Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Emerald Ash Borer topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lennox committee recommends citywide survey and outreach under emerald ash borer recovery plan
Summary
Committee endorsed a three‑stage EAB plan recommending a 2027 parcel survey, public education, cost‑share options and possible public‑nuisance declarations for declining ash trees, with staff estimating a $5,200 survey cost and roughly $50,000 for removal of declining right‑of‑way trees.
The Parks & Recreation advisory committee recommended that City Council review an updated emerald ash borer (EAB) recovery plan that frames the infestation as a slow‑moving natural disaster and proposes a three‑stage approach: survey, engagement and mitigation/recovery.
Staff told the committee an April 2024 confirmation of EAB in Lennox led to an initial inventory and removals: about 160 low‑value trees were removed previously and staff estimate roughly 150 ash trees remain on city rights‑of‑way and public property; an estimated 800–900 ash trees are on private property. Staff said a city parcel survey in April 2027 (survey cost estimated at about $5,200) would document location and condition, and that treatment is feasible for trees with better than 30% canopy condition (injections repeated every two years).
The presenter explained private owners would bear the direct cost of treatment or removal, and the city is exploring grants, a rebate or cost‑share voucher program to ease the burden. "The approximate cost would be about 50,000 dollars" for addressing the remaining street/right‑of‑way trees if removals are needed, staff said, adding that removal costs can rise sharply as trees decline and become hazardous.
Staff recommended community education (newsletters, mailers, a public forum with Matt Hart, Sam, and Dr. John Ball from SDSU), a public meeting in summer for outreach, and a possible City Council declaration in 2026 that would allow nuisance enforcement beginning in 2027 if property owners do not act on recommended plans. The committee voted to move the plan forward for council consideration.
Committee members discussed the financial and equity implications of requiring private property owners to remove hazardous trees and emphasized early notice and outreach so owners can plan and pursue funding assistance. Staff noted enforcement would rely on existing city ordinances and that noncompliance could ultimately be assessed as a property tax special assessment if the city had to contract removals.
The committee did not adopt a binding budget; it recommended the strategy and asked staff to pursue grant opportunities and draft council materials for the proposed survey and public engagement timeline.
