In 2022, the Southwest Portland family had applied for a tree removal permit, which the city denied. Two years later, a January storm brought it down on their home.
PORTLAND, Oregon — A family is suing the City of Portland for $4.7 million over a tree that fell onto their home after the city denied them a permit to remove the tree.
The Douglas fir crashed onto the home of Joel and Sarah Bond during the January snow storm of 2024. The Bonds and their two kids were living in the house on Southwest Fairvale Drive near Southwest 42nd Avenue.
“I saw wood and debris on the ground, a collapsing roof,” recalled Sarah Bond in a written account of the incident. “I scream my daughter’s name. Silence. Then I hear my husband say, ‘I got her!'”
The Bonds have been living in a rental home while repairs on their damaged house continue, hoping to eventually move back in.
“They’ll still have to live knowing that they were two feet away from having a dead 6-year-old,” said Joe Piucci, the Bonds’ lawyer.
Piucci said that in January 2022, less than two years before the tree fell and shortly after the Bonds bought the house, they applied for a permit to remove what they thought was a diseased tree. At the time, photos showed the tree leaning toward the house.
Portland’s Bureau of Urban Forestry denied the application, concluding that “No serious structural defects were observed,” according to court documents, and that removing the tree would “significantly affect the neighborhood character.”
“They tried to protect their home and the city prevented them from protecting their home,” said Piucci. “(The city is) not concerned about people’s safety, they’re concerned about keeping the tree canopy.”
Both the city of Portland and Portland City Forester Jennifer Cairo are named defendants in the lawsuit. According to court documents, the Bonds claim that a city arborist spent less than 10 minutes looking at the tree in question and failed to notice several signs of rot and disease. The permit denial noted that the Bonds could appeal the decision for a $200 fee, which they chose not to do.
“They thought, ‘Why would I pay $200 to the city to tell me that I’m wrong again?'” said Piucci. “They’re not arborists — the Urban Forestry Department is full of arborists.”
KGW reached out to the city of Portland for comment. A spokesperson said they cannot comment on pending litigation.
However, court documents revealed the city’s response to the Bonds’ tort claim filed last fall. In it, the city suggested that if the tree had been unhealthy when the city inspected it, it would have fallen on the Bonds’ home earlier.
“The tree in question survived for an additional 23 months prior to this incident occurring,” read the response. “Although the damage of property is certainly unfortunate, we conclude that the City is not legally liable for that damage.”
Piucci criticized the city’s response.
“It’s offensive to Sarah and Joel,” said Piucci. “Their family has been through hell over the last 14 months.”
Piucci said besides damages, the Bonds want the city to relax its sweeping authority over how trees must be cared for and preserved in an effort to improve safety. If the city doesn’t settle the case, he expects it will go to trial in the next 18 months.