Skip to main content

Support Investigation of Comm. Cover

From: kathryn kolb
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 11:52 AM
Subject: support investigation of Comm. Cover

Dear Members of Atlanta City Council,

I am very concerned about Comm. Cover and his subordinate, Mr. Maslamani's, actions in firing the City's top arborist Tom Coffin. A memo obtained through the freedom of information act shows that Cover, Maslamani and perhaps at least one high level member of the Mayors' staff apparently conspired for some time with a "plan" to get rid of the most knowledgeable and experienced City Arborist because he actually did his job in correctly administering the City's Tree Protection Ordinance. In the email, Mr. Maslamani tells Mr. Cover that many members of the public are beginning to speak out against Tom's reasonless firing, and Comm. Cover responds that he should not worry but should "hang in there and stick to our plan." This is quite simply disgusting.

Tom's firing is an unconstitutional act - it is clear that Comm. Cover does not support the City's tree ordinance and wanted to further weaken it by making sure the staff of arborists (which are indirectly under his authority within the Bureau of Buildings) did not enforce the code. Should members of the Mayor's administration feel free to fire city staff for upholding laws passed City Council just because they don't happen to like those particular laws? Cover's action in firing Tom was an abuse of power that disrespects and violates the relationship between the legislative and executive arms of City government.

Unfortunately, Cover's action was indeed consistent with other of his actions that clearly illustrate he is no friend to the City's tree ordinance (or its's trees). I have personally watched him on several occasions present inaccurate or "skewed" information about the administration of the tree ordinance or about tree "facts" to council members at committee meetings (including tactics I believe were geared to suggest racism!) in order to try to sway council members to weaken, undercut and reverse protection to trees outlined in the ordinance.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion about trees, and all are free to contact their legislative representatives to enact or change the City's laws - but once those laws are passed, it is the duty of city staff at all levels to enforce those laws, not to conspire with other staff members to erode a law's effectiveness. Tom Coffin was doing his job, Comm. Cover was not doing his!

Please support Councilmember Mary Norwood's call for a full investigation into this unfortunate situation, which I believe may well, and appropriately, lead to a call for Comm. Cover's resignation.

Thank you for your attention to this important matter, and please feel free to contact me anytime.

Kathryn Kolb
(personal contact information withheld)

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Appeals to the Tree Conservation Commission, 2008

Appeals to the Tree Conservation Commission, 2008 By Tom Coffin, Ph.D. Appeals to the Tree Conservation Commission are, by design, an integral part of the Tree Protection Ordinance. Like most laws, the TPO is a relatively blunt instrument. Though reasonable and effective most of the time, it does not cover all situations all the time, nor is it fair to all parties all the time. Appeals to the TCC provide an administrative means to resolve disputes. Unlike a Municipal Court hearing – also possible under the ordinance -- where decisions are usually based on the “letter of the law,” appeal hearings before the TCC often allow for some bending of the law as written to encompass a specific situation. At its best, the TCC acts as the “conscience of the community” in its decision-making. Both the commission and the appeal process have matured. After more than eight years of use and testing, both work rather admirably when allowed to do so. Under the Tree Protection Ordinance, every decision (s...
3 comments
Read more

Urban Forest Fiasco

From Creative Loafing... "Tom Coffin loves trees. And when we say he loves trees, he reaaally loves trees. The unfamiliar face – who was the city's senior arborist until he was fired July 29 – is the epicenter of the latest scandal to emanate from already embattled City Hall. The city's failure to specify why Coffin was fired (or who called for it) has led many to speculate about the cause – and jump to the conclusion that developers saw him as a threat. Even the New York Times took notice – and questioned whether Atlanta's development machine had chalked a win over the environmental community." ... more
Post a Comment
Read more

Huffington Post Comments

The Huffington Post picked up the New York Times story as soon as it was published. Here is a comment to the article from their Web site : "well it's nice to hear that at least someone was doing their job because when I drive through this city the question that repeatedly comes to my mind is: why does atlanta even have a tree ordinance? the developers here still clear-cut old large trees then replant saplings - and given the stress that these trees are under it is highly doubtful they will ever reach the size of the ones that are being cut down.I've lived here for almost 2 decades and I continue to be appalled at what the city allows developers to get away with here. we're running out of water and they still keep handing out the building permits. we're losing our oldest and largest tress to greed and the city just keeps handing out the permits. truely this city is f-ed at this point. so I guess given that developers always get their way in this place it comes as no...
Post a Comment
Read more