The right of a citizen to protect our power-lines from "harming" tall trees

More than one year ago, in an early October 2009, I moved to 14 Curtin Avenue,
Brunswick West, outskirts of Melbourne. This area is governed by Moreland
City Council. Shortly after I moved there, I noticed a tall ugly tree in
front of my property, which was over-grown passing our power-lines. Whenever
a strong wind blows, the top of this tree keeps brushing our power-lines.
I foresaw that this tree will harm our power lines in any moment, just like
a "time bomb". So I wrote the city council, asking for trimming this tree
as soon as possible. They wrote back, saying that they shall handle the
matter in due time...

However, even more than one year passed, nobody bothered coming from the
council to trim this "harming" tree. Finally around November 10, this year,
I cut off the top-half of this tree by my own hands (ax), assuming that
the city council does not care the matter. However, the bottom half of this
tree (around 2 meter long) still remained to re-grow in due time. I put
a note on the remaining stem, that "no longer welcome the high-trees which
harm our power lines". In my opinion, such a tall tree should not have grown
(been planted) under our power lines for the first place, but if done, the
city council should take care of (trim) this tree, so that it would not harm
our power-lines.

I was told that this tree belongs to the city council, and if I cut or trim
this by my hands, I shall be fine ($200-600). Well, as long as the city
council takes care of it, I wouldn't dare to trim or cut this tree. However,
if the council kept ignoring our request or warning, we shall use our own
hands to solve the matter. It took a few hours for me to cut it half by
small ax and hand saw. Since I don't have a tall (4 ml long) ladder reaching
the top of this tree, I have to cut this tree in the middle where my ladder
reaches. I thought my action is well justified, and the council wouldn't
dare to fine me. However, right the next day, an officer from the council
rushed to take a photo of the remaining bottom of this tree, and told me
that I shall be fined in due time. I got a feeling that the council deliberately
ignored my request, in order to grab this fine as their revenue, without
any action (taking their own responsibility). On December 3, I received
a bill from the council, saying that I should pay $250 for damaging this
tree (the city's property) in two months.

Why didn't the city take care of their own property? There is a lawn area
in front of each house. This lawn also belongs to the city. However, nobody
from the council comes to mow the lawn, and the each household has to mow
the lawn in front of his or her property. If you have no mowing machine,
you have to ask an expert to mow each lawn and pay around $15 each time!
The council would never cover this cost! In other words, both trees and
lawn areas in front of each house are so-called "gray" zones, which belong
to the city, but the city would never take care of.

I have never heard of any incident that the council would fine anybody who
cut the lawn grasses which belong to the city. Then why not the trees?
Is there any difference between trees and lawn grasses? I never understand
the logic of this council. In the past I used to live in North Melbourne,
very close to the center of Melbourne, for almost two decades. The Melbourne
City Council trims all trees along the street in front of our old Victorian
house. So we have never dared to cut the "huge" beautiful beech tree in
front of our house. I wish Mereland City Council would learn something (a
"civilized" manner) from the Melbourne counterpart.

In two months after the top half of this tree was cut off, a few branches
began to grow from the bottom half, clearly proving that this three is indeed
fully alive, and can re-grow in a more "controllable" (non-cancerous) manner.
In other words, this tree was not "damaged", but simply "trimmed".