University Park HOA agrees to delay tree cutting

As a follow up to my recent pieces about the battle over tree cutting in University Park, that neighborhood’s homeowners association board has a scheduled meeting tonight. The tree controversy will be discussed at the meeting, but no voting will take place. In fact, California civil code prevents the board from discussing or taking actions on items not on the published agenda, which puts the previous vote to remove the trees (cited in my Sept. 29th post) onto shaky legal ground as it was not on the agenda for that meeting:

UP homeowners I have spoken to are optimistic that the tree cutting will at least be delayed until it can be discussed and voted on at the scheduled board meeting in November.

UPDATE: Email from a UP homeowner:

The board agreed to hold off on the tree removal until a membership meeting to talk about a master plan. So the trees may need to come down but if they do there should be assurance that they are really hazardous. They also voted to have an attorney advice them about updating some things, like CC and R’s, etc.

Author: CoolDMZ

"X-ray vision to see in between / Where's my kimono and my time machine?"

19 thoughts on “University Park HOA agrees to delay tree cutting”

  1. Or- CoolDMZ now has ’till November to gather up his supplies, a warm coat, and bottles for the human waste, to try a stint in the trees. Seems long enough to prep. And a Pulitzer could be in them limbs- writing about tree sitting from an insider’s perspective?

    Maybe raise money for the group “Saving Trees And Rivers Through Radical Environmental Kustoms” at the same time. I’ll put in $.01 for each hour he stays up there. That’s almost $90 from me alone if he stays for a year. Hmmm…

    Like

  2. Tree sitting aint all its cracked up to be. You have to get to the root of the problem- offer an olive branch to other positions. But I’m also in for a penny an hour for CoolDMZ’s efforts on behalf of STARTREK.

    Like

  3. Dumpster Muffin, I hope that Sacramento treats you better than Berkeley did.

    Let me know if you need a place to bathe.

    Like

  4. Trying to keep healthy, unhazardous trees – trees initially planted with public dollars in the form of a SMUD subsidy – from being cut down is “radical”? That’s an interesting but rather ridiculous interpretation – or, I mean, framing.
    When did we fall through the looking glass?

    Like

  5. I live in Campus Commons and serve as a committee member. Would you be able to provide any additional information regarding this issue? (Despite our proximity to the University Park community, we have no formal communication.)
    Thank you.

    Like

  6. Ch 13 removed this story from Video Library when they discovered all “facts” as purported by Ms. Williams were erroneous. Stats in her original blogs also untrue. I guess every neighborhood has one.

    Like

  7. So, we’ve got the homeowners association themselves calling Ms. Williams a liar. What, pray tell, was she lying about? Do you want to substantiate your claims before you slander someone in front of all of Sacramento?

    Like

  8. No, Moe. You, SacRag, and Ms. Williams not worth it. Would Ch 13|31 remove video without substantiation?

    Like

  9. UnivPkHomeowners: humor me, though, and point me to any facts that I have “reported” (being self-deprecating there, not combative) that can be disputed. I don’t want to hide behind being “just a blogger” — if I misled people I’ll own up to it. I’ll have to check with the house lawyers but I don’t believe that The Sac Rag is required to stand by contributions to this site by Ms Williams or any of the other commenters (though we do moderate comments).

    I purposely didn’t “report” very much about this story in my own words, since I am not a professional journalist and did not have the time to do actual newsgathering. Not that I don’t think newsgathering is a good thing to do and not that I wouldn’t love to do more of it.

    I did try to report facts however, so if I got anything wrong please let me know. Did you speak with folks at CBS13 or are you just assuming the video was deleted for those reasons? If it’s not worth writing it up for public consumption feel free to email me off the record.

    Like

  10. Good Day Sacramento reported unbiasedly about trees being removed and showed the before and after of a community that is moving from an Urban Forest to a dry landscape. After the board meeting, a number of homeowners were kind enough to provide me with a copy of a Master Plan redesign that “planned” to remove 144 trees all Pears, Plums, Liquid Ambers and Alders. Is it just a coincidence that these same tree species have been found hazardous after the fact?

    I will upload the power point so viewers can see the Master Plan Redesign!

    Like

  11. Clearly, I am using my name. I stand behind what I have said and will continue to fight for an Urban Forest which I purchased into in 2001. Who is moe; Curly Larry & Moe?

    Do you really speak for the press? Have they become so short staffed that they need unnamed residents to defend them from the likes of those who prefer nature to rocks and cactus.

    Like

  12. I am sorry, I mean’t to respond to University Park not MOE! Who is University Park and show us your facts!

    Like

  13. Don’t forget, I am the one that had the homeowner petition signed by 20% of homeowners. We are asking for a community vote instead of a board vote majority of 3/5 on the trees. I am sure this “nameless” University Park Homeowner called the station and complained. Did you threaten to sue them?

    If I was “untruthful”; why did the board reverse the vote on the trees? When you look at the initial blog, you will see I was reaching out for advice from other bloggers to stop clear cutting of an Urban Forest. Move to Arizona where the landscape fits your taste.

    Like

  14. I called Channel 13. They were unaware of any inconsistencies in Ms. Williams story and said many local stories are removed from the video database after a short amt of time to make room for new content.

    Stephanie, you might want to consult an attorney regarding defamation and slander charges against the person masquerading as your HOA board above. It’s very clear they are seeking to slander you without any proof whatsoever.

    Like

  15. Moe: I am still feeling bad for mistaking you for one of the handful of residents that want to make us arid. It wasn’t my story, I was interviewed about the trees coming down, which I don’t want to have happen. What could be untruthful about my feelings – unless homeowners are so full of themselves that they done’t value, respect or consider the opinion of their neighbors?

    I like Sacrag and would never create a legal environment that would compromise it. University Park wouldn’t be where it is without the helpful comments that led me to a number of conflicts – convincing enough to stop the tree cutting two times.

    The unidentified blogger was caught by you, isn’t that enough. The blog was up until a few days ago, of course they cannot keep every local video forever. No worries, the issue is an urban forest in danger, not a poor sport who lost the vote to cut the trees. Thanks you for calling Channel 13, I e-mailed them and asked them back!

    Like

  16. From talking to folks at CBS13 it does appear the 10/14 video story was removed from their website, citing concerns of “balance.” And from what I remember of the piece it wasn’t very thorough.

    Like

Comments are closed.