Nine staples used for this Parks Department notice. "What’s good for the gander isn’t what’s good for the goose and its wrong. Its just plain wrong. The Parks Department puts the same staples in their trees," Mr. Ricatto says.
The ordeal began on August 31st when a reporter asks the Parks Department press office to see if anything came of the agency’s investigation of the Michael Ricatto issue.
The press officer reaches out to various to several senior employees.
Queens Parks Borough Commissioner Dorothy Lewandowski asks long time Queens Director of Forestry Joe Bonkowski to give his determination flyers stapled to trees in Kew Gardens.
On August 31st Bonkowski responds.
"Our forester Brooke (Costanzo) went out there and checked the trees for damage. Note only tape was used on some.
. Tree damage reports are being filed with special councils (sic) office for mnor (sic) damage from some staples.
A request has been made for pep to issue summons.
After parks press office employee Maeri Ferguson thanks him with an exclamation point Bonkowski writes back:
”Our forestry part is done it’s up to pep now,” he states.
“And would PEP know how much the fine is and how many trees were damaged?” Ferguson asks.
“That’s a question for pep. it seems depending on when you go out the number of fliers varies as neighbors have been removing them,” Bonkowski responds.
The next day Bonkowski assess an astonishing $ 41,000 dollars in damage caused by the stapes.
“Okay – but so far can you please tell me how many trees were inspected by forestry?” Ferguson asks the next day.
“40 trees looked at with 11 trees with deep staples the tree damage dollar amount of 41,000 dollars for those 11 trees,” he writes.
t h e remaining trees had either tape posters already removed or no other issue as staples shallow or not effecting cambium which is the living layer under the bark.”
The press representative then reaches out to PEP Deputy Inspector Parks Enforcement Patrol Edwin Falcon.
"Wondering if you can tell me what the fine would be if this guy were to be issued a summons. Background is a Kew Gardens resident who taped and in some instances stapled dozens of flyers to the trees in the neighborhood after someone stole his Trump signs from his lawn.
40 trees inspected with 11 damaged by staples. The flyers he has been posting have his contact info on them though PEP has yet to “catch him in the act”. Can a summons be issued anyway?” she asks.
“I’m consulting with legal and awaiting response to see if we can issue him with what we have,” Falcon responds.
"In the past we have issued for every tree. Violation can be damage to vegetation 50 dollars each. It can also depend on what forestry tells about the damage. Let me find out if we can issue him at all.
After another request for information from the press office to Falcon loops in the agency’s legal department including Sherri Rosenberg, and the head of the tree restitution division Karen Dugan.
“Sounds like summonses we can issue will not cover damage. Karen - can your office follow up for restitution?,” Falcon asks in a September 2nd email.
Four days later (September 6) Maeri Ferguson writes to Falcon and to the legal department.
“What can I tell this reporter about our plans to issue summonses?” she asks.
"Were hashing it out now. Let me get right back to you.” Falcon responds an hour later.
Gerguson writes that she had spoken to Parks Department lawyer Associate Counsel Sharmila Rampersaud and includes a draft she was planning on send to the reporter.
At that point a clearly irritated Karen Dugan weighs in.
“Am I reading this email chain correctly? Are we charging this Kew Gardens gentleman with $41,000.00 worth of tree damage due to some staples being inserted in 11 trees?,” Dugan asks.
“Our office was told many years ago that staples do not cause harm to city trees, to the extent that we can’t seek monetary restitution as they do not penetrate deep enough to cause damage.” she continues.
"We were told that it was impossible to affix an amount on such damages. This amount seems extremely inconsistent with all the various types of damages we have received in the past years.
I understand that the article might already have been written but as far as restitution is concerned, how did a figure of $41,000.00 worth of damage get calculated from staples?” she asks.
"We have given summonses for staples in the past and it is also written into our contracts that staples cant be used. I agree with you that it is minimum… but using parks tree damage report format which calculates the dollar amount (tree size really influences this number) the huge $$ amount is what you get. I believe Brooke (Parks Department Queens Forester Brooke Costanza) only used 1% as the damage and it still calculates to this number,” Bonkowski writes twelve minutes later.
Five minutes later Parks lawyer Sharmila Rampersaud throws in the towel on going after him for $ 41,000 in restitution fees due to the media spot light.
“Given all the Press at this time we are not proceeding with any restitution claims,” Rampersaud writes.
“I’m still in discussions with PEP (Eddy) Falcon about the investigation and proper documentation of this incident.
Please check-in with me before taking any action on this matter. It’s senisitive!”
A few weeks later however she has an apparent charge of heart in an September 20th email to Eddie Falcon restitution is stil on the table.
“PEP in consultation with Queens Forestry can go ahead and issue these violations,” she says of the Environmental Control Board summonses.
"My understanding is that Forestry determined that of the 40 trees inspected, 11 were damaged by staples causing over $40k worth of damage. Since there were 11 trees, if you issue 11 summons one for each tree, the charge should include language that 11 trees were damaged and at the end of the narration (1 of 11 tree), (2 of 11 tree), etc. Both PEP and Forestry would need to attend hearing with all supporting pictures, evidence, etc.
“In the event that a notice or sign is, in violation of this subdivision (c), posted or displayed on any property, including the perimeters of any park, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that any person whose name, telephone number, or other identifying information appears on such notice or sign has violated this subdivision, she writes siting §1-05 Regulated Uses.
“We should wait for the outcome of the Oath-ECB hearing before proceeding with a restitution claim,” Rampersaud writes.
Two days later Sgt. Oro’s immediate supervisor, Captain Andre Greenfield informs Deputy Inspector Falcon that the fliers were removed by the time Sgt. Oro got there.
“How would you like to proceed.?” Greenfield asks.
"Yes. Forestry removed them already a d (sic) damage was done on 11 trees,” Falcon responds.
“Have him speak to Joe Bonkowski at forestry and find out each location of tree damage.”
Hours later Sgt. Oro responds and says that if Joe Bonkowski has written them in the past "THEY should continue" and "leave pep out of it."
He reminds that Forestry too can write tickets.
He agrees with Karen Dugan assessment and reiterates that PEP were told that in the past staples do not hurt trees. He also states that in the past officers were instructed they have to witness the violation being done at the time.
"What changed," he asks.
"one day we say have to witness at the time of violation being done. Next its ok to do it twenty two days later and the violation is not even on the tree any more."
“Joe trust us on this, DI Falcon has been working with the legal Dept,” Edwin Rodriguez writes.
The next day, on September 22nd, Edwin Falcon asks for an update.
"What's the update on this? Were summonses issued today?“ Falcon asks.
A month later Sgt. Oro is told that Deputy Inspector Edwin Falcon filed disciplinary charges against him.
On October 20th Oro was hauled into a disciplinary hearing and is still awaiting its decision.
On October 22 Sgt. Oro finally writes,
"Games must stop.”
