Carelene Timbs has made a passionate call to Shoalhaven council against removing a controversial tree removal policy.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Carlene, who lost her husband Gordon after a tree fell on their home in 1988, said council's 45 degree rule was about saving lives.
"Gordon paid the ultimate price and that was his life," Carlene said at council's meeting on Monday.
"I do not want another family to suffer the pain over keeping an unsafe tree."
The 45 degree rule allows trees to be removed by a property owner without council approval, where it is within 45 degrees of a building.
Council had previously rejected Mr Timbs' application to remove the tree. The rule was implemented after his death.
Debate over the policy had reignited after Shoalhaven Mayor Amanda Findley put forward a mayoral minute to remove it at council's ordinary meeting on February 21.
Cr Findley said council's tree policy would still allow dead and dangerous trees to be removed, even if the rule was scrapped.
Discussions about the rule will continue after the mayor's mayoral minute was deferred for briefing.
A date is yet to be determined.
On Monday, no changes to the rule were debated, but councillor Greg Watson called on councillors to show support for the existing policy by 'reaffirming' it through a notice of motion.
He said the rule empowers residents to undertake work that protects their lives and homes, especially after the recent severe weather.
Some councillors were left puzzled as to why lengthy debate over 'reaffirming' the policy was happening.
"This is a motion to affirm an existing policy ... so we're not debating any changes to it? I don't see the relevance of us spending time on this," said councillor Evan Christen.
A procedural motion to move the discussion along was ordered.
Councillor Paul Ell, who has been vocal in his support for retaining the rule, said it was "shameful" after he was not given the opportunity to speak.
Crs Kitchener, Watson, Wells, White, Ell and Copley voted in favour of the motion, with the balance against.
A crowd of community members sitting in chambers left straight after.
We depend on subscription revenue to support our journalism. If you are able, please subscribe here. If you are already a subscriber, thank you for your support.