everyone um to our Oakdale Treeboard meeting. Um we have a full agenda today. We'll go ahead and I'd like to call this meeting to order. Uh first we'll start with roll. Um and I'm Marge Sagetter. I'm filling in tonight for Nick Canola, our um president who can't be here. Um I'm Marge Sagster as I mentioned. Uh and we'll go ahead and go down the list. Um, Glenn Jacalto, acting chair. I can I can take care of that for you. Okay. So, uh, Commissioner Pearson, present. Thank you. Commissioner Jacalto, Commissioner KD, acting chair Sagsteter here. Commissioner Bender present. Commissioner Sella here. Uh, Chair Canola. Okay, we have a quorum. All right. Thank you. Um, okay. Uh, thank you. Let's go ahead and do the pledge of allegiance. I aliance to the flag of the United States of America to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay. Thank you. Um, the agenda has been preset. I'd like to get a motion to approve the agenda. I move we approve the agenda as presented. Second. All in favor? I I. All right. Um let's go ahead then. Um approval of the minutes from our January 21st, 2025 regular meeting. Um has everyone had a chance to take a look and review the minutes and are there any comments? I move we accept the minutes as presented. Second. Okay. Um all in favor I I decline. No. Okay. Um the motion passed the accept those meeting minutes. Thank you. All right. Uh open forum is next on our agenda. Um, that's usually a time when we can ask anyone in the audience or any of our board members to speak up and talk about anything hot topics about trees that's not on the agenda. That's not on the agenda. Thank you. Actually, I have one thing if nobody else does. Uh, anyone from the audience want to speak? All right. Um, I just want to let everybody know um that ARP is offering a class again at the Discovery Center on October 3rd. um from 1 to 3 A ARP and um it's on prairie plants and I'm not sure the exact topic but mark your calendar if you're interested. It's a free class. We had one last year. Mike Bender and I hosted um a tree uh little tree trek uh after the class and this time we'll go out to the prairie and um take a look. So anyway, just that's something coming up. Not specific to trees, but of course there are trees in the prairie. So thank you. Anything else in the open forum? All right. Well, that's good. You have to close the forum. Oh, I do have to close it. Um, can I have a motion to close the forum? Just gave it to close. That's it. Thank you me tonight. All right. Uh, tree board review. Uh, we have old and new business. Old business is first. Our 2025 work plan which has been presented in January. The draft was presented to um the council um in our uh work meeting. Uh it's let's see it's it's quite a ways in here. Um so it includes our our three basic community um events and then uh public education and awareness efforts that we're trying to make sure people know what's going on about trees in the community. Uh we need to get an approval for this. I believe a formal approval. So, can I get a motion to uh u present this as planned to the council? You may want to ask first if the if staff has any comments on Oh, any comments from the staff on that? Yeah, thank you, acting chair. There there is none from staff. Just as a reminder, this is the same plan that the uh commission reviewed on the January 21st meeting. It was then submitted to council. Council reviewed at the February 25th meeting and had no recommendations or requests for changes. So seeking um just approval to adopt as presented. All right. Thanks, Corey. All right. Then we need a motion to adopt this as written. I move we accept the 202 2025 treeboard work plan as presented. Second. Second. Thanks, Mike. I know it's a slim pickings. All right. Um motion's approved. Thank you. Um on to new business. We're chugging along. Um, so there's a new chapter 22 article 6 disease control and tree trimming that we want to talk about. Um, this was sent to board members ahead of the meeting. Um, it's a little lengthy, but um, could we maybe get some background on this? Yeah, acting chair, I can I can take that. Um, certainly. So, um throughout conversations with city staff and um you know the ongoing presence of Emerald Ashboard developing um throughout the city and especially in private uh properties, we um as staff asked uh brought this forward through the administrator for um seeking just some clarification and review to our city council u as the ones that set that direction on uh how do we you know the appropriate steps to take in responding to uh emerald ash or trees or infected trees which per our code con constitutes a nuisance tree um on private property uh recognizing that there can be some pretty significant cost to that and uh you know as code states um currently which we'll get to on how we are doing it now compared to way other communities are doing it. So, I'll I'll briefly run through the memo here. Won't read it word for word, but um just reme reminding the commission that uh we're just looking for feedback um for council consideration that we can take forward to them. Uh they specifically requested that the tree board review um provide some input um and guidance from them from your perspective. But um as as mentioned on the thing ongoing um efforts uh you know with the urban forest and the increasing amount of emerald ash bore into trees there's for property owners that uh there is an opportunity depending on the quantity the location of where those trees are that it can have some some pretty uh high consequences for financial con you know constraints to to different individuals. That's one aspect of it. As it states on our current city code is that our forester, Mr. Melhorn, um would could do an inspection on a property. If he uh felt that there was a nuisance tree on the property, he would submit that information to the council. If the council agreed with that, uh we would at that point then send a letter to the property owner and from the date of that property or that notice, they would have 20 days to remove uh that tree. If they chose to not or did not meet it in that deadline, um then the city would uh abate that tree, uh we would coordinate likely with a contractor to do that removal and then the invoice and all related cost would be uh sent to the uh parcel owner uh property owner uh not tenant, the property owner of that thing. If they failed to pay within 30 days, then we could special assessment under uh you know Minnesota statutes which is alignment with what we do for special assessments for uh road construction projects and stuff like that. So related to um in preparation with that recognizing council also had some questions related to what the cost for abatement was for different things. Uh our forester Melhorn did some research on it and there is some uh estimates for abatement expenses. So, as you can see in the thing, a tree in the backyard that does have some obstacles, um, with approximately a 22-in DBH, if we did a full removal stump restoration and everything, it's about $3,200 per tree. Um, obviously with the front yard, there's some differences there, uh, the cost is a little bit less. and then depending on the diameter of that tree. But it kind of it it's meant to give um you know the commission and it'll ultimately be provided to the council just some some underlying estimates of what that cost could be uh to a property owner if uh required to remove that. Um looking around to uh some different uh communities or city forester and myself did some research and just collaborated some things together. Uh ultimately uh briefly going through the what you'll see here through all these there's a pattern that's very similar. Um city of Stillwater uh forester shall notify in writing um the property owner has up to 30 days to remove it per city code. Um if the city performs uh the work that the all those expenses will be uh transferred onto the property owner. If the property owner fails to uh pay those then same similar situation those abatement costs can be uh assessed to that parcel and importantly note that the Stillwater city staff report that they only take action to remove the nuisance on private trees on a complaint basis. Uh city of Roseville uh not not much different. Um the forester would notify if they do see a tree that needs to be abated, remind the property owner of the code. the it requires 20 days after the date of the notice for those to be removed. Uh, one unique thing to Roseville is that they within 5 days of receiving it, they can file an appeal that would ultimately go through their tree board and then city council um all within uh 21 days following the notice. Ultimately, if the if the property tree has to be abated by the city that those costs uh similar to the other communities um would be transferred to the property owner paid within 30 days. Anything not uh paid within 30 days will be collected over a uh through property assessment over a 5-year period on real estates. Uh similar to Still Water and what you're going to find in other city staff report that they only take action to remove the nuisent trees um on a complaint basis. White Bear Lake. Uh very similar uh abatement notices requiring 20 days um following the notice received by the city. If they the property owner fails to remove it, city will pursue uh proceed with the removal um and assess the cost against the said property. There is a little bit of a a difference with the city of White Bear Lake and discretion to defer payments of a special assessment depending on if they meet uh a few different categories of age. Um the uh depending on the abatement requirements of the city and then also uh if it would create a hardship for the applicant. And as described in their code, a hardship is described as an owner whose household income does not see exceed 80% of the most recent median household income data. So um but there again, similar to the other codes, uh the city of White Bear Lake has adopted this uh code. Staff did not take action against nuisance uh trees on private property. a city of Egan uh as aligned with the others city forester uh would uh notice that to the property owner um the next two will be fairly similar that is a little bit unique thing where if they don't feel that there's an intimate uh threat to other trees surrounding that that um and because of maybe dormcy it's hard to tell what the actual uh uh living condition of that tree is. there is an ability to delay a further inspection until the growing season or the next uh the next upcoming growing season. If the um same tree is still deemed to be need to be removed but uh not an imminent danger to the others, the city forester has latitude to identify a timeline that they can work with the property owner. It's not a specific set amount of days that they have to have it removed from. uh differently. If that uh uh tree is infected or it ultimately becomes an intimate um threat to surrounding trees, the city forcer shall notify that property owner and then they are subject to uh at least uh removal within 20 days of that receiving that notice. uh very similar to the other ones. Uh if the property owner fails to remove, city shall abate and uh the property owner is responsible for uh reimbursing the city for those charges uh within 30 days of the invoice. Anything over 30 days shall be considered delinquent, late penalty fee, and also uh potentially charged as a special assessment. uh city of Egan staff report that they'll in they will inspect for infection in um trees on a complaint basis only. They would try to work with the property owner to educate and encourage them to remove the nuisance independently. However, if the uh property owner fails to do that, then they would um move forward with the action of the city code. And lastly, uh, city of Woodbury just adjoining to us. Uh, very similar to city of Egan with, uh, non-inimate debt threats that they can, uh, be deferred for a reinspection, um, outside of the dormcy season. Forester, um, and property owner will, uh, outline a timeline of when that tree needs to be removed. Uh, depending on the situation, if they fail to uh, remove it, the city uh, will proceed in having that abated. And under the their public improvement chapter, which is very similar to the special assessment stuff that we've already been talking about, if the danger of the tree is intimate um to a threat to other trees surrounding the area, the property owner u must be abated within a specified time. U they don't have anything that outlines a specific date. That would be just up to um from our understanding that they work with the property owner to set that. Um, one unique thing to the city of Woodbury that they most recently did pass uh to help with recognizing that there can be some uh constraints with the expense related to trees is they have um reallocated $500,000 a year mark $500,000 to um be spent between 2025 and 2027. and it's a one-time allocation and a property owner could um receive reimbursement or be have a tax deferred um assessment on that uh over the amount of the actual removal cost dictates the term of how long that assessment goes out the higher they can go to a property owner can have up to potentially $20,000. Um, and so that's obviously the the most extensive and then with a uh the less impactful cost would be uh at a lesser amount, but it they they have a fee schedule that they've worked out, but it's a a one-time thing just meant to help with that. And once the it's first come, first serve. So once the $500,000 has been expended, that's it. Then they're deferring back to the property owners. Um then uh just through the council the the recent council discussion um through the workshop that we mentioned previously again council believes that uh enforcing the code of ordinance is essential. However, there's acknowledgement that modifying the code of ordinance uh could enhance public safety for numerous different things where this is your neighbor's property. It could be infrastructure that uh maybe those trees are around power lines or something that uh when they do go down from a storm uh could knock power out to different properties or anything because of a property didn't debate it. Um but initially they've some of the discussion points that they've uh participated in and also are are looking for um uh feedback and consideration for consideration from the tree board is is um the suitability of creating a repayment process similar to street assessments. Um they also are looking for some feedback or some consideration related to the removal um after property owner has been notified to abate and so what's the timeline for that? Is the 20 days that is existing in our existing adopted code appropriate um or should that be adjusted and how the uh how the trees are identified? Are they complaint basis? Is it something that we want to uh that the council should direct where it's uh through part of a different form of the inspection process for a property if they're on another site or anything like that. Um uh but ultimately in in a nutshell there was an awful lot there but um certainly happy to answer any additional questions or anything from that but uh looking for feedback from you for um council consideration. I've got a question on the 20 days with um so much emerald ashbor going around a lot of quote unquote reputable tree tree removal people are busy. So, if would it be possible if if you're notified by the city forester and you you uh call up a a tree company and they say, "Yeah, what we can get to you, but it'll be a month and a half." If if they've got that on record, would that be um acceptable that they would bypass that 20 days, then? I think that, you know, that's I I'm I'm not going to I I'm not here to answer that question. This is feedback that we're looking from you to provide. You know, if you're if that's a suggestion that you would like to make towards the council to consider, we can I think there's got to be some leeway because um to get a reputable um tree removal, it's I I think most of them are pretty well booked up. I was just talking to somebody about Still Water and they were talking about they were asking how Oakdale was doing with their emerald ash removal and I said it looks like they're doing okay and they were mentioning Stillwater. They said Still Water's got an awful lot of them that have been standing for a long time. So that means that you know the the reputable people are busy. So yeah. Yeah, certainly a valid point and I think uh one that's in alignment to some questions that were raised by the council of what that appropriateness is for that. I would have to concur because of my personal experience of having a tree fall and it took me a couple of weeks to get someone to be able to come over. 20 days might be a little tight, but if I can understand certainly making arrangements within the 20 days that that was going to be and and and thank you for for mentioning that commissioner that's that was going to be a distinction question I was going to ask is are you referencing the maintaining the 20 days um requirement as adopted but with supplemental documentation that you have a plan would be permitted to uh delay that this advice for the 20 days um based on there. Okay. So, a written conting is that what you guys are you're thinking or at least be on the schedule being able to say on the schedule. Yeah. But you'd want evidence of that probably, right? Yeah. I I would think should even even tree removals, they're subject to the weather, too. Uh yeah, point. So, I've got a question perhaps a moot question, but is there a distinction between the city easement versus the properties private property owners area? Yes. If it's in city rightway or on city property, the city will remove it. Okay. Because that's not clear at all in any of the the notes you've got in here. These are meant um to be specifically focused towards trees on private property. Yeah. I'm not sure the people a lot of people know about the city easement issue though is a question. Yeah. Yes. And our our forestry team has a has a real um comfortable grasp on where we're at in our public spaces of what's left especially um you know those that u might be out in the public and you know those you know whether it's in a right of way or something like that. and are uh continue to actively triage those and address those, you know, as appropriate and we'll continue to do that. But this this conversation here is um more directly focused on trees on private property for a property owner that might not be aware that you know what can happen with that tree or you know what how not removing it. what kind of safety concerns that could that could bring um to maybe not them themselves, but you know, a neighbor or something if you have a tree leaning over onto somebody else's property or it could be something in your front yard and um an individual walking down the sidewalk on stuff like that. So, that's that's really where uh my understanding is the basis of this. You know, when we talk about nuisance trees, we're talking right now about emerald ashbor, but it covers a lot of other, you know, species and and diseases and stuff like that. But with the quantity of you know EAB and trees succumbing to that that disease where does you know at what point as it's adopted um the city our forer would go um and could do an inspection and and automatically notify council could be required that that property owner removes that tree and um there's recognition of that importance that I think the council's asking for your input more related to are the terms of that uh our current ordinance appropriate uh given the quantity that we're seeing in different areas and whether that be the time and recognizing what some of these costs are. How how could that be is um from your perspectives and and your guys' is knowledge base. Where do where do you feel that um that level of urgency should be? you know, sticking tight to the 20 20 days and, you know, recognizing that there could be some some fiscal hardships if um you know, there is some options for uh that uh the council has discussed about, you know, working through that special assessment process with some um you know, how that looks, you know, for repayment and that, but ultimately anything related to this topic is, you know, we appreciate that feedback. but specifically to trees on private property. The only other comment I could have is my personal experience. I had an emerald an ash tree that I was having serviced and taken care of and all of a sudden I woke up one morning and the tree had split in half. Half was on my neighbor's fence. Fortunately, it didn't go the other direction and take out my neighbor's shed. Uh but it took me a while to find somebody that could come out and get it. So it was marginal if I would have been in the 20 days. But also how do people know if the tree is going to be I didn't know there was a problem with the tree. I was having it treated for emerald ashbor and I thought everything was copacetic but it was certainly not. Is there any facility to help people determine if some of these ash were in bad shape? Yeah certainly our city forester Mr. Mel Horn is is happy to, you know, assist with inspection or reaffirming for property owners just as it states in the code. Now that we, you know, in determining whether a tree is is diseased, obviously um there is uh numerous other uh private entities that are wellversed in in tree disease and in their overall health. So, um there's uh numerous options besides the city forester, but by uh any any homeowner can call public works and set up an appointment with our forester to to come out and have a consultation with them about it. Yeah. The way this is written right now, it's they've got 20 days after they're notified by the city forester. Correct. So, anything can go on, you know, weeks before or months before that. Yeah. And and and just to clarify the way it's written now, the forester if he inspects a property and and not notices a diseased tree, he is to or a nuisance tree, he is to report that to the city council. They are the ones that would uh determine that yes, it does meet the expectations of the the guidelines of a tree and then that letter will be sent out after that time. So it's it's not necessarily immediate like the next day because we would have to be waiting until the next council meeting. Um if I can move on to another question I have. Um do you know what the dates of these ordinances are for these other cities? Because I'm just I think it's interesting that um they've all been adopted but there's been no action taken. Are they all very brand new and there hasn't been time or I mean I'm I'm just not um clear how common this issue is and are people like not taking their trees down if they look dead? Yeah. You know that the purpose ultimately for this? Yeah. Yeah. Good good question, acting chair. But um I can't um you know I don't believe that we're in a position to clarify when other communities created those ordinances and stuff. Um you know our forer Mhorn um did make direct contact with representatives from those communities to just reaffirm how they are um actively participating and in enforcing the ordinance. Um and it's it it appears to be similar in numerous other uh situations. It's a tool that's in place if they um at this point they haven't determined that it's one that they're ready to fully execute um in that stuff. And that's where I think that um uh we're at as an organization. I can say from city staff as we come to those places and and can recognize the financial hardship that some of that you know those trees where if there's even one tree like we've talked about at over $3,000 that can be a thing and we're happy to um fully execute the the code as adopted. But uh with the increasing quantity now that you know uh EAB has been in the area for some time and we're really starting to see those effects of those untreated trees or um trees that um were not previously removed, the the quantities of those in those private areas are are going to significantly increase. So I I see not only Oakdale but other communities um you know having to will probably be adjusting some of that practice should that you know be in their purview um or decision that that they want to do. So, is the city forester or crew monitoring the the trees in in Oakdale so that uh that they will be notified or I I would think that's kind of a hard task to go through the entire city looking for. So, is it also then neighbors can also call in? I guess I'm I'm a little vague as far as what the complaint is. Is it primarily just the city forester or is it anybody can file a complaint? Well, anybody can file a complaint with, you know, the city notifying of it whether it's in a public space or not. Uh Mr. Mel Horn and his team have a a very good grasp of where uh where remaining ash trees are on city property or in our right ofways, but we do not inventory trees on private property. Um so those would be um you know could be complaint driven could be per the city code. Now we could you know be tasked with um if directed to do uh a required inspection of them all. There's some concerns about, you know, staff that the timing that that would take and and the logistics of tracking all that if we start uh going down different directions, but I think that's feedback that the council's looking for from you guys of what you know, what do you as the as the tree board think is a a reasonable direction to go moving forward? um as a again uh for consideration as they they decide uh if it warrants an an amendment to our current code as adopted. It seems to me that there would be um not capacity for our crew to inspect every tree that could come in as a complaint. And I think about even in our parks, you know, I don't know if all of our the nature center, you know, anything that's near a a walkway has been removed yet. And and so just the capacity of having Tim andor the crew members go out and inspect all those, it's got to take an hour or some time. Um, so is there a possibility of having um an inspection by Rainbow Tree Care or some other reputable company come in and do an inspection or will it have to be one of our employees? Yeah, I think that, you know, the council can ultimately provide that direction. You know, per city code, it's it's related to staff that are required to do that and that's similar to other communities. um you know uh a traditional uh civilian is not permitted to access backyard properties and stuff like that, but for various inspection reasons or you know those city codes and ours do permit city staff to to do that stuff and if if it's directed that that's what the council wants, we'll figure out a way to make it work. Okay. Um you know, make some adjustments to some other things. Um, obviously recognizing that we're still working to abate, you know, the last um, you know, I would say the last phases of our our ones that are are there, but ultimately, you know, reassure you that from a public works standpoint and organization based on the council's direction that we would do that. But uh we're also confident that the council recognizes the the amount of effort that that can take in staff time and we'll be acknowledging of that and and you know develop a plan that with us that unders recognizes that. Do tree removal companies have like in Woodbury's case a deferred plan so that when they contract with people to remove it, especially if it's like three or four trees or something, do they kind of have a pay a pay as you go kind of plan or something of that nature that I mean, you know, these are pretty expensive prices for some people. So that I would think that we might want to have something where we either can defer uh payments or uh set up some kind of assistance, but I guess that's more of the city council's whether the you know the budget could uh sustain something of that nature. and and I can't speak for um nor would it be appropriate for me to speak for the private side of that but I think you commissioner what you're getting at is is information that the council's seeking you know thoughts from from uh this commission on if if you feel that because of what those costs would be it is appropriate to consider some sort of a um assessment process similar to what we do with our street reconstruction stuff like that would be um certainly could alleviate some of those costs. And by no means is is that that the city's um you know ultimately assuming those costs, but we're just you know supporting and helping the property owners for the greater good of you know what's the public safety standpoint whether it's um your property or your neighbors property or whatever. I assume you're talking about something like the program the city council had set up for arranging loans with a local bank um was under a reduced interest rate. Yeah. Yeah. Very similar to not specific where we would set up a loan for each property u um for that stuff. But through like a street reconstruction project, you know, we assume um through the budget process, we plan and um uh finance that project initially and then those assessments for the percentage of um you know, frontage that you have, you each property gets assessed amount and that's deferred over an x amount of years and and that's where um you know certainly could continue to do that um and just ensure that that's a part of this process. So um but there again that would be in a process where uh the city would ultimately be the ones that would coordinate the removal and stuff like that. This it still allows the property owner and would encourage them where they can to abate that on their own uh uh with that. But if it comes to the fact that you know for numerous reasons which could be financial or you know a variety of different things that um each and every one of us can can face that um how do we you know is it appropriate that the council allows that uh assessment to be paid out over a period of time so that one the property owner um can become in compliance of the city code uh but yet do it in a way that not not only uh promotes public safety for the numerous different avenues we've already discussed, but also uh doesn't intentionally put an undue hardship on that property owner. You know, we're obviously a you know, a tree city community and and um you know, appreciate the forest canopy that we have and um and want to continue to promote that, not defer somebody, you know, from removing it, not wanting to replant. And um how can we how can we do that for them in a way that wants them to continue to to replace those trees and and take care of those trees in a way that does ensure safety for others. Well, if I can take um a quick summary of I think you know our input here is at least on my notes. Three things that it sounds like we maybe have a agreement or at least some concern about is the 20-day time limit to maybe extend that a bit um in whatever way that makes sense. Um the inspection process, making sure maybe we have a contracted inspectors or something if needed um to support the staff. and then the repayment process like perhaps, excuse me, treating it like an assessment or something to allow people to go get their own loans or find their own financing. Um, uh, I think just those would be, um, make it a lot easier for people to, you know, follow the code and be safe and, um, do the right thing. So, so just to just to seek additional clarification if I can acting chairs um you know for the delay in the the reference on the 20 days there's in my view there's two parts to that. So, we have the existing code that says 20 days, but there's was discussion on if they have a plan in place, right? Um, so sticking with the 20 days, but, uh, potentially providing some latitude as long as there's an executed agreement or something that it will be terminated or, you know, taken care of in an amount of time. Are you leaving that window open or are you leaving? Do we Is there interest in stating, you know, you have to have it removed or have a plan to have it removed within the 20 days that has to be submitted, but what does that end potentially look like? Is there any feedback related to that? Um, my understanding would be the 20 days you have a plan or it's it's done or you have a plan in writing that it's done and you can submit that to the council. They do we let me clarify are we looking at that could be like another 30 days or we looking at what if somebody uh just a hypothetical they say well it's going to be 6 months before they can get here. Oh, does that seem, you know, a a cap at that it needs to be within a certain time um based off of their vendor or if they still don't meet it within that time, then the city would remove that. You know, following where I'm going with that. Just seeking some clarification on that to pass that to the council. 20 days plus 20 days. I that's kind of my thought. It I think you got to leave it more open than that. It's um because you know, like I said, the if if we have bad weather, that's going to set all those tree companies back. And if you were scheduled for uh 20 days out, but all of a sudden they lost five days of work, you know, you're you're back in there. Sure. And I don't know what if this is valid or not, but I've been told that after an ash tree dies, it you basically have six years until it gets to be dangerous when it starts coming down. So, you know, I'm not, you know, too set on, you know, if if they go beyond it a little bit, it's going to cause harm. So, so do you have a thought on where you were, you know, thinking on what that end term might look like for somebody to state that they have, you know, some sort of some sort of guidance that we can, you know, I would say six months is too long because if anybody's out out two six or two or out six months, there's there's other reputable companies that are probably available to do it. Okay? You know, I just I just think in in the 20 days it's a little tight, but it would certainly be within your purview to suggest to the homeowner that maybe they need a different vendor at that point. Yeah. Or or maybe go what I think it was said before, add add an additional 20 days on. So now you've got 40 days total, but you've already, as you stated, once the uh city forester notifies them, there's still a time period between uh between that time and when they get the final letter that starts the 20 days. So they got quite a bit of time. So, if I'm understanding correctly, uh, at least um, from what you're stating, commissioner, is that, you know, f maintain the existing 20-day timeline uh, for required abatement. If within that timeline, they would have to provide documentation that they have an executed contract potentially with a private company. If they do, it's uh, that is extended another 20 days. If they don't um if it's not abated within that 20 days, then the city um would um the suggestion would be then it would revert back to the city forester could coordinate that um thing that removal and abatement. That sounds reasonable. Okay. Certainly good good information and I'm sure the appreciate uh the council appreciate and take into consideration as they're as they're figuring that out. And then uh one on your second part that uh you mentioned acting chair is just about the uh investigation process is if you could clarify for me a little bit more what that looks like. you know, probably more specifically to is that um where we are is it complaint driven um inspections or is it where um are you suggesting that uh council should consider maintaining the existing process that staff um start incorporating a a mandatory inspection process into their I guess it's a it's a workload issue as from my mind um you know how many uh people on staff are are certified tree inspectors. And I know Tim, you must be, but how are there other staff members that can go out and do this? So maybe it's not as big of a concern as I'm thinking it might be if you're the only one and and you have other work to that has to be done. So how do you you I guess you prioritize this because it's public safety and get out there, but I know there's x number of hours in the day. So, I mean, is that something we could contract another company who has certified inspectors to come if we need it? I think that if if it um if it came to the point of a required inspection across the board, we, you know, certainly we'd have to look at operations and and uh work with the administrator to decide, you know, what's the best way to move forward to meet the expectations of council. Um I certainly I I don't know what that would look like right now. There's a lot of different options out there, but um I think that one thing that the council um one important thing that the council was looking for um some feedback from the tree board on for their consideration in this is is it appropriate to uh continue as written where it is um you know inspections uh could be done at the uh discretion of the council and as obviously staff or um that's available or is there uh interest in uh being a complaintbased inspection? Um you know, certainly two very distinctly different um situations there. So, I think you're already on complaint based from the document, right? And uh I think all she was suggesting was if it gets to the point where there are too many trees to be inspected for one person to carry on, consider the option for the city council to give you the option to hire uh staff from services from existing companies. Yes, I think that's what she's meaning. Just to clarify, right now city code is not complaint driven. our Oakdale city code. Numerous, not to be confused with the code of other communities and what they're actually doing with that where they have a code um these other communities that we referenced that state that forester shall inspect. They're stating that they don't go and do the inspection unless it's complaint based driven. Our code um states that the forester authorized agent if we have reason to believe that uh there is a nuisance on a property then we would go inspect. That actually sounds better to me too. Yeah, because you know we're basically talking about emerald ashbor, but if it's oakwilt or twoline chestnut bore, those take a long time before they start showing up. So, um I don't think I would want to spend my tax dollars hiring some company to come around and inspect trees just to see if they're diseased. I think we should keep it as it is, keep as the code is now. Okay. Okay. Yeah, that's good information and we can um uh we'll definitely take to the to the council for their consideration as we um evaluate this uh our existing code and the appropriateness of it as adopted moving forward. And I I appreciate your comment about complaint driven. I I think our code that our code is a better choice on that. Yeah, good feedback. Thank you for that. Um I don't uh certainly happy to answer any other questions that you might have or field any more comments that we can share with the I have one more authorized agent. Would that be uh um when it says city forester or authorized a agent twice in here? Um would that be like a certified inspector? Yeah, tree inspector. Okay. Can we just change the wording in there? I think authorized agent isn't clear very clear. We can look into it. might be um through a definition in an earlier aspect of the of the overall city code because that could be you know I I would have to reaffirm but I'll certainly take that into consideration that that I think that would help for me to be clear about it is who who's an authorized agent to to state that. Thanks. All right. And then it sounded like we were all maybe in agreement about the repayment process. We need to make sure people have time to to deal with us financially. Um and the city, you know, can help us to do that as indiv as private citizens. So, you're you would encourage the council to consider that um some form of um it just makes sense. It's what we do with the streets, you know. So, okay. Good feedback. Okay. Happy to take that back to the council. All right. All right. Anything else on um that discussion? Thank you for your input everybody. Um let's move on the agenda to um excuse me other updates. Our staff lays on um what's happening this I'm going to defer to uh Mr. Melhorn forester for some updates. Yeah. So, the city forestry department is considering not renewing our treatment contract for ash trees. Um, we are getting caught up with our EAB management on our public spaces. Um, we are currently researching a grant for removing and replacing diseased and hazardous trees in public spaces. If I might make a comment, if you use the other mic, that mic has a problem and shouldn't shouldn't be used. There's a a yellow tag there. Maybe start over, Tim. You did cut out. Thanks. The forestry department is considering not renewing our treatment contract for ash trees. We are um currently getting caught up with our removal um and replacing our diseased trees in public spaces. We are also researching a possible grant for removing and replacing diseased and hazardous trees in public spaces. And treating the terminally ill is expensive and not very coste effective. Um, which I also recently was affirmed by at a training I attended. Forestry staff has also been working hard on the abatement of other nuisance trees throughout the city. And then specifically for the Pete Grassy Arbor Day tree giveaway, um the check-in list based on your feedback, we will provide an alphabetical list by last name. And that's it. Just a reminder to everybody that um the locations changed this year for the treat giveaway. So if you're watching on TV, don't come to Walton Park. It's it's going to be at the fire station, the North Fire Station and a drive-thru like we've had. Correct. Rain or shine. The firemen didn't even know that. Yeah. In that station. Well, hopefully they'll know it by the giveaway day. So, so in the res uh registration is there, you know, kind of like please note kind of a thing. So, it's quite clear in in the registration that this has been moved so you go to this site and such. Yeah. Yes. Okay. And April 1st is the the sign up start, right? 8:00 in the morning, I'm guessing. Correct. Um I don't I can't confirm on the actual timeline of when that'll start, but um yeah, that is. And then our staff this year, one thing we've changed a little bit is uh working together collaboratively with our communications department and then our public works admin to reaffirm um with uh those that did sign up for a tree to remind them as it gets closer that here's the that you did sign up for this. It's upcoming on this date. Here's the date that you should arrive. So hopefully that um obviously had some feedback from last year that there's some people that maybe forgot about the event at all. Um which is easy to do. and then they maybe uh forgot about what time they had to show up, so they just showed up. And so we'll put some extra effort into that this year to help try to communicate with people and obviously during that process, we'll make sure that they're aware of, you know, the location um at the North Fire Station. Excellent. Thank you. Yeah, that that was discussed last meeting that yeah, if a followup would really appreciate especially since the site's being changed and and we do seem to at least the last couple years gotten a lot of no shows, so that that would help. Yep. Yeah, we have we have a plan in place for that this year. We'll hopefully uh hopefully address that and and uh staff have already discussed a uh a post afteraction review just to see what what worked uh and what didn't and and hopefully continue to you and every year you know make finite adjustments and do do the best that we can um for that. Hopefully um you know to clarify for those uh members of the commission and that stuff that are looking to attend that and participate into that, we'd ask you to arrive about 15 minutes early um to uh uh get set up and we'll get you into your, you know, the workstation areas and um task. So that way once people do arrive, we hopefully uh don't get behind right from the start. I'd like to take this opportunity to just officially thank the city of Oakville for doing this. This is a a really nice deal. Not a lot of communities um you know we are a Tree City USA city. We have recognition for that and um I just so appreciate that the city does this and the people that come through are just so grateful. So I want to just formally say thank you for doing this. Certainly an event that um that staff appreciates and it's it's nice to uh you know there's there's a lot of work that goes into it, but it's um as you mentioned there's it's it's for the right reasons and so we're happy to support that and be a part of that. And the people who come through are impressed. The trees are lovely and nice size specimens. So um I think it's a it's a nice investment back into the community by council to keep approving um this expenditure every year. So, please pass that on to council for us. Absolutely. Thank you. Absolutely. All right. Anything else, Tim? That wrap it up. Okay. Well, thanks. So, that'll be our next big event coming up. Um, so we'll move on then on the agenda to board member updates. Is there anything um from the board that um I stopped out at the uh nature center and got the updated tree track and I want to make sure that Laura Lindmeer gets a lot of credit because she's the one that put all this together. So, this is the new one. It's uh quite a bit easier to read than the last one. So, excellent. We don't need a microscope to read the font. Excellent. Thanks for bringing this. So, it's all done. It's as updated as we can make it right now. And and Mike, thank you for your work. You've done a lot of work. Laura Laura also I know. And Laura for making us a great map. Um and hopefully these maps are now out in by the front door of the Discovery Center. Yay. I picked it right off the shelf. Excellent. Excellent. So, and then it's on a little bigger paper, I think. So, legal size, so that helps. Thank you. So stop out the discovery center and pick up a tree track map and take a walk, learn about trees. Um, anything else from the board members? No. All right. All right. Then we move to council leaison. Good evening, commissioners. Um, first I want to thank you for your very thoughtful feedback on the um, let's see, chapter 22, article 6. Um it was really interesting to listen to you. I know Corey took all of the notes um and will send back to us. So, thank you so much. I really appreciate that. Um wanted to just It wasn't part of my notes originally, but earlier today Oakdale did share the tree giveaway on Facebook. Um and it does say note new location and that um set an alarm for Tuesday, April 1st at 8 a.m. to reserve your free tree. So, um April 1st indeed. I knew I saw it earlier when I was scrolling, so I pulled it back up while you guys were talking. Um, we have been busy in the council and I um understand that they keep saying it's not usually like this, council member Moore. It's not usually like this, but it's been busy. Um, we have spent a lot of time talking about the park system plan update and the pedestrian and bike plan update. And so there's been some really healthy discussion um with how we move forward, how we look forward, and how we prioritize some of these. So um it's been kind of exciting. And we've been watching the public works building going up um which is incredibly satisfying, right, to check in on those pictures every once in a while. So um that is all I had as far as council updates. I am happy to answer any questions and Corey, I just want to thank you for your facilitation of that discussion. So thank you. Do you guys have any questions? When is the park the public service um building open? Is that this fall? Yeah. October to November of 202. It is this fall. Okay. Right. Good luck with that. Yeah. Thank you. Any other questions? Thank you so much for your time, commissioners. Thank you. You're welcome. All right. Um I think that's it. We move on to adjournment and adjournment. Um, I need a motion to I move to adjurnn. Second. All in favor? I I. All right. Thanks everybody. Have a good night. Enjoy our spring. I think for a day till tomorrow delay delay.