Draper tree committee earmarks $4,000 for contractor planting, debates hiring a full‑time arborist

David Cloward, chair of the Draper City Tree Committee, told members at their May 6 meeting that the group has roughly $20,000 committed for tree purchases — $10,000 from a donor and about $10,000 held in nursery stock — plus a separate $4,000 allotment that must be spent before June. "We need to have somebody who is dedicated and owns it," Cloward said of tree care, arguing that ownership is key to long‑term maintenance.

Why it matters: The committee is trying to convert event momentum and donor funds into lasting street‑tree canopy rather than one‑off plantings that may fail without follow‑up care. Members said constrained staff capacity, disease pressures and narrow park strips make project selection and post‑planting maintenance critical.

Committee members reviewed options for using the $4,000, concluding it can best be spent by hiring contractors to purchase and install as many trees as the budget covers and provide a standard one‑year planting warranty. "The 4,000 needs to be used by June," a committee member said; members asked volunteers to solicit bids and noted procurement rules that typically require multiple quotes. The committee set a practical deadline: trees should be in the ground by June 30.

Site and species choices were discussed pragmatically. Members prioritized locations with existing irrigation and open park strips; the "Carl Quest" area (committee discussion label) was identified as a leading candidate because irrigation is already in place. Species mentioned as preferred or under consideration included Zelkova 'Village Green', honeylocust 'Skyline', and Prospector or Frontier elm cultivars; chokecherry was discussed and largely discounted because it requires heavy maintenance.

Funding and costs: Cloward reported a $10,000 donation from Troy Orr and noted another $10,000 already invested in nurseries for tree purchases. Committee members estimated past event labor at roughly 140 man‑hours and said Tree Utah had covered about half the tree costs at prior plantings. Staff reported that treating certain disease‑stricken trees (anthracnose) could cost roughly $8,000 per application cycle — about $16,000 per year if done twice — a figure several members said was unsustainable compared with removal or targeted replacement.

Staffing tradeoffs came into sharp focus. Some members argued for funding a full‑time, dedicated arborist who would "own" the urban forest program and follow projects from planting through maintenance. Others proposed outsourcing mowing to free existing crews for tree work, or relying on contractors for specialized treatments. "If it's only part of a person's job, that will never happen," Cloward said of efforts split among multiple duties.

Procedural note: The committee opened by approving the April 1 minutes; the motion was made and acknowledged as approved during the meeting though no roll‑call vote tally was recorded in the transcript. Members also noted the part‑time inspector position tied to a grant is being re‑advertised; that role, as described, would inspect city projects for planting compliance rather than private developments.

What’s next: Volunteers will solicit contractor bids for purchase and installation to use the $4,000 allocation; the committee will prioritize irrigated sites and aim to have trees planted by June 30. Further discussion of hiring or funding a dedicated arborist and amendments to the Draper Street Tree Guide was deferred pending additional research and staff feedback.

Quotes

"We need to have somebody who is dedicated and owns it, and they're passionate about it, and that's all they do," David Cloward said, summarizing the committee's argument for a dedicated arborist.

According to Cloward, the disc golf group that partnered on a recent planting reported a $10,000 donation and said an associated tournament "brings in $2,700,000 in economic impact," a figure committee members relayed but did not independently verify at the meeting.

Ending

The committee set short timelines for the immediate planting project and left broader staffing and code‑amendment questions for follow‑up; the part‑time inspector posting remains open while members pursue contractor bids and planting logistics.