Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Urban Forestry topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press village on utility tree trimming, stump responsibility and planting plans
Summary
Residents, tree board members and trustees discussed NYSEG and contractors' pruning of public trees, a PSC pause on NYSEG trimming, stump‑grinding responsibility and plans for spring planting and inventory work.
Village residents and the tree board pressed trustees and staff on utility pruning across East Aurora during the April 7 meeting, and trustees described ongoing talks with NYSEG and third‑party line contractors.
Nancy Smith, a resident and tree advocate, asked whether a smaller "trim box" would materially save canopy and why property owners might be asked to bear stump‑grinding costs when a for‑profit utility had removed a tree. She asked the village to push contractors to minimize trimming and to provide clearer communication about timing and the coverage of editorial reporting on meetings.
"When a utility removes a tree encroaching on power lines, they are typically responsible for the entire removal process including stump grinding," Smith said she found in a web search; trustees and staff said they would research the legal and contractual responsibilities and follow up. Tree board chair Jesse Griffith thanked trustees and staff for progress and asked the village to press contractors on schedules so the board can plan spring plantings.
Village Administrator Shane Krieger said he had been speaking with state and utility contacts; he reported that the Public Service Commission had ordered NYSEG to pause trimming in the village and that NYSEG has a new local contact. Krieger and trustee Jeff Ravey said NYSEG agreed to spare certain named "heritage trees" the tree board had identified, and that O'Connell Electric is coordinating with the village for its contract work.
Officials said stump‑grinding responsibility was unresolved in some cases. "If we're asking for a tree to be removed because more than 50% of the canopy was taken, I'm guessing that's gonna be our responsibility because we're asking them to remove it," Krieger said; he added that if NYSEG removed a tree because it was dangerous, the utility might take responsibility. Village staff said they would follow up on statutory responsibilities and contracts.
Tree board members and trustees asked contractors to provide clearer schedules and mapping of work so replacements and plantings can be planned. Griffith said the village had hopes to replace street trees taken down or heavily trimmed and to coordinate plantings in spring; he asked staff and contractors to clarify how much work remains so the tree board can schedule plantings.
No ordinance or formal vote was taken. Trustees directed staff to continue discussions with NYSEG, O'Connell and local contractors and to report back to the board on responsibility for stump management and on contractor schedules.
