Lincoln council debates whether Tree Board should stay with city or move under Park District

Lincoln City Council members spent the bulk of their Nov. 21 meeting debating whether the Tree Board should remain under city control or be transferred to the Park District.

Tree Board members told the council they prefer to stay under the city, arguing the board’s forestry funds and local oversight best serve tree maintenance and long-term planning. Park District representatives and several councilors countered that Parks already performs much of the practical tree work — planting, watering and removal — and said folding Tree Board duties into Parks could streamline operations.

Why it matters: the Tree Board collects a 1.51-mill levy that has funded tree-planting and a tree-collection site. Speakers raised questions about which entity would control that revenue, how enforcement of tree ordinances would operate if the board moves, and whether staff and equipment exist to handle ongoing maintenance. Councilors and Tree Board members also raised concerns about projects that depend on the existing fund — for example, purchase of a burner to dispose of trees (one speaker said the city paid $7,626.58 to landfill tree debris this year).

What happened at the meeting: a council member stated a motion to keep the prior council action moving the Tree Board toward placement under the Park District, but members agreed that no ordinance change has yet been completed. Council directed staff to: compile a detailed accounting of the Tree Board funds and how they have been spent; draft necessary ordinance amendments or a joint-powers agreement; and schedule a joint meeting among the Tree Board, Park District and City Council to define obligations and transition steps before any formal readings or votes.

Voices on both sides: Tree Board speakers said the board is largely advisory and lacks the staffing and equipment to take on maintenance duties without city public-works support; one Tree Board member urged clarity about which entity would pay for watering, removal and equipment. Several council members said Parks already performs the work in practice and that ordinance language must be amended to reflect the transfer rather than relying on a gentleman’s agreement.

Next steps: councilors asked staff to prepare ordinance language and a clear funding/accounting plan prior to any readings. No ordinance was adopted at the Nov. 21 meeting; the council left the prior motion’s status intact for now and scheduled additional planning and a joint meeting before any formal transfer.