Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Works Brush Disposal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Isanti council weighs chipping, hauling or controlled burn for storm-generated brush pile
Summary
Council members discussed options for disposing of a large brush pile left after a storm — renting/buying a wood chipper and using seasonal staff, hiring a contractor to haul material, or a controlled burn with the fire district — and asked staff to get contractor quotes and cost estimates.
Isanti City Council members on the committee of the whole discussed how to manage a very large brush pile created after a recent storm, weighing on-site chipping, contractor hauling and a controlled burn as possible options.
Councilman Lundin opened the discussion noting the pile is “pretty large,” and recalled that last year the city paid a contractor to haul loads down to Rivard. A council member said trucking “has got to be a very tedious operation” and that, with a larger pile, hauling repeatedly would strain staff time.
One councilor proposed bringing a wood chipper or renting one for a short period and having seasonal staff chip material during slow periods. “I personally would like to look into a wood chipper and whether our seasonal can do that while he's sitting there,” the councilor said. Supporters said on-site chipping could use resources the city already pays for and reduce repeated truckloads.
Others raised safety and equipment concerns. A member warned, “I'm not sure 1 guy out there would be safe to be trimming. Especially he's an older guy, elderly guy,” and that staff have not had chipping training. Council members also noted the pile contains large logs and is densely compacted, which would complicate chipping.
The possibility of a controlled burn was discussed as a training opportunity for the fire district, but the council said the fire chief (Al) was not recommending a burn for such a large pile; past small burns were conducted in winter with snow to help manage the fire. One member said, “We had burned it years and years and years ago — never this big,” and cautioned about duration and safety.
Council members recalled approximate prior hauling costs (discussion referenced figures around $150 a load and roughly 8–12 loads last year) and agreed the city should obtain current contractor quotes before deciding. A council member suggested calling hauling contractors to “come up and take a look at it and see if they charge us” so the council can compare removal costs with on-site options.
No formal decision was made. Council consensus was to gather more information: staff and council members will seek contractor estimates, clarify training needs for chipping, and report back so the council can decide between hauling, chipping, or other disposal approaches.
The committee then returned to other agenda items.
