Holding Atlanta City Government Accountable

Tree advocates are joining together to demand that the City of Atlanta enforce the Tree Ordinance. From the Buckhead Reporter... New Group Supports Atlanta's Tree Canopy From Grass Roots Up by John F. Schaffner May 15, 2009 Canopy Keepers Atlanta might not survive as the name for a new grass-roots group organizing to protect Atlanta's trees — thus its tree canopy — by insisting the city's tree protection ordinance be enforced as intended, fairly, consistently and without exception. The name was what the group of about 15 people — several longtime activists for trees — came up with for the organization at the end of a two-hour meeting May 11 at the home of Dr. Jeri Breiner on Woodhaven Road in Buckhead. But the vote was not unanimous, and all agreed to consider it again at the next meeting, June 1 at the same location. Several in the group preferred the name The Tree Next Door. While the group was not able to decide on a permanent name or a mission statement — those items we...

The City Attorney has responded to the Whistleblower lawsuit filed by Tom Coffin in the Fulton County Superior Court. In summary, the City’s response is to deny all allegations and call for dismissal of the suit. I hesitate to post the city’s entire response here as it is lengthy and repetitious ("Defendant denies, denies, denies…"), but in Tom’s desire for continuing openness and transparency, I have posted the City’s response in its entirety below. The suit has now entered the "discovery" phase, with the first set of "Request to Produce" demands delivered to the City this week. Tom’s legal team will soon be taking depositions in preparation for a court trail by jury. In an email Tom issued his supporters Friday, Tom says, I greatly appreciate your continued interest in this case, the importance of which extends far beyond me. In a cynical end-around of the many individuals and groups who worked for years to rationalize and strengthen the law, City policy...

“I see a Bureau of Buildings and a Department of Planning elevating unrestricted development above all other considerations, including adherence to law.” -- Tom Coffin Tom’s statement above is made in regard to his most recent analysis of the appeals that were heard during 2008, the full text which can be found below . Not surprisingly, 5 of the 7 appeals still outstanding at the time of Tom’s firing were subsequently withdrawn or deferred/dismissed; whereas only 2 of the 16 appeals filed against Tom’s decisions prior to his firing were withdrawn or deferred/dismissed. As Tom explains, withdrawals typically occur when the appellant and the city arborist resolve their differences prior to the hearing whereas a deferral/dismissal means the case was deferred or dismissed without a ruling by the commission. The fact that the majority of Tom’s appeals were never heard before the Tree Commission after his firing raises doubts as to how well the city arborists are adhering to the law. Tom’s a...

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...

Appeal for Support By Tom Coffin In numerous papers written since I was fired from my position as Senior Arborist for the City of Atlanta last July, all of which are available on an independent blog at http://holdingcitygovernmentaccountable.blogspot.com , I have demonstrated that Atlanta’s landmark Tree Protection Ordinance was not and is not being enforced in any systematic manner by the field arborists hired for that task. Without enforcement the law is meaningless. It is a sham. The Bureau of Buildings, which hired my replacement in December, now pays five field arborists to accommodate builders and developers, to look the other way if illegal destruction is apparent or suspected, to stonewall citizen complaints, to make excuses for their failures – in short, to not enforce the ordinance. This would be indefensible in the best of times. It is outrageous and unconscionable in an economic climate that has forced hundreds of city employees to lose important jobs that they were act...

Support the Tree Protection Ordinance Support the Legal Fund By former chairs of the Atlanta Tree Conservation Commission The Tree Protection Ordinance was established under the stewardship of Mayor Maynard Jackson to ensure future generations of Atlantans the many benefits derived from living in an Urban Forest. Trees clean our air, shade our homes and streets and prevent storm water runoff from spoiling our creeks and rivers. To ensure the protection of those benefits the Tree Protection Ordinance was written to ensure “No net loss of trees” in the city. Subsequent amendments to the ordinance were added to provide the city with strong enforcement powers to prevent wanton destruction of trees and ensure that funds are available for replenishing this forest. Tom Coffin, Ph.D., has served this city admirably, first as a member of the initial Tree Conservation Commission and later as a city arborist where he helped citizens develop improvements to the ordinance for tree replenishment ...

A brief article (below) in today's Atlanta Journal Constitution states that "City officials said Coffin was dismissed because of his “inability to work (italics mine) in a team environment.'" I wish the AJC would do a story on what constitutes "work" in the City of Atlanta. Because whatever it is, I'm pretty sure Tom Coffin wasn't doing it. Fired Arborist Files Suit to Reclaim Job by Eric Sturgis February 17, 2009 An arborist fired last year by Atlanta is suing to get his job back. Thomas Coffin filed a lawsuit Friday in Fulton County Superior Court claiming he was let go in violation of the state’s “whistle-blower” act, which prohibits government workers from being fired as a reprisal for making a public complaint about an employee or government to the employer. Coffin, a senior arborist, believes he was fired because he complained to supervisors that some arborists were not following the city’s tree ordinance. City officials said Coffin was dismis...