Agreement finalized between Bill Riney and ITC in Ypsilanti Township tree dispute
The dispute between an Ypsilanti Township man and a power company over the right to cut down large trees on his property has been officailly resolved in court.
Bill Riney agreed to let officials with International Transmission Company use an easement that allows them to cut down large white pine trees lining the rear of his Edison Avenue property, according to a court order filed last week.Â
Bill Riney of Ypsilanti Township staged a protest in a tree.
File photo
Riney will receive roughly $10,000, and garnered several conditions that prevent ITC from building structures on the land. The Novi-based company is also required to reseed the turf and repair damage to the grounds within a reasonable time period after using the easement.
ITC has full rights to trim all trees, bushes and brush, and can access the property at any time to repair, improve or maintain the high-voltage wires overhanging the property, according to the agreement.
Company officials said the trees interfere with the lines and pose a potential safety risk if they remain intact. Workers attempted to trim them in June but determined the trees were too mature to just cut without destroying them.
Riney, 56, climbed into a tree and spent about two days roughly 30 feet off the ground to protest. Company officials initially backed down, but returned with a financial offer in August. After Riney refused, the company took him to court.
Riney and his wife, Marcia Burton, argued during an evidentiary hearing that the trees added aesthetic beauty and value to their property. But Washtenaw Circuit Judge David Swartz granted the company access to 31 feet of Riney’s property, largely due to safety concerns.
Crews began cutting the trees in the presence of Washtenaw County Sheriff’s deputies in November.
Art Aisner is a freelance writer for AnnArbor.com. Reach the news desk at news@annarbor.com or 734-623-2530.
Comments
cinnabar7071
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 2:07 p.m.
" I think everyone on that block should have sat in their trees, too." Then in the winter you could all huddle aroud the BBQ for warmth once you've lost power because you felt the trees were more important. Great idea, lol!
katie
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 1:49 p.m.
How sad for the trees. Apparently some people don't like Riney. I don't even know who he is. I think everyone on that block should have sat in their trees, too. Spiking? I presume that he let people know they were spiked, that he didn't do it in secret to hurt people, just to prevent trees being cut down. (If that's not the case, it's just wrong.) Anyone read the Dr. Seuss book about the Lorax to their kids? Who speaks for the trees? If I owned that property I would not have taken any amount of money for those trees. When big business comes for your property, who will protect you? Probably not gov't, though you might get some compensation for your grief if you appeal to the courts and make a big enough fuss about this theft of land. If the company didn't have the easement, why should they be entitled to it over the landowner's rights? How much would it cost the company to relocate or replace those huge trees with equal size and quality ones in a different location (not planting shrubs)? That's one thing they should have done instead if the property is set up to allow it. My guess is that it would cost far more than $10,000, given the size of the trees.
treetowncartel
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 11:38 a.m.
Shame on ITC, the people of Ypsilanti Township were better served with Riney in the tree. I find it abhorable that he spiked the tree. This is the same person who premised his campaing on "more jobs" and here he is willing to injure somebody who would have just been going out to do their job.
dading dont delete me bro
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 10:05 a.m.
sweet, guess who's paying this $10grand...? you and i in the long run. you're welcome mr.riney, i might just have to stop and get a hot dog i just paid for
PR of AA
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 9:03 a.m.
I would've given "one more chance" to come down, and if he didn't......I would've cut the tree down with him in it. I'm all about standing up for what you believe in but c'mon, what a waste of tax payer dollars and a waste of "news" space.
Flossie
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 8:38 a.m.
What's a homeowner to do?? I'm in the same boat. Our trees were planted plenty far away from lines. We think so, and believe most people would agree. But not big utility company! In oh gosh, maybe 10 years the trees might be big enough to fall and damage the wire - which by the way, goes only to our house. Yes yes I know, repairs use the money from all customers. I'll take the bet and put funds in escrow for that possibility! But apparently that's not an option. The only option is to move about 15 yd of line underground costing over $10,000 ($9,000 to the utility company and something more for the asphalt repair). If anyone knows how to fight these things AND WIN, please tell me!
a2huron
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 8:13 a.m.
Didn't previous news articles indicate that ITC did not have an existing easement over Riney's property? Otherwise the judge would not have needed to grant ITC 31 feet of property. They would have already had it. That is why they are paying him the $.
Concerned Citizen
Mon, Feb 1, 2010 : 9:55 p.m.
The story states:..."use an easement". Does that mean use a pre-existing easement?... or was an previously non-existant easement granted as part of this settlement?
cinnabar7071
Mon, Feb 1, 2010 : 1:20 p.m.
ITC did not have an easement, thats why they paid him. They also bought easements from other residents on Edison that they didn't own. I guess Riney believed the other residents didn't need electical power as bad as he needed his trees. It's really to bad when one persons own selfish wants supersedes the rest of the community. Please remember this the next time Riney runs for office. Also know that Riney spiked the trees with nails to try and hurt those who came out to trim the trees, it's in the court record.
codywilson
Mon, Feb 1, 2010 : 12:57 p.m.
They had no legal right to access those trees. They had no easement. This is nothing more than a court ordering a private land owner to allow some corporation to destroy his property. It's a travesty.
jcj
Mon, Feb 1, 2010 : 12:49 p.m.
Looks like we all can refuse to let companies access what they have a legal right to do if we are willing to sit in a tree and cry loud enough. Nobody honors agreements anymore.
unclemercy
Mon, Feb 1, 2010 : 12:40 p.m.
ten grand is a lot of hotdogs.