Giving the plane tree supporters time at the meeting may have set a precedent but does this sort of quandary happen that frequently that it matters?
What does matter that people feel they have been listened to and taken seriously.
There was a barbed remark from Marie McKay about councillors and council officers living in nice tree-ringed homes elsewhere. There are few trees in the CBD and it is one of the areas of Wanganui that is promoted for its heritage and aesthetic qualities.
Plane trees have been the subject of dissent before and in Palmerston North in 1997 more than 1500 people protested when those lining Fitzherbert Ave were chopped down. A future mayor was among them. They just wanted to widen the street there but council here seems to have more valid reasons for removing the trees.
However I am sitting on the fence on this one.
The trees are beautiful and they add immeasurably to the city. But historically we have often planted the wrong kind of tree to live alongside - or over - urban infrastructure.
I don't know what is right. But I do think after the campaign by the plane tree supporters, they have the right to be upset. They were under the misapprehension that a compromise had been worked out. And the decision by the council to go ahead was hardly unanimous.