Susan Alexander asks council to clarify tree-board role in ordinance

Susan Alexander, speaking for the town’s tree board, asked the council to adopt two textual amendments to the town’s tree ordinance to remove confusion about the board’s responsibilities.

Alexander told the council she had misread the clause in question and, after consulting the town attorney, learned the tree board is not the appeals board for tree permits but instead may perform functions at the appeals board’s request. “I read it to mean that the tree board was the appeal board, but the clause actually reads that we the tree board will perform functions that the appeal board requires of us,” she said, asking the council to reword Section 263-3E to prevent future misinterpretation.

Alexander also proposed changing Section 263-4D to limit full tree-board review to applications seeking removal of three or more trees. That change would leave most single-tree removals to an administrative review process conducted by staff: Jay and Sarah would review ordinary applications and, where removal is appropriate, recommend replanting on the property. “If you’re going to take one tree down, we ask that we replant with one additional tree on your property,” Alexander said.

Council members pressed staff on overlap with existing critical-area and site-plan reviews. Staff and the town attorney confirmed the amendments would not supersede critical-area forest protections or site-plan review processes and that Sarah’s pre-screening already filters many cases before a formal board meeting.

The council did not vote on the amendments at the work session; staff will incorporate attorney edits and the items were scheduled for the next regular meeting for formal action.

Ending: The tree-board amendments are intended to reduce administrative burden for routine single-tree permits while preserving board review for canopy-level clearings. Staff will provide revised ordinance language and the council will consider the changes at its next regular meeting.