The confusion began when the Tumalo Irrigation District began clearing trees along a popular stretch of the Deschutes River Trail on the north side of Bend.

At first, city officials said it was OK for the district to topple the trees without a permit. Then, they weren’t so sure. Maybe the irrigation district’s actions violated city codes. Maybe they didn’t.

Nobody at the city seemed to have a straight answer. The only person with any conviction was the TID representative, who declared that the rules didn’t apply because “we were there before the city.”

In the end, it took the involvement of the city’s two in-house attorneys, Mary Winters and Gary Firestone, to figure out which codes actually applied and whether the irrigation district violated rules in cutting down the trees to protect its 5.5-mile underground pipeline.

They described their findings in a secret memorandum that Firestone discussed with Bend city councilors during a closed-door meeting on April 4.

When the city released the document to The Bulletin after initially denying a public records request, it outlined a convoluted set of rules governing when and where trees may be felled in city limits.

“Minor differences in facts can result in a different decision on whether not or it’s allowed,” Firestone said. “In every situation you have to carefully examine the code because there are three different areas you have to look at, and you have to analyze each separately to see if they apply at all, and if they apply, what do they require or prohibit.”

Essentially, said Firestone, the city’s tree-cutting restrictions apply in only a small number of circumstances: if a tree is located on city property or within a right-of-way; if new development is taking place on a piece of private property; or if the tree is located in the waterway overlay zone — for instance, if it’s rooted along the Deschutes River.

Trees located in “areas of special interest,” which include various buttes and rock outcroppings, also require a review of city codes before they can be cut.

If none of these rules apply, Firestone said the city doesn’t have any purview and an individual is allowed to saw away.

“Generally, if development is anticipated we’re going to be interested in tree removal,” he said. “If it’s George Washington chopping down the cherry tree in his backyard … we’re not going to care.”

In TID’s case, the trees were in the waterway overlay zone, but the city found that removal was necessary to protect the $15 million pipeline from roots that could crack through the lining and cause leakage.

But Bend City Councilor Jim Clinton thinks this is a narrow reading of the city’s codes and said the back-and-forth about what’s allowed means the city needs to adjust its rules to make them understandable to the average citizen.

“All ordinances have to be clearly written so reasonable people can all agree to the extent possible on what they mean. And any interpretations of what they mean should be open to the public,” Clinton said. “You get into a really awful situation when people interpret it different ways and when the city’s own interpretation is a little murky and secret. It’s all supposed to be clear and objective.”

Clinton said the council should discuss implementing a new, umbrella ordinance that would dictate when a tree should be chopped down.

For instance, if a tree is located in someone’s front yard, but is along a highly traveled street, should the property owner be allowed to cut it down without any input from the city? What if it’s a 100-year-old ponderosa pine? Or some other native species? What if it’s endangered?

“I think that’s a perfectly good topic for the City Council because trees are important for the majority of people who live here,” Clinton said. “I’m a libertarian, so I’m never in favor of real onerous rules. But on the other hand, you have to have some rules because people’s selfish interests are at odds with the public’s interests.”

The City Council discussed adopting an ordinance in 2006 to preserve trees in Bend. It was part of a yearslong discussion that eventually fizzled.

That ordinance would have required a permit for anyone who wanted to cut down pine trees 10 inches or greater in diameter, trees on the Deschutes County Historical Society inventory or 50-year-old trees located in the historic district.

Mayor Jeff Eager agrees with Clinton that the city needs to review the rules to clear up confusion regarding tree clearing. He added that he’s a little apprehensive about going any further than that.

“Quite clearly the city staff had a misunderstanding one way or another for how to interpret the code,” Eager said. “I’d be in favor of taking a look at the code for the purpose of clarifying it. … At this point, I’m not excited about any kind of additional regulation for what people can do on their property.”