Mike over at Dakota War College has been flogging the meme about regulation putting kids' lemonade stands out of business. Oh, the oppression! The tyranny! Down with government!
But enough with the low-hanging fruit: let's go out on a trickier limb in the discussion of local regulations versus little-guy entrepreneurship.
When it gets done banning hippos Monday night, the Madison City Commission will consider Ordinance 1508, which reads in full thus:
Tree Trimming Operation
- It shall be unlawful for any person to engage in the business of trimming, altering or removing trees, timber, or shrubbery without a license by the Board of Commissioners.
- The fee for the license required by the provisions of this article shall be one hundred dollars ($100.00) per year.
- Any person applying for a license shall provide proof of insurance in the amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence and proof of a South Dakota sales tax license.
Madison has at least one prominent company, Madison Arborcare, making good money on lawn care and tree trimming who can probably spot the license fee and insurance costs. And it's probably no bark off the big operators' profit trees if an ordinance like this stifles some small-timer competition.
But consider: my brother makes his living painting houses. He has a boom truck. Every now and then, someone who hires him to paint that hard-to-reach roof peak or steeple comes out and says, "Hey, while you're up there, do you mind swinging over and taking out that branch on that tree?" Get a rope, chainsaw, vrrooom-crack! Problem solved, back to painting.
Under the city's proposed ordinance, my brother will have to shell out a hundred bucks to the city before he breaks out the chainsaw. More likely, he'll just say, "Sorry, no tree license!" and the city will have successfully funneled a few more dollars to a few favored operators.
Now you don't have to have a boom truck to feel pinched by this regulation. Those kids who've graduated from lemonade stands and invested in a nice mower to push around the neighborhood may bring along a pair of trimmers and a simple pole saw to clear small branches out of mowing range. This ordinance leaves mowing alone, but if your unlicensed Rent-a-Teen prunes one sprig of your maples or your honeysuckle, Mayor Hexom will come running over and smack that kid on the wrist with his six-inch-grass ruler.
Now I understand that chopping down a tree from the wrong side on a windy day can result in an unexpected skylight or compact car. I understand that contractors should carry insurance to cover the inevitable accidents that happen on the job.
But should Madison's tree- and shrub-trimmers join the ranks of electricians, sidewalk installers, and fortune tellers as licensed and bonded contractors? Or will this ordinance remove one more opportunity for young people and neighbors with chainsaws to make a few dollars on a sunny summer day?
Dropping a tree in a city is a little more risky and takes more knowledge than trimming a hedge. If the 'favored business actually does a safer job in the long run gets all the risky work can be a good thing. It does lack the advantage of the painter doing the tree trimming. But he is a painter and they get paid good also while they are painting. They might not even know the going rate on tree cutting. If you put a clause in it that the liscense is needed for anything over ten feet tall(that means any part of that branch is over ten feet high) then the risky jobs are still done by those who are liscenced. And the kids or helpful neighbor of the aged, can do their thing without a lot of risk. If the painter finds lack of work and a lot of offers for tree work, they can get a liscence. But if they are busy painting they might not mind having an excuss to not do the risky work.
A law that has good intentions still needs to fit the most situations possible. That is why we have free speach and democracy. It is slow but can do a better job.
If you hired Joe down the street, wouldn't an incident be covered by your homeowners policy? Rod??? Madison Arborcare is very expensive compared to the small guys in town with buckets.
Good insurance question, John. Roger, if the issue is danger and special skill, then why hasn't the city required painters to be licensed, what with all their death-defying activities on ladders and boom trucks?
So, I'm not sure why the city needs to charge a $100 fee/yr for the license, I could understand wanting to insure your local arborist is insured/bonded, but not sure why the city needs to get involved in this private business.
I suppose Madison now have a rightful duty to charge a plumbers license, or just about any other blue-collared trade, as just think of the 'potential' to create revenue streams if we charged everyone an annual license fee to flush our stools, that's just genius bottom-up thinking! Let's forget about those pesky concerns over lack of sales tax growth or meaningful downtown development or the desire to attract jobs with any sense of self-worth, we may have just discovered our newest 'eureka' moment as a community.
Actually, I think it would only be wise to continue this vain of thinking, and start to charge a license fee for every economic developer in Madison, especially with all these fake and ill-trained Madison promoters running about, sparking festivals and calling for community meetings, which probably sounds a little more than worrisome to our notable roundtable.
Now, I'm not one to brag, but how about this humble proposal, which I hereby present to the our well reasoned and more knowing roundtable: The citizens of Madison will now charge a reasonable fee of 240k annually for the much sought-after 'economic developers' license, which has the incredible potential to do amazing and yes, even unexpected things, which we can't really discuss with you, because that's kind of private.
Apply today!
Does the ordinance stop me from doing it myself? I take down a few branches on my trees every year.
Matt, I assume that "engage in the business" means you can still do your own trees without a license. You may even be able to volunteer to do your neighbors' trees without payment. But if money or chickens change hands, then you'll need a license.
Interesting legal question: what happens if you pay your son an allowance to trim the tree? And does that include Christmas ornaments?
Since we are a painting contracting business we have all the licenses, insurance, liability that we are required. Only once in a great while is a branch cut to keep it from rubbing the side of a house and not letting us paint. A minor project. Who is the one requiring a license and an insurance policy or who is requesting the city do this. If my tree is broken in my own yard i'm going to cut it. My tree-my responsibility. This is getting rediculous - you'll need a license to mow your own yard, to do anything on your own. Rediculous.
If this city ordinance is needed at all is if there has been problems with people giving eachother instant sun roofs by dropping trees on them. If the reason for the new regulation is to promote one business that charges to much, then it is pure nonsense. People in Madison have to decide this one. Theoretically if someone is manipulating the system for their own personal selfishness, the courts could intervene and call it unconstitutional.
My having Dutch ansestors where the people were 600 people per square mile fifty years ago already, you could not paint your own house so that the painter could have a job. With that many people they needed enough jobs. If your local situation requires it, you do it. It might not make sense to someone else, but you need to know your own communitee's needs.
This is likely being driven by Arborcare's owners as Jerry Bickett and his sons of Ramona are allegedly working without insurance and proper equipment according to Arborcare's owner, Gary Graff, who called my agency a couple of weeks ago to discuss those exact points.
One of our clients recently lost a tree in their yard. Arborcare quoted $1500 while Bickett and sons removed the tree for $300. Since Bickett had done previous work for me and my family, I had given his name to my client as an alternative to consider. That prompted the phone call.
The other tree trimmers who work around Madison don't have the large equipment Arborcare has, but I would doubt that the other tree trimmers take on the same big jobs Arborcare is qualified to do like lifting trees off homes which had to be done in Wentworth recently.
There's room for the little guy in Madison as well as the million dollar operator and each have their niche. We have to be careful not to regulate away competition, which is what this ordinance is meant to do.
$1500 versus $300?! That's quite a difference! Thanks, Rod, for the information. With so much commitment to using government power to intrude on the free market, I'm surprised any of our city leaders can call themselves Republicans.
If the City of Madison is going to regulate tree trimmers, perhaps they should also set prices for tree trimming services to protect its citizens? Or, they should let the free market handle the entire process and toss out the new restrictive ordinance.
Why not extend the requirements to ALL businesses that operate in Madison?
Imagine the added revenue!
Madison already squeezes businesses with its high utility hookup fees. More licensing only shuts out more competition. Come on, Madison: do we believe in economic development and the free market or not?
Heh, after perusing the Madison code a bit, I now feel much safer living in the city of Madison. God only knows the damage, destruction, and health risks that could be imposed by unlicensed magic. Thankfully we live in a forward thinking community- we have our magic (including palm reading, fortune telling, and necromancy) safely regulated (with a $50/week fee). Everyone really should think twice before summoning a spirit on a whim. I'm glad this was in place before things got completely out of control.
On the flip side: think of the children. Are we stifling their development by over-regulating the magic industry? How much economic development has Madison lost to other magic-friendly communities?
Madison wants to license and tax tree trimmers, but we don't license DayCare Facilities in Madison who take care of our most precious commodity...Our children and babies. Daycare facilities can register with the City, but there is no fee. Asking every tree trimmer who works in and around Madison to get licensed and pay will keep the out-of-town firms out of Madison and trimming fees could skyrocket. Unneeded self-serving influence on our local government. Protectionism is not going to help Madison residents have choices.
I'm told if a person hires someone knowing they don't have insurance, the homeowners policy won't cover any liabilities. But shouldn't we be able to hire someone with that understanding? Many jobs aren't high risk.
The First Reading on the tree trimmer ordinance failed due to lack of a second. Commissioner Nick Abraham brought the ordinance forward and made the motion to approve it. He acknowledged that the ordinance was handed to him by someone (wonder who?) and he put it forward as written to his fellow commissioners. When business people write their own ordinances that specifically favor their own business, ask an elected official to carry their water in getting it passed, it becomes a major conflict of interest for both the business person and the elected official.
Wait: you mean this proposed ordinance really was what we thought it was? Holy cow! Please, please, Commissioner Abraham, tell us who handed you that ordinance!