> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.smdp.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# Officials reject latest treesavers overture
- URL: https://www.smdp.com/officials-reject-latest-treesavers-overture/
- Published: 2008-03-14T15:00:00.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-24T18:52:44.000Z
- Author: Guest Author
- Tags: Environment, Downtown, #archive-import

*File photo DEAL? Treesavers’ latest offer came just days after the California State Court of Appeal extended the temporary restraining keeping the ficus trees in question in place until March 21\. Treesavers, City Hall to meet in courtroom later this month*

*By DAILY PRESS STAFF*

CITY HALL City officials rejected a settlement offer made this week by the Santa Monica Treesavers, who proposed dropping a lawsuit in exchange for preserving 54 ficus trees slated for removal. treesavers’ attorney Tom Nitti, whose offices are located just two blocks away from the ficus trees in question, submitted the offer addressed to the City Council on Tuesday.

“In response to the treesavers’ proposal, we intend to wait for the \[state\] Court of Appeal to hear all the facts and make its decision,” City Manager Lamont Ewell said.

The trees are part of an overall beautification plan for Second and Fourth streets, which in addition to transplanting 31 trees and removing 23 identified as structurally deficient, would enhance lighting, repair sidewalks and create a better pedestrian culture on the corridor. The plan also includes the planting of two ginkgo biloba trees in place of each removed and displaced ficus tree.

The group’s offer came just days after the California State Court of Appeal extended the temporary restraining order against City Hall until March 21, barring the removal of any ficus tree that doesn’t pose an imminent threat to the public. The order was initially issued on Oct. 5, just days before work crews were set to begin removing the trees from the downtown area.

Earlier on Tuesday, City Attorney Joseph Lawrence responded to the treesavers that he interprets the court’s decision that the 23 ficus trees, which the city forester identified as dangerous to the public, can be removed as soon as possible.

Nitti disagreed, writing back that the consulting arborist for City Hall, Cy Carlberg, said in her January report that only three trees had “high failure potential.”

The treesavers warned that if City Hall loses in court, it might have to go back to the drawing board with the streetscape plan, conducting an environmental impact report and losing more money in the process.

“That could delay or terminate the entire streetscape project and the treesavers are not interested in doing that,” Nitti said. “The treesavers are only interested in saving the trees.”

The treesavers and City Hall are expected to meet back in court on March 21.

They came face to face in a Downtown L.A. courthouse last month when Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Ann Jones ruled that the treesavers lawsuit against City Hall, alleging it failed to follow the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), was moot since it was filed a few years too late. In the Feb. 28 ruling the judge found the 180-day clock during which time a lawsuit could be filed began ticking in October 2005 when city officials determined the project was CEQA exempt. The treesavers contend that City Hall misled the public in stating that the street trees were also exempt, classifying them as facilities in the 2005 report rather than as trees.

“The settlement, treesavers think, is a win-win solution,” Nitti said.

![](https://storage.ghost.io/c/55/9f/559f9abc-8372-4a2e-8c2d-27386da4e363/content/images/2026/10/031408-01_01.jpg)

DEAL? (Photo: Photo courtesy)

*Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on March 14, 2008.* [Read the original PDF.](https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/smdp%5Fbackissues/031408.pdf?ref=smdp.com)