The whine of chain saws has faded with autumn. But as tree lovers in Irvington and elsewhere in Westchester County carry the memory of Con Edison’s harsh tree-pruning policies into winter, they are cloaking themselves with a mantle of reform.

In the aftermath of the utility’s unsparing removal of branches and trees from around electric transmission and distribution lines, citizen groups and local politicians have been weighing in with suggestions on ways to curb future abuse of trees, as well as with stratagems to regain control over the process.

Several local lawyers have offered analyses of the procedures regarding Con Edison’s access to private property, and local office holders are seeking ways to amend ordinances and clarify oversight. Through it all, Irvington Tree Commission Chair Mark Gilliland’s blog (www.irvtrees.blogspot.com) remains an active forum on the subject.

At the heart of the matter is a widespread recognition that laws designed to protect trees on the books of both the Town of Greenburgh and individual villages were either not enforced or were simply ignored by Con Edison. Nominal oversight of the utility’s practices is in the hands of the New York State Public Service Commission (PSC), but several observers maintain the PSC did not, and does not as a rule, enforce.

“It’s like everybody’s got blindfolds on and we’re all swinging bats, in terms of who has the authority to regulate,” said Anne Jaffe-Holmes, coordinator of the environmental project and school programs at the Greenburgh Nature Center.

Now, the blindfolds are coming off, and experts are beginning to focus on the mechanics of regulation. In mid-December, Patrick Gilmartin, an attorney and longtime Irvington resident, posted an analysis that concluded the village has the right to restrict the pruning. Similarly, Dan Rosenblum, senior attorney with the Pace Law School Energy Project, and Mike Sigal, a retired business lawyer—both members of the Greenburgh Conservation Advisory Council, concluded Con Edison does not have the right to override local ordinances, specifically regarding access to their “distribution” lines, that is, those that deliver electricity directly to consumers, often across private property lines.

Greenburgh Town Supervisor Paul Feiner has called for a meeting in early January to discuss solutions. Among his proposals are an extension of the notification period before the utility commences its cutting and a requirement that they replace felled trees. Other officials have suggested when Con Edison applies for a rate hike, which it is expected to do early in 2010, the villages should band together and demand that part of the additional revenues be applied to the restoration of lost trees.

The involvement of State Senator Andrea Stewart-Cousins promises to extend the controversy further. On January 9, Stewart-Cousins and Feiner will lead an inspection tour of egregiously affected sites.

Meanwhile, Jaffe-Holmes at the Greenburgh Nature Center has convened a Tree Roundtable, with 28 members representing the villages of Ardsley, Dobbs Ferry, Hastings, Irvington, Scarsdale, Sleepy Hollow, Tarrytown and Greenburgh Township. Representatives of the Pace University Environmental Law Center will advise the group.

“We’ll be meeting in the first week of January to review legislative oversight of Con Ed,” said Jaffe-Holmes.

Ultimately, added Jaffe-Holmes, the process must involve the utility itself. “There’s no divorce here,” she said. “We need utilities. We need trees. To remain pitted as enemies is not an option.”