The clear-cutting of an Anna Maria lot of trees may result in more than $90,000 in fines and fees.
Special magistrate Gerald Buhr, an attorney out of Lakewood Ranch, postponed a ruling Jan. 20 on a city code violation for the alleged removal of six grand trees at 610 N. Bay Blvd.
The municipality prohibits the removal of grand trees without city commission approval. City code defines grand trees as those with 8-inch diameters at 4.5 feet above ground level, excluding Ficus and Australian pine trees.
There is a workaround under state law, which preempts local government from requiring “notice, application, approval permit, fee or mitigation for the pruning, trimming, or removal of a tree on a residential property if the property owner possesses documentation from an arborist certified by the ISA or a Florida-licensed landscape architect that the tree poses an unacceptable risk to persons or property.”
State law establishes that a tree only poses an “unacceptable risk if removal is the only means of practically mitigating its risk below moderate.”
Code enforcement manager David DeZutter and city planner Ashley Austin presented the city’s case against property owner 610N Bay LLC and a pair of contractors, Palmetto-based G&S Construction Services Inc. and Bradenton-based West Coast Resources LLC.
The claim is that six grand trees were removed from the property during demolition, including a sea hibiscus tree, a gumbo limbo, a Hong Kong orchid, a mahoe and two plumeria trees.
Austin said city staff repeatedly asked for clarification about whether the work would involve removing grand trees during the permit review process.
She said the respondents failed to provide an answer multiple times, but eventually sent a letter stating that no grand trees would be removed.
However, when work kicked off on Nov. 26, 2025, the city received calls about trees being removed from the lot.
DeZutter responded to the property and found G&S removing the sea hibiscus and gumbo limbo trees. The other four trees had already been removed by West Coast Resources.
The contractor on site had no documentation to allow the removal, so DeZutter halted work and determined a violation had occurred.
Austin said the city did not receive an arborist letter to remove trees at the property until Jan. 14, but it was not properly signed and dated and did not meet state requirements.
She said the letter failed to provide the trees’ locations, species or measurements, and did not provide for health conditions and structural assessments.
Buhr asked if there were any measurements for the removed trees to prove they qualified as grand trees.
Austin said the city relies on applicants to provide measurements and, having failed to do so, that information was not available.
DeZutter asked Buhr to fine all three violators $5,000 for each of the six removed trees and a $100 administrative fee, totaling $30,100 per violator and $90,300 overall.
Representatives for all three respondents attended the meeting, including G&S co-owner Kelly Parks and West Coast Resources owner Diego Rivas.
Rivas said none of the trees he removed from the property qualified as grand trees since they did not have 8-inch diameters at 4.5 feet above ground level, but he did not provide measurements to prove his claim.
Parks said Sarasota-based Sam’s Tree Service had provided an assessment that the sea hibiscus was an unacceptable risk before its removal, so no permit should have been required to remove the tree.
He added that the tree also was deemed a risk to nearby power lines by Florida Power & Light, which trimmed the tree so G&S could remove it without damaging the lines.
Parks called the ordeal a “witch hunt” and said the city was operating off hearsay instead of facts.
“I think it’s wrong and I think it’s utterly disappointing to see this,” he said. “We shouldn’t be hung for something that we did everything right for.”
Buhr said the arborist letter provided to the city only provided assessments for two trees, the sea hibiscus and a coconut palm.
He said he wanted to speak with the arborist about the situation, saying the letter was “a little sketchy.”
Buhr ordered to continue the case to a future hearing and for all involved parties, including the arborist, to meet in the meantime to determine if the letter covers all of the removed trees.
“I’m hesitant to enter a fine of $90,000 with missing facts,” he said.