Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Tree Removal topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board allows removal at 701 East 9th Street after motion to deny fails 3–2

Newport Tree Board · February 13, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Newport Tree Board heard from the city arborist about a red maple with root rot at 701 E. 9th St.; a motion to deny removal failed 3–2 on a roll call, after which the chair indicated the removal will stand.

The Newport Tree Board considered Case NTB 262 on Feb. 12, concerning a 14-inch red maple on the Maple Street side of the property at 701 East 9th Street. The applicant for the removal was listed as the city arborist.

The city arborist presented photos showing branch dieback and localized root rot at the base, saying the tree’s combination of symptoms made continued retention questionable and that, if the board chose not to remove it, staff would monitor the tree at regular intervals. The arborist noted the tree "looks different from that side" in photos and acknowledged limitations of remote assessment: "It's so hard to tell when you're not there in person."

Board members asked clarifying questions about the tree’s exact location (near a fire hydrant), whether the root rot could affect the hydrant, and the extent of canopy failure. One member described the tree’s overall condition as about a "C" and said they were likely to vote against removal, while another expressed concern about root proximity to the fire hydrant but the arborist said typical planting distances near hydrants are about 5 feet and did not observe a clear issue.

A board member moved to deny the removal (motion text: deny Case NTB 262). The motion was seconded and put to a roll-call vote. The tally was Garrett Reinhart — yes; Kevin Ellison — no; Neil Connor — no; Kevin Brokemer — yes; Brent Owens — no, resulting in a 3–2 vote against the motion to deny. The chair stated that because the motion to deny did not carry, the removal will proceed.

The board did not adopt additional conditions at the meeting; the city arborist said staff would continue to monitor or proceed with removal as appropriate. The record includes photos referenced in the application and the arborist’s recommendation.