Aug. 20, 2025 Editor, the News Gazette, The last three paragraphs of your “Knitters Protest Tree Removal” article (NG, Aug 13) were rather intriguing. Twothirds of the article was about the Knitting Ninjas and their point of view, as was proper, given the title and that’s that’s what the article was supposed to be about. Had the article ended there, I’d have been happy with it But the last third of the article — “the last word” as it were — presented the opposing point of view. The chair of the Courthouse Square project says that “[…] the team was advised by an arborist that one of the trees is in decline and the other will shortly follow […]” Even beyond the fact that the arborist’s report is given second hand, I have some questions about it.
1) Who is the — anonymous — arborist who gave that advice? Is it our own, city one (likely to have the city’s interests as priority) or someone employed by the project (and not likely to bite the hand that feeds, thus saying what the employer wants to hear)?
2), What, exactly, does “in decline” mean? It’s not a very specific term, which I’d like to see explained, in much greater detail.
I went to see the panels — and the “condemned” trees — in person. The panels are splendid and well worth a trip to see them. The two big trees (maples?) seem to be in rude health, not at all “in decline.” Both might use some trimming but not a single branch on either one of them looks to be in bad health. So, why do they need to go? Perhaps The News-Gazette can investigate and write another article on the subject?
And, while I’m at it … I heard from a gentleman sitting in the trees’ shade, that the current paths — laid with the iconic and uniquely Lexington — patterned bricks are to be ripped out too and the whole area paved. If that’s true … Why? Who thought up that aesthetic horror story? TAMARA DUVALL Lexington
