Five residents of the Town of Mamaroneck have filed a lawsuit against the Town in Westchester County Court, asking that its recently-passed tree law be declared null and void.

The Plaintiffs have sent the following statement to theLoop:

Over near unanimous opposition, the Town passed a law this past fall that allows property owners to cut down virtually all their trees and lifts all limits on the Town’s right to cut down trees on Town property. The latter restrictions had been in place for nearly 40 years.

The law allows mature trees to be cut down so long as property owners plant by a few tiny trees or pay into a “Tree Fund” that can be used for almost any outdoor costs. The Town calls the law a “Tree Replacement Law” and contends that the newtrees will “replace” the old ones. The law faced unanimous opposition.

Without consulting any scientist or citing any facts, the Town insisted that the new law’s requirement that old trees be “replaced” by one to four tiny new ones or that a payment be made will have no adverse effect on the environment or on Town character or beauty. It maintained this stance despite experts, the Town’s environmental advisor, its own employees, the Planning Board, the Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee, and some 500 residents telling the Town that this idea was preposterous and that they did not want this new law.

What makes the new law even more absurd is that, as the Town recognizes, it has a “Climate Emergency.” It suffers from rampant flooding and a rapidly-declining tree canopy. Mature trees help reduce flooding and maintain the canopy. By intercepting rainwater with their leaves, absorbing rainfall through their roots, and aerating the soil, mature trees reduce runoff. Runoff, which carries fertilizers, pesticides, oil, gasoline, and other debris, creates erosion and flooding and pollutes our sensitive environmental areas and the Long Island Sound. The Town is well aware of its flooding problems but turned a deaf ear when residents recited these facts and related how they themselves had been devastated by repeated flooding.

Similarly, by sequestering carbon, mature trees offset greenhouse gas emissions. In 2019, New York State passed a law called the Climate Act, which requires the State to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 40% by 2030 and 85% by 2050. The prior Town administration embraced the Climate Act and committed to reaching these goals, specifically telling its climate advisory group to draw up plans to reverse declines in the Town’s tree canopy. But the new administration has reversed course, most obviously by passing the new Tree Law, which essentially permits cutting down all trees.

The lawsuit just filed seeks to have the new Tree Law declared null and void. The lawsuit argues that the new law is invalid for several reasons.

• First, it is irrational and is not based on any facts. The only reason that the Town gave for passing it was that property owners purportedly have a right to do whatever they want to do on their property. But there is no such right. Communities can pass all kinds of laws that place restrictions on property owners for“the common good.”

• Second, by law, the Town Board was required to assess the effect that the law will have on the environment before passing it. But the Town Board improperly delegated this responsibility to the Town Attorney, and he abdicated that responsibility by not performing the review that the law requires.

• Third, the Town failed to consider whether the new law was consistent with what is called the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program, a nearly-forty year-old state, federal, and local government program that requires that all actions taken by the Town be consistent with the Program’s goals of protecting our waterfront area — which includes our whole Town — and Long Island Sound.

• Fourth, the lawsuit argues that, in exempting itself from any restrictions on cutting down trees on Town property, the Town violated two ancient doctrines, the Public Trust Doctrine and the Charter of the Forest. These provide that the public have a shared interest in natural resources on public property. These resources do not “belong” to the Town alone.

• Finally, by refusing to give residents a copy of the proposed Tree Law while it was being drafted and discussed by the Town so that they could follow along during the discussions, the Town violated what is called the Open Meetings Law, which seeks to permit people to observe their lawmakers at work. The lawsuit is now before a Westchester County Supreme Court judge. The Town’s response must be filed by April 19th.

Inquiries may be addressed to Andrea G. Hirsch, the attorney who is representing the plaintiffs, at 212 267-1411, aghirsch@rcn.com.