Tree Advisory Board Meeting 11.19.2021

Detailed briefing

Tree Advisory Board Meeting — November 19, 2021 ATTENDEES: Sue Stewart, Nancy Rondell, Karen Strope, Dana Mulder (via Zoom; permitted to participate but not vote), and staff consultant Ben Beeland. • The board approved the October 15 meeting minutes as written, 3-0. No other formal votes were recorded. • Members discussed continuing a monthly Harbor Light tree article. The proposed next topic is how locations for new city-owned tree planting are selected, along with adjacent property owners’ rights and responsibilities. Members said right-of-way questions can be confusing, particularly where there is no sidewalk. • For a seasonal tree feature, members discussed focusing on the local history of Christmas-tree growing and plantations rather than only profiling one species. They also suggested mentioning the city’s holiday tree if its species can be confirmed. Staff said the current tree is coming from Levering, but the species was not known during the meeting. • The main agenda item was a proposed tree maintenance and care budget estimated at $96,000 annually. Staff described it as a rough planning framework for City Council, not a request to immediately fund every item. The stated goal is to shift more attention toward maintaining existing city assets, including trees. • Discussion covered trimming, removals, inventory, consulting, training, pest and disease work, outreach, and replacement trees. Staff said much tree trimming and removal is already done, but tree-specific removals are not consistently tracked. The proposed $5,000 annual inventory amount was described as part of a five-year cycle that could update existing records and expand the inventory. • Members said inventory information can support management choices, grant applications, monitoring for pests and diseases, and documentation of tree value and condition in potential liability or property-damage situations. Others stressed that young trees need practical care, especially watering, and cautioned that the board should be realistic about city financial limits. No budget recommendation or formal spending decision was made. Worth watching: • How staff frames proposed shifts toward tree maintenance, inventory, training, and outreach for City Council. • Whether the city improves tracking of tree removals and updates or expands its tree inventory. • Whether replacement planting and young-tree care can be funded alongside hazard-tree work. Upcoming: Staff said the city is going to Council for budget discussions on December 6; article material was expected to be provided early in December. Why it matters: The discussion positioned the urban forest as a city asset requiring planned maintenance, public education, and defensible records amid budget constraints.

No open public follow-ups are linked to this meeting yet.