266597 WH17E - CITV CLERK ���f���
PINK - FINANCE `;
� CANARY - DEPARTMENT GITY OF SAINT PALTL COIIIICll
BLUE - MAVO'R v
. File N 0.
� � cil Resolution
Presented By
Referred To Committee: Date
Out of Committee By Date
RESOLVED, That the Council of the City of Saint Paul approves the
attached Shade Tree Disease Removal and Assessment Program for the City
of Saint Paul and specifically adopts the assessment policy for the
removal of diseased trees from private property set forth on page five
of the attached report. The Mayor and Administration are hereby directed
to administer this policy on behalf of the City of Saint Paul and the
City Council .
COUNCILMEN Requested by Department of:
Yeas Nays �
Christensen _ $ _.1�eS l
� Hunt � In Favor
evine —
Rcedler Against �
Sylvester
Tedesco �
President F� Hozza Form Approved by C$ty A orney '�
Adopted by Co . Date '�A� 8 �97g
;`
Certifi as e b ou retary • BY ��
Y � ;
App by Mayo • Date Approve Mayor f issio ounc'
By By
PuausHED ,�AN �, ? 1976
� , .
' `������
1975
DUTCH ELM DISEASE
CONTROL REPORT
November 12, 1975
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES
Robert P. Piram, Director
.
. ' ' � � .�'��'�e��-�,
f_�,,,, �-
]975 DUTCH ELM DISEASE CONTROL REPORT '
I. Back9round . j
, Dutch Elm disease is caused by a fatal fungus which is spread by European and
native elm bark beetles. The entire life cycle of the elm beetle depends on
its parasitic relationship with el.m trees. If the beetl�s develop in a dis-
eased tree their bodies may carry as many as one million spores of the causitive
fungus. When the beetles feed on healthy elms the spores enter the vascular
systems of the trees and new infections occur.
There is no cure for Dutch Elm disease. The Saint Paul control program is de-
signed to keep elm losses from reach�ing epidemic proportions. The incidence
of Dutch Elm disease since its arrival in St. Paul in 196i provides a clear ,��
picture of the magnitude of the increase. Elm losses in 1975 represent a 67%
increase over those of 1974.
.
1961 - 1 tree 1966 - 8 trees 1971 - 340 trees
1962 - 0 1967 - 8 trees 1972 - 801 trees
1963 - 8 trees 1968 - 5 trees 1973 - 585 trees
1964 - 3 trees 1969 - 163 trees 1974 - 1 ,594 trees
1965 - 2 trees 1970 - 204 trees 1975 - 2,682 trees
TOTAL . . . . . . . 6,454 trees
In response to the need to control the spread of the disease� the Saint Paul
Dutch Elm disease control program directs its efforts to the following activities:
1. Survey and detection
2. Chemical root�graft control
3. Sanitation (removal of diseased trees and elimination of beetle
breeding material )
4. Reforestation with a more diversified tree population
All of these steps are vital to the success of any control program. Hawever,
the rapidly increasing incidence of Dutch Elm disease is placing a strain on
;.. the capacity of the City to perform all phases of the program.
IT. Problem Statement
A. Primary Probiem
1. 1975 Diseased Tree Removal .
The increased incidence of Dutch Elm di,sease haS lntenslfled the pro6lem
of timely removdl of diseased trees from pu6lic and pri:vate property. Tb.e
disease increase of 67� since 1974 was not foreseen when the 1975 6udget
was developed. The result is that the existing budget cannot provide
enough personnel and equipment to keep pace with the tree removal needs
on both public and private property. The addition of extra crews� funded
by the transfer of reforestation funds, will enablQ the City to remove
condemned trees on public property in 1975.
However, the City will not have enough personnel or monies to remove the
, ���
. _ . . ������
. large number of condemned trees on private property which endanger the
City's attempts to control Dutch Elm disease. Private property owners
have lagged far behind in their removal of diseased trees. As of October
31, 1974, 73% of the condemned trees had been removed. Only 41� of the
condemned trees on private property had been removed by the same date in
1975. This has been attributed to:
1. Increased tree removal costs, including the high cost of disposal ;
2. Lack of comnercial companies capable of ineeting the demands of the
metropolitan area for tree removal services;
3. Property owner requests that the City remove the trees and assess
costs over a, period of years; and ���
4. Property owners anticipating proposed State subsidy programs.
In order to ensure timely removal , it appears that the City of Saint Paul
will have to remove or contract for removal of a minimum of 350 con�
demned trees from private property in 1975. This has not heen a
necessity in the past; the City �emoved only 11 trees from private
property in 1974. However, 875 condemned trees remain to be removed
from private property as of November 7, 1975. Of these remaining trees,
an estimated 350 will have to be rer�ved by the City at an average cost
• of $250 each.
2. 1976 Diseased Tree Removal .
Tree removal on private property using City funds will be necessary in
1976 as part of the City's Shade Tree Disease Control Program. All signs
indicate that Dutch Elm disease will continue its increase in 1976,
compounding the elements that have creatAd the 1975 tree removal crisis.
The City must provide additional funding for 1976 tree removal in orde�,
to ensure the continued effectiveness of Saint Paul 's disease con�rol e����ort.
B. Related Problems
1 . Cost of Disposal
The costs for the disposal of diseased trees represents a substantial
proportion of the costs of tree removal both for the City and for the
private citizen. The nearest approved disposal site available to
� St. Paul residents requires a 30 to 40 mile round trip. The inconven-
ience and the cost of disposal results in the illegal dumping of dis-
eased wood in vacant areas, storage of it on private property or de-
cisions by private property owners not to remove the tree themse1ves.
� These actions result in additional work and cost for the City. Efforts
to destroy elm beetle breeding material are also jeopardized.
2. Reforestation
The Dutch Elm disease control program is designed to limit the spread
of the infection while allowing for the planting of a more diversified
tree population. There is little hope of halting the disease which
could eradicate the Dutch Elms. These trees comprise 85� of the St.Paul
tree population.
-2-
�
�
. , , ,�, -����
B. Related Problems (Reforestation - cont'd)
The future of the urban forest depends on the orderly transition to a
mixed tree population. Plans for 1976 call for the transfer of reforest-
ation funds allocated in the 1976 Shade Tree Disease Control Budget to
provide vital survey and sanitation operations. The same course of
action was employed in 1975 resulting in CIB as the only source of
funds available for 1975 tree plantings. Unless additional funding
for replacement of diseased trees is found, reforestation efforts
will fall hopelessly behind the recommended one-to-one-replacement rate.
III. Objectives
A. The r�mar objective of any action is to keep Dutch Elm disease from
reac ing epidemic proportions by: `�
, 1 . facilitating prompt removal of diseased trees on public property;
2. providing for the removal of diseased trees on private property
for those unable or unwilling to remove the trees promptly;
3. encouraging private property owners to make arrangements for
removal of condemned trees on their property.
B. Secondary objectives should include action:
l . to develop a more economical , convenient and ecologically sound
means of disposing of diseased wood, both for the City and pri-
vate property owners; and
2. to ensure one-to-one replacement of diseased trees with mixed
species trees.
IV. Criteria
Potential solutions should:
1 . achieve the primary objectiv,es (immediate priority)
2. achieve the secondary objectives (second priority)
3. be economically and practically feasible
V. Alternatives
A. 1975 Tree Removal
1 . No action.
The decision to take no action to remove diseased trees on public
and private property will result in the complete negation of Saint
Paul 's shade tree disease control efforts. The primary metho�l of
in►peding the spread of �he dis�ase rrquires the prom��t rE�na,v��1 c�t'
condemned tress. Un'less the diseased traes ar� renrovr�d. ti1.. Nf�u1
-3-
���c���`�
. : A. . 1975 Tree �temoYdl . �cpnt�dl
faces an explosive increase in infected trees next spring and summer
' as a. result of the beetles which infest the diseased trees. Control
of such an increase with the available budget would be impossible.
2. Use the 1975 General Revenue Contingency Reserve�.
These funds would be used for the removal of diseased trees on
private property and the initial costs of an assessment policy.
($87,500 will be required for this alternative.)
As of November 7, 1975 only $83,000 remained in the 1975 General
Revenue Contingency Reserve. This amount is not sufficient to '
remove the estimated 350 condemned trees on private.
3. Draw from the Dutch Elm Dedicated Fund.
These funds would be used for the removal of diseased trees on
private property and the initial costs of an assessment policy.
($87,500 will be required for this alternative.)
There is $237,877.30 in the Dutch Elm Dedicated Fund and Reserve.
The requested amount of funding will permit the City to remove
or contract for removal of the remaining diseased trees on private
property condemned in 1975.
The City of Saint Paul is required to have a uniform assessment
policy for recovering costs for diseased tree removal on private
property. Under an assessment policy, the City pays the initial
cost of tree removal and can recover the money through a number of
methods:
a. Continue to collect the tree removal costs in one installment.
A public hearing is required prior to ratification of
the assessment. At that time the City Council has the
' authorit to spread the tree removal assessments (in equal
payments� over a ten year period. Problems with this option
include:
(1 ) any extension of the assessment period will result in
' a cost recovery lag,
(2) people not attending the hearing would have to pay the
�ssessment in one installment regardless of any hard-
ship, and
(3) the City Council would be required to spend time making
decisionson individual cases. ,
;
-4-
�� � ,�����,
.. �
A. 1975 Tree Removal (cont'd)
b. Adopt a policy where the private property owner is allowed the
option of paying for tree removal in equal installments over a set
period of time. This assessment policy would spread payments over
a maximum of ten years, based on payments of approximately $10 per
month. (There is a 6� yearly interest rate. )
(1) Bills of up to $120 would be paid in one year;
(2) $120 to $600 would be paid over a five year period; and
(3) Bills that are$600 or more could be billed over a ten year ;
period.
This policy allows flexibility for the property owner and lets
people in hardship situations pay tree removal bills in realistic
payments.
Since a uniform assessment policy must be adopted we recommend that
policy b. be approved. � (See attached schedule for long range
pro3ections of the financial impact of adopting this policy.)
B. 1976 Tree Removal
1. No action.
Without a transfer or addition of funds to the Shade Tree Disease Control
Program in 1976, Saint Paul will be faced with a tree removal crisis
similar or worse that that faced in 1975. This will again jeopardize
the effectiveness of the entire control program.
2. State/City Subsidy.
The City can use a subsidy program to encourage private property owners
to remove trees promptly. This alternative consists of three potential
subsidy programs:
R
a. The City can take part in the subsidy program currently funded
by the State. This program provides up to $50 in State funds to
match an equal or greater amount paid by the City. (Shade Tree
Disease Control Act, Minn. Statutes, Section 18.023)
It is the policy of the City to attempt to shift some of the tax
burden for State programs back to the State. By agreeing to
� participate in this subsidy program, we will be going against this
' particular policy; in fact, this action would add to the City tax
burden at a rate of $50 per tree.
A request for CD Year II funding could provide $75,000 for the City
match (grant application attached). This would provide a maximum
$100 subsidy for the removal of 1500 trees on private property.
This would not have the effect of shifting the burden back to the
State, however.
_5_ '
���'���
B. 1976 Tree Removal (cont'd)
b. The City can support proposed State legislation calling for
tax credits of 50� to private property owners over 65 and tax
deductions for those under 65 for the removal of condemned shade
trees. (Kerr�e - H.F. No. 1869)
This o�ption is dependent on passage by the legislature. However,
it �s recommended that this legislation be suppor.ted by the City
of Saint Paul as a beneficial program for City residents. Th�s
proposal places the tax burden for a statewide problem on the State.
c. The City can support new State legislation for a maximum $100 ,�
subsidy to private property owners for diseased tree removal . The
entire subsidy would be paid by the State.
This type of legT�lation would support the City policy that Dutch
Elm disease is a State Problem and that State monies should be used
for any subsidy program. Any legislation along these lines should
be endor.sed by the City. However as in plan b. , proposed legislation
is suhject to passage by the legislature.
In any of the subsidy programs, a paid bill would probably be required to
receive the subsidy. If the private property owner opted for the City to
remove the tree and assess the costs, the subsidy might be lost. In
addition, provision of a subsidy does not solve the entire problem of
tree removal on private property. At best, it may serve as an incentive but
does not guarantee prompt tree removal .
3. Draw upon �he General Revenue Contingency Fund (1976).
These monies would provide the additional funds needed for the 1976
Shade Tree Disease Control Program, $100,000 for the removal of
approximately 400 condemned trees from private property.
There is approximately $1,000,000 in the 1976 General Revenue Contingency
Fund. This would allow the City to draw the amount of money necessary
to remove trees on public and private property that were not anticipated
in the 1976 budget.
4. Use General Forestry Funds (Account No. 09105).
The City contribution to the Special Forestry Fund would be used for the
1976 tree removal on public and private property. It is anticipated that
approximately $100,000 will be required. �70,000 will be drawn from the
Forestry Funds and the remaining $30,000 will be provided by the
Dedicated Dutch Elm Fund.
�6-
���'��"�
B. 1976 Tree Removal (cont'd)
This alternative would allow for flexible use of monies already
budgeted ($443,745) to deal with the need to remove trees on both
public and private property. Tree trimming is the primary activity
which would be affected. If tree trimming crews or monies from this
code were used for removal of diseased trees, the tree trimming that
is done will cost the benefited property owner more. The exact a-
' mount would be based on the amount of tree trimming accomplished.
Currently, approximately 50� of the budget is recovered by assessing >
for tree trirrming costs. Under this proposal , the City will reduce
its contribution to the tree trimming program. Condemned trees re-
moved from private property can be billed and the cost can be recovered.
C. Related Alternatives
1 . Construction of a Wood Recycling Center.
A joint effort of the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board and the
City of Saint Paul to implement a wood recycling center has been pro-
posed as a long range solution to the high cost of diseased wood dis-
posal . Grants are available from the State on a 50/50 match basis.
Minneapolis and Saint Paul are submitting a combined grant request.
Saint Paul 's share of the total cost is $120,000. Possible sources
of matching funds are: ,
a. Draw funds from the Dutch Elm Dedicated Reserve to cover
Wood Recycling Center construction costs.
The Dutch Elm Dedicated Fund and Reserve is $238,877.30. Money
from this fund would be immediately available as match money
for the proposed State grant.
b. Budget construction costs in the Cii:y's 1971 General [3ud��et.
Including the wood recycling cent�r in the 1977 t�udget would
delay the construction of the facility until 1977. Since the
cost of wood disposal is a major share of the total cost of tree
" removal it is desirable to undertake this project as a means
of keeping those costs stable. A delay in City funding would
jeopardize the availability of State funds.
� .
�` c. CIB fund for 1977.
;
,
Funding a wood recycling center through the CIB program would re-
sult in the same problems noted above.
fi
a
� -7-
���'���
• C. Related Alternatives (cont'd)
2. Funding of the Reforestation Program. ($370,000)
Regularly budgeted reforestation funds have been transferred to nec-
essary sanitation and survey operations in 1975 and it is expected
that the same action will be taken in 1976. Suggested sources of
funding are:
�
a. CIB funding (1976) for the reforestation effort.
$160,000 in CIB funding has been requested for tree placements
on public property,primarily boulevards and parks. This will
purchase approximately 1100 trees of mixed species for the
1976 season. If there is no 1976 CIB funding, additional CD
Year II funding will be requested.
b. Comnunity Development funding (1976) for the reforestation
program.
$210,000 has been requested for the replacement of trees on
public property. This will purchase approximately 2500 trees to
be planted during the 1976 season. (See attached grant application)
c. Budget adequate reforestation funds i�n the 1977 operating
' budget.
This will solve the problem of reforestation in 1977. Addition-
al CIB funding for 1977 and CD Year III funds will also be re-
quested.
VI. Recomnendations
The following actions are recommended as the most complete and flexible
approaches to the problems facing the Saint Paul Shade Tree Disease Control
program. In addition, these alternatives address the problems with the least
strain upon the total City budget.
It is recommended that:
1 . The City Council implement an assessment policy for tree removal .
2. The City Council draw from the Dutch Elm Dedicated Fund to fund the
essentlal removal of diseased trees from private property in 197��.
providing money for the s�tartup costs ofi An assessnK�nL pnl icy. ('�£3'1.5U�)
-8-
������
VI. Recommendations (cont'd)
3. The 1976 assessment pro ram for tree removal be funded using General
� Forestry Funds ($70,000� and Dutch Elm Dedicated Funds ($30,000).
4. The City Council draw $5,000 from the Dutch Elm Dedicated Fund for tree
removal in cases of extreme hardship.
5. The Wood Recycling Cneter should receive City Council support and
funding as a necessary part of the City's Shade Tree Disease Control
Program. ($120,000)
6. CIB and Communi:ty Development Year II funding be commi'tted to the �'
vitally importa�t reforestation effort. (CD Year II � $210,000)
�81,500 for tree removal (Dutch Elm Dedicated Reserve) estimated 350 �
trees on private property
120 000 for Wood Recycling Center (Dutch Elm Dedicated Reserve)
$207,500 Total 1975 Expenditure
$100,000 for tree rerrroval and assessment on private property (General
Forestry Fund-$70,000 and Dutch Elm Dedicated Reserve-$30,000)
of an estimated 400 trees.
$210,000 CD Year II funds for 15�0 replacement trees on private property
$160,000 CIB funding for 1100 replacement trees
$470,000 Total 1976 Expenditures
� RPP:cm
11/7/75 '
; �
�
; -9-
' . ` � � ��' ���""{
� y'�=C�'�-C. _�° h
1975
" BLM CONDEMNATIONS �
' � A. PUWB�L,IC PRO�RRTY C�NDLMNATxONS
1� Public Boulevard and PArk Blms Condemned
Z,028 D�seASed IIlm Troes
__ 22 Doad or Dyin�; Elm Troos
Z,O50 TOTAL ELM �TREB CONDEMNATION� _;
1,12S (S4 �) Condemnod Treos itamovecl
SiZS (46 �) Condemned Tree RemovAls
to be tomplet�d by Jan.
�lst 197G. City Forces
2. �'ublic Wild Blm Treos . . . 420 Trees
River pottoms and l��.uff Areas
To be removed Uy Pnrk Crews.
1�125 Diseased Trao lo��tions wr.r.e tre�ted
with a Vapnm chomical soiT sterilent to
control spread o� disoase by root grafts.
H• PRYVATR pROPF,RTY COND3:rtNATIONS
.__.___..... _..._..____._.. _
l. Private Resiclential Plms Condemned
� G54 DisQased P.].m•Trdes
� ; 1�,234 llead or Dying Elm Trees
�
, ' 1,888 TOTAL IlLM TR�iE C�NDL�MNAT70NS
,
, _ 775_ (�tl �) Condemnad Troas Romoved
;
! 1,1I� �59 �) Condamned Trees to ba Romovod
a ; . Romoval Pro�;ress ])at�
No. No. ",;
Dn�e Conclemned Tree Tree Removed 7�+��1���vf�-;
..,_._...,. __..._._,_ .. .
:
, SoPt. 18 ,I97a 1 ,8GG 314 :17 ^�
# r Oct. 10 �1975 1 ,f�8F 645 :���'� "
' � OCt.a8�1975 i,a88 ,y75 � 47 ^.
t
�: ;
; ' , .
- ,. � .� ������
� • � . •
�
i
8. xVBTE rR�PrRTY Cn2 U];1ft�IRTXf71�'S; (cont'd)
� - -
,�
�. Privato Yroncr�y p�ild 1�1m Trvo Condemnations
Fozt Aiitl►ority . . . . . . . . S92
Ito�as�n�; �nJ licdovoln7»nIIt
Autl�arf ty . . . . . . . . . 1 nn
A+,otro Sc�ircr Ttn�rd . . . . . . 2�1 fi
� Ttorth 5tar 5�c�al . . . . . . . Sn
Pard Plant . � . . . . . . . . G5
�
TOTAL -----..._....___�•---...._.1 .�G1 .
3� OtheY Priv�to Prnporty C,onclomnr+tion�
i
lpd Rlm Stunj�s Conc3or:ined
27Q I'sl�+ 1�ood snd 1�r��sh riies Cancl�mnc�c�
3aint Faul'� nut�h alm disouso control j�rograms �rv d�si��rrrci
et holdinR olm losses fram ro�chin�„_ �Pfcie�,ic �r�Portfo��s, :�nd
alloH for a contrul2ea tra�nsitinn of olr�s to rnor� divcr�i�'ir.�i
sPocios. Tl�o pro�rams mu�t bo �loxil�Io �nd of£�Y altQrnntivos
to �noot t}�� diffQtrfng n��ds t+itl�in �ho con�raY aroa. •
Xncroased ciinoase fncfdenGc*; anct t?�o ncod to oxrr.clite
;
rcr��va� ef condor�nod olM trrae5 on taot3► I'��b1iC and Private
; >>rr���ortiex the foi�,oNing �rioritxos nra navciQd Ca maot ifl7e,
� �
j rr�arAr� rec�ufranents. �
{
'± 1. "i1R'��rY 111;i) nrTr�Trn,» - �1dc1�.�C�n1� of t�ra (2) sc�rvey
i ; crci�'tin�oxj�cz�r�ta�1�e�tr��t hy �rrc.�e� ay�zte�mlt3c
; ' City-wici� survcy of l�oth �ut�13.G �.z3c� ��rivs�to nra�,ors:ics.
� ': To r�l:�a oxradite f4llow-u�� �r�s��c:ction� o� condemna�c:�oii
noticvs.
. ,
' , C05T • $ iZ�ap0.0A To t,e trttnx!'errecl £rom tt,e
' � trc�a r�pir�ntin� rnrt9on c� �
; � the I)u�ch r1M Uisot�s� 1'u�lj;�•t.
' 4 x. CiUitt'1C,AL RO�T-CitAPT c:�ir'"I'P�L - 1ld�f ti�n of onr (i) - r««
�: '? -
�(��n�n Toat Rrn�ti contral czc��v far � tl►rae (3} r:�o�����
; " roriocl to oxrr.dito trout�ent of boulovnr�l elmg Ac1�nCCZilt
� ;
ta trea dise��o gitos.
� � COST • $ 3,500.OQ To ba tr�n��'c�rrad fr�r� tl�n
r � ' troc rcpinntin� rnrt9o»a r� f
; � tl�e Dutch �31ra Diseu�o l�u�l�;et.
f � '
� :� � � � - 4 - R���9'7
; . , _ . ..
4
!
` i. RI�ft1VAL OA CONlll;ritiPn rt,if TRJ:ES -
_� _
; � A. Publ �ondomnod troa rc��vnl.
� t
Parsonnal and onuipmc�nt co�t used in tlio tr�o
ropl�ntin� portion o£ tho I). �. U. Progr�.m w�ll
` be di�'e�t�d to troe► rau�oyal oporatien� to ox-
; pedit• this oPoratfon.
�
i COS"P • t Z0,146.Q0 nf the treo p2nntiYi�* cost
� wi.11 br. u�ed in rv�oval
� orar:�L ions.
;
n. Private condennect trv� re�ov�l. '�
�__..__.__ .�.�. __.�.__ .�...
� Tha 1975 rQnov�l of cander�nad cIm trr.os hy rri-
` ' vatu propor�y ownors lias ln�rrad considornhly
� behind previous yoars. This has boan attr3t?uted
to.
. .
� 1. Incxe�sed treo remavsc2. cost.
' 2. The StRto Subsfdy Pr�rxc�m.
3. Proporty o��7ie�rs r��i�r.5�:�n�± tl�o City
to clo thc� work nnc� spxe�clinp the cost
ovc�r a ti,na parioa.
4. L�ek of n�lcqutito conmercinl cora�s�nf os
to �eQt the tima nonds of tho ftotro-
politnn eroa.
Yt ar��cnrs th�t Sa�.nt rnul Kill hlvo tu cont�nct
tlae r�movni �f n nirin�,�n o� 75� trc�Q� fro�� rri•
vnta rTOr�rt��� in a �75. TheaQ troas mtitst 1��
rr.r��vc�cl or tl�a ontira 19yG �utch LIm Di�oscsv
Pronram will be 2o�t.
�3STTAfATi! C�ST - � I87,SR(1.QO 7��1 ti^ao� X
$250.00/roY trea.
� +1. TRI?1? I�'LAt'dTIT1� - 1'tmJs for this rortion of tho Contr�Y
� ]rArrnm ►nvc bocsn directcc� to survay anct pui>1 ic Yrac�
rar�ovxl in tho T�J76 Z�ro�;rnm.
'Chis wi�I eliminnt� tho pl.�ntina a� ap�roxi�atcly 1�40�
treou fror� tha tro• plu��ting rrogrum.
� Aclditionnl fundfnA through tho C. Y. A. Pro�rr►ra is n�c��la�i
� to weet this noed.
� �'� �
w ,''
� . A i! 1�'
1.. . /i..� .
� 10- z9-yS
�
�
, ,
:� '1', " - ; ,
�. r
,�
.� ;. �,�����
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES
DIVISION OF ACCOUNTING
November 10, 1975
+
Mr. Robert Piram, DirecCor
Department of Comcnunity Services
Room 545 City Hall `
ATTENTION: Judy Barr
Dear Bob:
I have developed a financing schedule showing the impact of the assessments for
tree removal on private property (see attached) .
Assumptions:
5 year assessment, 1/5th collected each year (annually)
NOTE: individual assessment exceeding $600 which qualify for a
10 year assessment were not projected in this financing
schedule, since an estimate was not available.
Annual tree removal cost estimate:
1975 - 350 trees - $250 each - $ 87,500
1976 - 400 Crees - " " - $100,000
1977 - 500 trees - " " - $125,000
1978 and thereafter -
500 trees - $250 each - $125,000
Cumulative amount uncollected at year end due to delay in collecting
assessment frrnn benefited property.
Cumulative
Assessment
Year Uncollected
1975 -- $ 87,500
1976 Year 1 ll0,000
1977 " 2 257,500
1978 " 3 320,000
1979 " 4 357,500
1980 " 5 370,000
lggl " 6 375,000
k 1982 and thereafter 375,000
�
f '; Please feel free to contact me if you have any further questions for your
` � presentation to the Council.
, ;,
, �
� Sincerely, �,
9 � � , <� ' � �,��' � y
, ���/
i � Robert G. Lang
i Chief Accountant 109 City HaII, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
1 . �e
. ' « W N 00 O �D 00 v O� VI I►y � '" ��.
������:;.1�
r r r r+ r r+ r r
N N N N N N N O 00
u� v+ v� �n �n v+ v� o v � ro
V � Y Y V V V Y Y �
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �+ rt �•
o° °o °o °o 0 0 0° °o °o °'
r r
°o I I i I i � � o o I~
V
� � 0
t')
►.� r
v 1 1 1 I 1 1 � O N IN
0 O O O
�
n
, O
r
w r rr r
� I I I 1 I � O O lwi+ IW n
� y
O O O O O C
O O O O O
a
H
W r � �-C
v 1 I 1 1 � O ln O y I� �
Q �O O O O O �
v O o 0 0 0
W r r
; V N O V t!1 N 1
�' O i. i i ln O �n O O O Itn
�_
� O O O O O O
�
,;
�� VVi 1 I VNi O VVi O VNi O IC�
F'� Y ' ' V Y Y V ' .
� 0 0 � � 0
w r r
tn i ln O ln O ln O I V
I
O O O O O O
. O O O O O O
O O O O O O
w ►-+ r
V N O V lJ� N I
V� tJ� O tn O ln O Go
V Y V V Y '
� � 0 O � Q
Q � 0 O � �
O � � Q � �
v '
� � . . ����9'`�
� 1• Project Names Shade Tree Disease Control Subsidv Proqram
Z, � Proj.oti Xumbars - - - --
� �i Aqenoy� �Ar�*'�'�ent of Conununitv Services __ _
,
� 3•1• 8oCt1011t �'-"' a'^n ^f 1'arks and Recreation
�4• P�CO�eot I�naqeri Gerald W. Prill, Superi.ntendent of Parks_aizd
Rec eat_ion
� 6� ,etat�n�nt of Neeci: y
,, °t
Two ahacle tree cliseases are endangering the urban tree
� population. Dutch elm disease is one of the most serious ar►d
devaetating tree diseases known. Tt is highly fatal and
,;,. eaeily spread. 6ince approximately 80% of the trees in Si:.
Pa�ul are elma �o effective control measurea must be employed
to star�n the spread of the disease. Oak Wilt is a less well
known shade tree disease that attacks oaks of all varieties.
There ia no known cure for either disease. ' � '
' The prima=y method of control is the immediate removal ��ncl
disposal of the diseased tree. St. Paul forestry crewe a.r�
unable to keep up with the volume of trees that must be r.em��ve�+
from public and private property. Therefore, it is desiral� ► �;�
. to encourage citizena to remove diseased shade trees (o��k ���►u
elm) from their property. A subsidy to private properi:y c�wner:.
of $100. per tree removed ($50. Grant-In-Aid from �he S�:�tie of
Minneaota a�d $50. in matching Conununity Development Block
Grant funda) will help promote time],y removal of diseased
tree• by private parties. � �
6. service A�coq/populatior►: ' ��
,
Citywide � '' � '
y• Statement of Objeetivess
To provide � subeidy for the removal of an estimated 1, 500
� private alw anci/or oak trees condemr►ed on private proper�y
in 1976.
8. Description of Activitiea/Servicea: �
Activitiea Agency
O• Support Serviees Division ot Parks and
Hire a Clerk I to hand7e the Reareation
aras►t-In-Aid paperwork for six �
�6� �aonth.. ', � � '
,A �
, � , ,
' ������
;.:.
8. Description of Activities/Services (continued)
Activity Agency
' p. Subsidy Division of Parks and
To provide a $100. subsidy to Recreation
private property owners for the State of Minriesota
� removal of each diseased tree..
8.1. Eliqibility Requirementas
A Grant-In-Aid may be given to a private property owner for
� the removal of the trees meeting the following criteria:
a. The tree must have been removed on or after June 1, 1975
b. The tree must have been in the City of St. Paul. '>
c. A determinatio� must have been made by the municipal tree
inspector that the tree was a hazard to the disease control
proqram.
d. Proof of payman�t for tree clisposal and removal.
9. Work Progran�a� �
Ongoing
10. Hudget:
Private Froperty Subsidy- $150,000.
Estimated 1.500 private �
elm and/or oak trees
condemned in 1976 @
$100. ,
Less
Up to 5096 Grant-In-Aid from the State of Minnesota ($75,000. )
; TOTAL CITY SUBSIDY- $75.,000.
PERSONNEL (Clerk I)- _ 3,�3 80.
' TOTAL $78,380.
11.1. Personnel:
One regular Clerk I will be hired for six (6) months to
process the G�ant-In-Aid paperwork. The total salary
($3, 380.) will be funded by Community Development Block
s_i
� Grant funds.
ll.Z. Long-ranqe Finan cial Implications:
a. Seek City funding for same level of operation.
b. Seek City funding for reduced level of operation.
o• Diovontinuo project.
. . �• , ,
�
� K � . /`.�{�����
� � 1. Pro�ect Name: Shade Tree Replacement �
r
Y. Pro�ect Nua�rs
, 3• Agency: Department of Community Services
3.1 Section: Division of Parks and Recreation
' 4. Pro�ect Manager: Gerald W. Prill , Superintendent of Parks and Recreation
5. Statement of Need:
It is anticipated that by 1976 elm tree losses will reach between 3,
000 and `"
4,000 trees per year. With present funding, the City of Saint Paul is
planting approximately 2�540 trees per year. Funding for another 1,000 trees
of mixed species is needed to maintain a one�for-one replacement rate.
6. Service Area/Population:
City-wide . -
•7. Statement of Objectives: �
a. To replace 1,000 trees removed from public property under the Shade 7ree
a � Control program.
b. To provide for the orderly transition from a street tree population
which consists of 80X elm trees to one of more diversified species by
planting 1�000 trees of mixed species.
8. Description of Activities/Services;
Activit _A��_��enc�
P. Other - Replacement of trees ��'vision of Parks and
removed under the Shade Tree Disease Recreation
Control Program.
8.1 Eligibility Requirements; �
� Not Applicab3e '
9� Work Program:
Spring planting r April 1 through May 30
Fall planting M October 1 through Nove�er 20
10. Budget:
j 1,000 trees of mixed species 2k-3" in diameter � �140.00 each
, ����. BV�� � il����•
, '
-Z� l��9 �
. ' PROPQSAL TO EST�IE3LISH A HARDSNTP FU(`!D FOR THE DUTCH ELP1 DISEA,SE COPJTROL PROGRAi•1I
IPaTR�DUC7I0fJ: The Dutch Elm disease control proqram is vital to the pro-
tection of St. Paul 's urban forest. Control efforts, how�ver, are costly.
One of the more expensive elements of the program is the removal of
diseased or dyinq Dutch Elm trees.
RESP�PlSI�ILITY FOR RE�IOVAL OF TREES: The City is responsible for the
removal of diseased trees from p�ablic propertv (parks, boulevards, City
property) . Private property oamers must remove trees from their own
property. If a private property oa�ner fails to remove an infected tree
from his property, City forestr,y crews 4ri11 remove the tree and bill
the property owner for the service.
COST OF REMOVAL: 7he average cost of the removal of a tree is $�a0.00.
t�any variables affect the cost of tree removal : the location of the
tree, its size, and the number of diseased trees on a piece of property.
Tree removal costs may reach several hundred dollars.
PAYMENT FOR THE REi40VAL OF TREES: Private property owners are billed by
the City for the removal of trees from their property. They have the
option of paying the entire bill ��rithin 90 days of the billinq date or
having the bill assessed aqainst their real estate taxes (over a p�riod
of one to ten years) . Monthly payments for the tree removal (excluding
interest on the unpaid balance of the biil ) arill not exceed �i0.00.
PROBLEM: It is recognized that this $]�.00 monthly payment may imoose
a financial hardship on some St. Paul families.
SOLUTION: A "f�ardship Fund" of $5,�OQ should be established that would be
used to eliminate the difficulty faced by eligibte individuals or families.
CRITERIA FOR ELIGISILITY:
Family Size Income Family Size Incor�e
1 �4,700 5 �8,450
2 6,250 6 9,050
3 7,050 7 9,700
4 7,800 8 or more 10,300
Attachment "A" shall be included in the income cor�putation of a famiiy.
Attachment "B" shall not be included in the incone computatfon of a family.
Unusual expenses such as losses due to fire, hurricane, flood, theft, or
costs of funerals tvill be considered as a variable affectinq income.
In the event that the payments to e1igible a�plicants would exceed the
amount allocated in the Nardshio fund, the follo4•�ing formula will be applied:
Cost of tree removal
Income
Families with tt�e hi�hest ratios of cost to incor�e shall be a��rarded c�rants
to cover the �ntire cost of the tree removal/s.
E{1FIEi, TO JIPPLY FOR fi HARDSIIIf' ��'A�;T: ,n,onl i cati ons �ay be made as soon
as a bill for tree removal is received, but in arzv case, no latPr than
nctobpr 1 of each year. Consideration e` tne apnlicatiors vrill t�e
qiven an:1 grants arrarded on or �hout �ctober T� �f eac�t vear.
The Cirector of the De;�artment of Community Services shall be responsiL�ie
for revieti•�inq all applications.
K[?N/ I/7/76
� APPENDIX A
A. Except as grovided i.n para�rapti B uE �his section, all payments �
from all sources received by ttu:� I�:;u��1 v head (even if temporarily
absent} and each additional membF>r o: the Family household who
is not a minor shall be incl.uded in tl�e Annual Income of a Family. �
Iaco*ne shall include but� not be limited ro:
(1) the gross amount, before ar�y pa_yroll deductions, of wages
and salaries, overtime pay, commissions, fees, tips and
bonuses;
(2) the net income from oper�ltion c�f a business or profe�sion '
or from rental of real ur personal property (for this
ptirpose, expenditures for hu:; i�i�:ss expansion or amortization
of capital indebtedness sh:-� i1 not be deducted to determine �
the net income from a bus�.ness) ;
(3) interest and dividends;
�
(4) the full amount of peric>di.c payments received from social
security, annuities, insurance policies, retirement funds,
. pensions, disability or deatli henefi_ts and other similar �
types of periodic receipts,
(5) payments in lieu of earnings, ;,uch as unemployment and �
disability compensation, workmen`s compensation and �
severance pay;
(b) Public Assistance. If the Public Assistance payment �
includes an amount specifically designated for shelter
and utilities which is subject to adjustment by the
Public Assistance Agency in accordance with the actual �
cost of shelter and utilities, the amount of Public
Assistance income to be included as income shall consist
of:
�
(a) the amount of the allowance or grant exclusive of the
amount specifically designated for shelter and utilities,
plus �
{bi the maximum amount which the Public Assistance Agency could
in fact allow for the Family for shelter and utilities; �
, _._._._ _�____.__.._____; ,
--------- -----__--- --
� _ ___ __._.._
(c) periodic and determinable allowances, such as alimony and
child support payments, and regular contributions or gifts
� received from persons not residing in the dwelling;
(d) all regular pay, special pay and allowances of a member of
� the Armed Forces (whether or not living in the dwelling)
who is head o£ the Family or spouse.
f •
° � APPENDIX B
.
B. The following items shall not be considered as income;
( (1) casual, sporadic or irregular gifts;
� (2) amounts which are specifically for or in reimbursement of
the cost of inedical expenses;
(3) lump-sum additions to Family assets, such as inheritances,
� insurance payments (including payments under health and
accident insurance and workmen's compensation) , capital
gains and settlement for personal or property losses;
� (refer to section 1. , B. regarding assets over $5,000) ;
(4) amounts of educational scholarships paid directly to the
student or to the educational institution, and amount
� paid by the Government to a veteran for use in meeting
the costs of tuition, books, fees, and equipment. Any
amounts of such scholarships, or payments to veterans,
� not used for the above purposes but which are available
for subsistence are to be included in income;
� (5) the special pay to a serviceman head of a Family away from
home and exposed to hostile fire;
� (6) Relocation payments made pursuant to Title II of the
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition
Policies Act of 1970,
� (7) foster child care payments;
(8) the value of coupon allotments for the purchase of food
pursuant to the Food Stamp Act of 1964 which is in excess
� of the amount actually charged the eligible household;
�
�
�
� � � a � ��4
Proposed Procedure for Assessment Pro ram Relating to Removal of
D�seased Trees
1 . A tree located on private property is identified by City tree in-
spectors as a diseased tree.
2. The property owner is notified by the City of Saint Paul that the
diseased tree must be removed within ten (10) days after receipt of
the notice.
3. A tree inspector returns to determine whether the diseased tree
has been removed.
4. If the property owner fails to remove the diseased tree a second
notice is sent informing the owner that the City Forester will re-
move the tree and bill the owner for the cost of removal (See
proposed letter attached) .
5. The diseased tree is removed by City crews from the private property.
6. A registered bill is sent to the private property owner as soon after
removal as possible.
7. Tree removal costs (all or any portion) can be paid immediately, or
anytime up to October 1 of the same year withou interest.
8. Tree removal costs unpaid on October 1 will be certified and sent
to the City Council for ratification of assessment of the amount
against the owner's real estate taxes.
9. The cost for tree removal will be placed on the owner's real estate
tax statement according to these guidelines:
a. The amount of the bill determines the length of time over
which the bill will be paid. The Assessment Program is based
on a maximum payment of $10 per month;
b. The payment will be paid in equal amount (plus 6� interest on
the unpaid balance) over a period of one to ten years;
c. The payment schedule will be as follows:
(1 ) Bills up to and including $120 will be assessed against
the following year's real estate taxes,
(2) Bills over $120 and up to and including $600 wi17 be
assessed in equal payments (plus interest) over five years'
reai estate taxes, and
(3) Biils over $600 will be billed in equal amounts (plus
interest) over ten years ' real estate taxes.
JB:cm
1/7/76
FIRST NOTICE
T0: POSITIVE DUTCH ELM DISEASE Date:
Tree Tag #
The City of Saint Paul is carrying out a program for the control of
Dutch Eim disease. In order to perform this service for the general
good of the city, it is necessary to locate and require elimination of
possible sources of the disease, not only on public property, but on
private property as well . When informed of the importance of these
sanitation measures, the residents of St. Paul are proving most cooperative
in this effort. This is indicated by the following regulations:
CITY ORDINANCE N0. 13614 authorizes the City Forester to make in-
spection on private property for elm disease, and also to serve
notice upon the owner to dispose of any infected trees, or dead or
dying trees, or parts of a tree which may serve as a breeding
place for elm bark beetles. It also specifies that he may cause
this to be done at the owner's expense if the owner fails to
carry out the provisions of this notice.
Please take notice that the elm tree(s) located on the described prop-
erty has (have) been inspected and tagged as indicated below:
LOCATION:
After laboratory analysis, found to be infected with Dutch Elm disease
fungus. Diseased tree(s) must be removed and wood and brush destroyed,
and all visible bark removed from stump.
Said tree(s) or parts thereof are dead or dying and serve as a breed-
ing place for the bark beetles which carry and transmit Dutch Elm
disease. Dead elm tree must be removed and wood and brush destroyed
and bark removed from stump.
Elm logs or piles of cut elm wood or brush must be stripped of all
bark, or destroyed entirely, because they serve as a breeding place
for the bark beetle.
Stumps must be stripped of all bark to eliminate breeding place for
bark beetle.
You, as owner, are required to dispose of this material within ten (10)
days after receipt of this notice.
Lloyd A. Burkholder
Asst. Supt. of Par�cs
' SECOND NOTICE
CERTIFIED MAIL
DATE: DATES OF PREVIOUS NOTICES:
T0: LOCATIQN:
Our records indicate that, as property owner of the land indicated above,
you have failed to comply with City Ordinance Number 13614 regarding the
disposal of elm trees which are dead, dying or found to be infested with
Dutch Elm disease fungus, elm logs, elm brush, and/or elm stumps. This
material has been condemned as a public nuisance by the City Councii and
given to the City Forester for appropriate action.
City Ordinance Number 13614 also specifies that the City Forester may
cause the disposal nf this material at the owner's expense if the owner
fails to carry out the provisions of this Ordinance.
The City Forester will schedule the necessary work to remove condemned
materials from your pronerty in the near future. You will be required
to pay for the removal of this material .
Removal costs may be paid in either of the following ways:
1 . You may pay any portion of or the entire bill within 90 days of the
billing date; or
2. The removal costs will be assessed against your real estate taxes
according to the following payment schedule:
a. Bills of $120 or less will be assessed against the following
year's real estate taxes,
b. Bills between $120 and $600 will be assessed in equal payments
(plus 6% interest on the unpaid balance) over five years' real
estate taxes, and
c. Bills over $600 will be billed in equal amounts (plus interest)
over 10 years' real estate taxes.
If you have any questions, please contact our office at 488-7291 .
Lloyd Burkholder
Asst. Supt. of Parks