By RICHARD DEGENER, Press of A.C. Staff Writer | Thursday, March 4, 2010 |

CAPE MAY – A local condominium owner who faced a fine of more than $4,000 for cutting down a pin oak tree without city permission got a reprieve of sorts on Wednesday.

George Dascenzo, of Lamplighter Condominiums on Washington Street, said his case was dismissed from Cape May Municipal Court.

“The judge and prosecutor said the city has no rights on private property. I kind of knew that because I read the law, but this was the first time somebody took it to court,” Dascenzo said.

Cape May Shade Tree Commission Chairman Jay Schatz, however, said the case is far from over. Schatz said Dascenzo is apparently referring to a state tree law that regulates cuttings on public lands.

Schatz said the city adopted its own tree ordinance in 2006 that requires permission from the commission to cut down a tree on private property if its diameter is 8 inches or more. There is also a permit required that costs $25.

“He was written a summons under the wrong ordinance,” Schatz said.

But there is a potential problem with the 2006 ordinance, as it was adopted by council but not included in the city’s code book. Schatz said the commission is awaiting a ruling by City Solicitor Tony Monzo on whether this matters and if a new summons can be issued. Schatz believes the ordinance is law even if it was not codified.

“George thinks he’s won. I’d rather wait until we get a ruling from Monzo,” Schatz said.

Dascenzo said the ordinance he was cited under said he can’t remove trees, shrubs and flowers from parks and public places. He claimed the Shade Tree Commission has been “bullying people” about private property they have no jurisdiction over.

“We should tell the people they can cut down their trees,” Dascenzo said.

Code Enforcement Officer John Queenan said the code book lists the 2006 ordinance as pending.

“I can’t write a summons for a pending ordinance,” Queenan said.

He said there is an earlier city ordinance calling for a permit to plant or cut down a tree but he did not use this one.

Dascenzo said the tree was causing problems with sidewalks and drainage at the condominium complex, on whose board he serves. Dascenzo said a contractor was hired to remove the tree but could not get a city permit after another condo resident told the commission she did not want it removed.

“I decided to take matters into my own hands,” Dascenzo said.

That statement sounds like Dascenzo cut the tree down, although he says he never admitted he did the cutting in court. He simply said the tree “disappeared” in November.

Queenan said other trees at Lamplighter have also mysteriously disappeared.

“Trees have disappeared in front of two more condo owners who voted against cutting the original tree down,” Queenan said.

Schatz said the commission denied approval in October to take the tree down but said it would help with fixing the sidewalk. He said the oak tree was then girdled, which would kill it, so a summons was issued. Then the tree disappeared.

Schatz said City Council adopted the 2006 ordinance after two gigantic trees, a cottonwood and an Eastern elm, were taken down. Fines are based on the size of a tree and would have been more than $12,000 for the two large trees if the ordinance was in place. The formula for the pin oak calls for a fine of $4,153.

Schatz said the commission approves most tree removals.

“In most cases, they illustrate a compelling need and we let them take it down. We’re not unreasonable on this,” Schatz said.

Monzo said he will research the law on whether an adopted ordinance can be enforced if it was not codified. He recalled there was no opposition when council adopted the 2006 ordinance.

Lamplighter Condos in Cape May, NJ