Mamaroneck Town Board Discusses Trees and Housing
To tree lovers, few things hurt more than watching a healthy tree bite the dust
without due cause.
Soon, there could be less of that going on in the Town of Mamaroneck if a proposal weighed by the Town Board Wednesday night becomes law.
Under the proposal, residents who want to remove trees on their property would have to get town approval – which includes neighbors weighing in – regardless of what size lot it sits on. Currently, only tree removals on lots a half-acre or larger are subject to the town’s OK.
Tree lovers hailed the proposal, calling the practice of arbitrary tree removal “distressing.”
Board members – many tree lovers themselves – though said changing the law would mean a dramatic increase in the number of permits having to be processed and could overwhelm the Town’s already overburdened staff.
Demand is Up for Local Housing Subsidies
In other business, Anna Danoy, who oversees the Town’s federally funded rental assistance program, said demand for local housing subsidies has surged – and there aren’t enough to go around.
“Demand is huge for the limited number of (subsidies) we have to issue right now,” she said.
“We are getting several applications a week where we used to get a couple a month.”
There are currently 1,130 applicants for the 647 housing vouchers the town has to distribute, Danoy said.
The vast majority of people on that list are considered extremely low income, which means they earn not more than 30 percent of the Westchester County medium income (which comes to about $20,000 for an individual), she said. The average rent in the town is about $1,500.
[quote][i]Taxation with representation ain’t so hot either.[/i]
– Gerald Barzan[/quote]
The most intriguing part of the meeting broadcast was the first few minutes when what was heard or not was questionable 😉
But good to see people participating with the Board in discussion about the Town. Perhaps some will get what they had asked for 😉
Later in the broadcast, regarding trees, the supervisor, appears correct in her comments about sharing appreciation for trees but balancing that with property rights. Eminent domain by any name must be used very carefully.
Certain trees and other items represent something of historical landmarks and should be identified and preserved, at the governments expense. But in a country that values freedom, we must tread carefully before we start telling people what color they must paint their houses.
Now speaking of things that keep growing, when will the Board [i]spend[/i] a significant effort to reduce our taxes and expenses. The days of ever growing budgets must end – Westchester’s already won the tax race.
This year we’ll expect a Town tax cut as the real estate bank has declined in value. No, you can’t say it can’t be done. No you can’t simply stand behind how you got us a Triple-A bond rating. Ratings don’t mean what they used to, and early word is that ours came with a “negative outlook”. Oh, what is being done to resolve that last thing?
I disagree with Oreo’s remarks on trees. Trees may grow on private property, but they benefit more than just the property’s owners. Trees help limit global warming by absorbing carbon dioxide and releasing oxygen, which we all breathe. They absorb water and help control flooding, a serious problem in Larchmont/Mamaroneck. Oreo cites “a country that values freedom.” If it valued the environment equally, we might not be in the global warming mess we’re in.
As to “telling people what color to paint their houses,” a long time ago I lived in a historic district in New England, where the historical society did rule on what color to paint one’s house. No one complained, because they saw the greater good that came from the restriction.
More people need to look beyond their own personal interest and see the greater good that trees provide.
[quote][i]God has cared for these trees, saved them from drought, disease, avalanches, and a thousand tempests and floods. But he cannot save them from fools.[/i]
– John Muir[/quote]
So TREELOVER, Oreo doesn’t necessarily disagree with you; only perhaps with the proposed law as it is written. Indeed, Oreo wishes that the Town spoke less and acted more in caring for the environment.
Many things provide for the greater good. For example, fewer automobiles and more public transportation might be desirable in our Town and its environment. And note, [u]theLoop[/u], doesn’t kill trees in its publication/production 😉
[quote][i]Freedom is the oxygen of the soul. [/i]
– Moshe Dayan[/quote]