Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tree Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Dearborn Heights council approves higher tree‑permit and replanting fees after hourslong debate; language sent back for counsel review
Summary
Council approved a resolution raising city tree‑permit fees and scaling replacement payments and a $500 conditional bond for replanting; councilors debated exemptions for dead or diseased trees, city removal responsibility and whether bonds should apply when residents pay to remove hazardous city trees. Corporation Counsel clarified replanting fees don’t apply to city removal of dead/diseased trees; council asked administration and counsel to refine the language.
After more than an hour of discussion March 24, the Dearborn Heights City Council approved an amended resolution to raise several fees tied to the city’s tree ordinance and to add a conditional bond for replacement trees — but the council also directed the administration and corporation counsel to clarify the language on exceptions for dead or diseased trees.
The resolution increases the permit fee for removing or trimming a city tree from $65 to $75 and raises the non‑refundable replacement contribution required under city code section 33‑37. The resolution presented numeric replacement amounts by trunk diameter: 12–24 inches ($700), 24–36 inches ($800) and 36 inches plus ($1,000). It also creates a refundable $500 conditional bond for applicants who choose to plant replacement trees themselves; the bond is refunded if the replacement planting meets guidelines within six months.
"This just changes the fees to what they should be for how much we're paying to plant trees," one council supporter said during debate. Several members pressed for clearer wording to exempt dead or diseased trees from replanting bonds and to confirm that when the city identifies and cannot remove a hazardous tree but a resident pays to remove it, the resident would not have to post the bond. Corporation Counsel clarified: "The tree replanting fee as well as this particular type of bond only will apply if you are dealing with a replanting obligation. It won't apply if you are removing a dead or diseased tree on the city right of way." (Corporation Counsel)
Council members raised equity questions: if the city lacks funds to remove a hazardous city tree and a resident pays privately, should that resident still be required to place a bond or pay replanting fees? The mayor and director of public works said the administration intends to seek grants and to continue inspections; multiple members asked that the resolution be subject to final review and technical edits by corporation counsel to ensure the intended exemptions and an explicit licensed‑contractor requirement for private removals.
The council approved the resolution as amended and noted it will return to the administration for final drafting and corporation counsel review before a final ordinance change is implemented. The council also heard separate, unsuccessful motions to pause all removals or to refund certain permit fees pending a rewrite.
Next steps: administration to redraft clearer language incorporating the council’s direction on dead/diseased exceptions and contractor/permit clarifications; corporation counsel to review and return the item to council.
