Board declines fall branch-chipping contract after debate over participation, budget and single bid

The Town and Country Board of Aldermen debated a proposed contract and budget amendment Aug. 25 to fund a fall branch-chipping program and ultimately voted against the measure after public comment and council discussion.

Bill No. 25-35 would have accepted a bid and authorized an agreement with Grama Tree Experts for the 2025 fall branch-chipping program and amended the 2025 budget to increase a general-fund expenditure account to cover program expenses. The contract and the requested budget increase drew extended public and aldermanic scrutiny at the meeting.

Sue Allen, a former state representative and a resident who spoke during the meeting’s public-comment segment, urged caution: she said the contract has no cap, noted that historical participation in earlier years was low (about 15 percent of residents based on 2019 mailings and street surveys), and said the Public Works Commission had not recommended approval (she reported a 7–1 commission vote against the contract). “This contract actually was not supported by the public works,” Allen said, and warned the city the program’s cost could exceed the budgeted amount.

Public comments and several aldermen raised similar concerns. Aldermen cited competing capital priorities — municipal center and firehouse repairs, and a salt-storage and equipment-protection project the board estimates at roughly $3 million — and questioned whether reinstating a service used by a relatively small share of households was the best use of funds. One alderman noted the $40,000 budget placeholder would be exceeded by the contract as proposed; another said the administration received only a single bid and preferred to seek competitive responses.

During the roll call on the item, the clerk recorded ayes from Aldermen Hughes, Carter and Garber and nays from Aldermen Sawyer and Murphy; other members’ recorded votes were not audible in the transcript. After the vote the meeting continued to new business, and members noted respect for the public process. The transcript indicates the item did not advance to adoption at this meeting.

Board members and residents suggested alternatives, including conducting a survey of residents to identify which yard services (for example, leaf pickup rather than branch chipping) would attract higher participation, and considering a more limited or capped contract if the board returns to the issue.

The board’s Public Works Commission, according to remarks at the meeting, voted 7–1 against recommending the contract on May 19, citing low participation and noncompetitive bidding. The administration will likely return to the board with additional information if the program is revisited.