The second appeal concerns the judge's ruling that the city's actions were intentional and the result of systematic unconstitutional policy, contrary to the decision reached by the jury that found the city’s actions were simply negligent.

But the city maintains that its actions weren’t intentional and that though the city was negligent in cutting down the trees, it did so with the residents' permission.

As for the tennis court issue, the city argues that the judge didn’t properly weigh previous case laws in making his decision, and that the tennis court on Tartre's property prevents necessary trucks from passing through the easement in order to maintain sewer lines.

Tartre and Armstrong have 90 days to file their brief in response to the city's.

This 4-year-old battle is just one of two that is pitting the two Powegians against the city government. On March 4, San Diego Superior Court Judge Lisa A. Foster will hold a bench hearing for the city of Poway and Tartre and Armstrong as to whether fences constructed on Tartre and Armstrong's properties should be removed.

A Glance at the Costs

According to Tartre, she and Armstrong have spent roughly the following on their legal battles with the city:

• $45,000 on the code violation issues.
• $750,000 on legal fees.
• $50,000 on an appellate attorney.

According to the city, it has spent the following on the legal battles against Tartre and Armstrong through the end of December 2010:

• $224,405.58 on legal fees and $107,329.17 on costs incurred on the civil rights violations case.
• $5,792.99 on legal fees and $1,998.64 on costs incurred on the Fences/FEMA Flood Plains Debate.