Letter to the Editor: Downey fumbled the tree project

Dear Editor:

A letter to the editor last week mentioned the TreePeople.org project coming to Downey. My own attempts to find out more information, in particular with regards to deferring or adjusting tree-planting, since we intend to plant trees of our own, yielded the following:

1. I spoke with Juan Solomon from TreePeople.org. We had a nice conversation during which he indicated his only latitude was to review requests for moving the tree from side to side along the city easement, with no option for deferment.

2. Juan also alluded to a target planting period starting in early September, when we would be further informed about tree type and final locations. Not all currently designated spots will necessarily get a tree.

3. I then called the city, speaking first with Public Works, who indicated this tree-planting effort is not a city project, but rather one that comes through Caltrans. (That seemed odd, but I wrote it down.)

4. Upon further inquiry, I spoke with the Maintenance Department, who apparently is most linked with the tree-planting project. I explained my situation (planning to plant one to two trees of my own, close to where TreePeople.org marked for planting). They took my number and called back within the hour: short-short, nothing they can do, not a City of Downey project, comes through a grant, and talk to Juan Solomon.

Unlike the previous letter writer, I welcome the addition of trees. Though I appreciate how a tree may not fit well in given property’s configuration, watering demands, irrigation line placement, and other constraints, I also recognize the many benefits a tree offers. These include improved aesthetics for your property and your street, shading for your house (thus lowering summer energy costs), and maybe even a tree swing a few years down the line.

However, it is reasonable for residents to select our own kind of tree(s) and also to exercise reasonable flexibility with the location of those trees. Most selected spots I saw while walking around the neighborhood land more or less smack in the middle of a property (and of course, on the easement, right by the street), with little consideration for overall aesthetics, alignment with front doors and walkways, other vegetation, and so on. And by the way, if you have a hedge or a concrete sidewalk on the easement, you don’t get a tree, even if your front yard is tree deficient.

To address this, a more resident-friendly process for contacting the city to communicate and coordinate alternative arrangements seems in order. The notice we received, lacking a city number, and featuring a take-it-gladly or take-it-angry choice doesn’t strike the right note, especially considering residents are most likely paying for these trees with our tax dollars (the "grant") and will be paying for the tree’s impact on our properties for years to come. And how is it that the city has no say or scope in this project, when the trees will go in the city’s easement?

Trees are good. But if you want us to embrace them, a little more customer service, please.

Eduardo Suastegui
Downey