Roeland Park is taking the hot-button issue of tree preservation to the residents.
After a proposed ordinance that would have put new rules in place for removing trees failed by one vote at the Roeland Park City Council this summer, the city decided to seek resident input with neighborhood meetings in each ward.
Other neighboring cities like Fairway and Prairie Village have tree preservation ordinances already on the books, and have either modified or approved those policies in recent years in an attempt to preserve those suburb’s grown-out tree canopies.
Roeland Park officials say the proposed tree preservation ordinance there will be a topic for a future community forum, and the city council is expected to take up the issue again after the new year.
It’s also a talking point in this year’s city council elections. Watch the candidates in two contested council races share their views on how the city should approach mature tree preservation.
The tree preservation discussion began years ago
Roeland Park finished an inventory of mature trees last year and developed potential policies around regulating their preservation.
However, the current council is split on whether to collect more public input or press forward on establishing rules that have been years in the making.
After committee discussions and policy draft reviews in 2021, city staff presented the tree inventory at a September 2022 city council workshop meeting.
The city council discussed and ultimately tabled the item in December, allowing city staff time to develop a proposed policy.
Then, in June, city staff brought two versions of a mature tree preservation ordinance back to the city council — one that would take effect 90 days after approval and one that would take effect 180 days after approval.
At that time, councilmembers Tom Madigan, Kate Raglow and Miel Castagna-Herrera wanted the ordinance tabled again until the city council received results from a 2023 resident survey in July.
Deliberation of the item on June 20 ultimately left the conversation on the agenda of the city council, but with no official policy in place. Here’s how the city council split:
- A motion to table the conversation to a later date failed in a 4-to-3 vote, with councilmembers Jan Faidley, Jen Hill and Michael Rebne, along with Mayor Michael Poppa, opposing a tabled ordinance. Faidley, Hill and Rebne said tabling the conversation again would not be beneficial, according to the June 20 meeting minutes.
- A motion to establish a tree preservation ordinance that would go into effect 180 days after approval also failed in a 4-to-3 vote, with councilmembers Madigan, Raglow and Castagna-Herrera in opposition. The June 20 meeting minutes state “an ordinary ordinance requires five affirmative votes of the Council” for approval.
What do the ordinances say?
- The tree preservation ordinances both outline proposed regulations for tree maintenance, trimming and removal by the city and also lay out rules for how to handle diseased or infected trees on private property.
- They both define “protected trees” as trees with at least a 12-inch diameter trunk that are on “covered property,” which includes front yards of private lots, public rights-of-way, green space and city-owned property.
- It also establishes a tree fund to be used for purchasing, planting and maintaining trees on “covered property.”
- Both ordinances include a penalty of up to $500 per offense for removing protected trees without city approval.
- The only difference between the two ordinances is when the policy would go into effect — either 90 or 180 days after approval.
Read the entire 180-day ordinance that failed in June below.
Loading...
Reload document 
Open in new tab Roeland Park is halfway through Ward meetings
- City Administrator Keith Moody told the Post via email that the city is hosting ward neighborhood meetings to review the draft ordinance and any information the city has collected to date.
- Moody said this is also a time for the city to listen to what residents think about the concept of tree preservation.
- Moody said resident questions about the impact and administration of a tree preservation ordinance was the driving force behind the ward meetings.
- Wards 1 and 4 have already hosted meetings, but wards 2 and 3 have yet to be scheduled, Moody said.
Next steps:
- Moody said that after all the Ward meetings are finished, a final community forum will be hosted to share information.
- “We don’t expect Council will take up consideration of an ordinance until after the first of the year,” Moody said.
Go deeper: See where 2023 city council candidates stand on tree preservation ordinances in the Post’s candidate forum at 28:16.
