Mm-hmm. 2467 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001
But it was in the back of my mind and it got beyond me, although I knew that Councilman Rizzo had done a very good job at asking questions about it and I knew that you had given an answer. Subsequent to that, I have received a couple letters about this particular issue, which then, when I received those letters, reminded me that something had come up about this issue, but I was not crystal-clear on it at that particular time.
I need to get a better understanding and also remove any confusion, which I may be the only person confused about this, the distinction between the five volunteer coordinators, which, I know, for the most part, as soon as we pass this budget, I think that will be resolved, but those people are not the same as these other staff at the Environmental Education Centers.
And so the solving of the volunteer-coordinator problem has nothing to 2468 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 do with environmental objection; is that correct?
All right. Can you go back for a moment to how many Environmental Education Centers are we talking about, how many workers, what do they do, and what does it mean for them not to be funded?
Okay, I'm going to ask Mark Focht, the Project Administrator, to assist in that question, Councilman.
Good morning. Mark Focht, Program Administrator, Natural Land Restoration and Environmental Education Program. Councilman, there are three Environmental Education Centers in the Park: Cobbs Creek, Wissahickon, and Pennypack. Currently, there are five environmental-educator positions funded through the program.
Correct, five positions. There are two environmental educators currently based at Wissahickon, two based at Cobbs Creek, and one based at Pennypack. To complement, 2469 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 there's one City-funded environmental educator at Pennypack also.
The positions all report to the director, the Park's director of Environmental Education and myself, jointly
The Director of Environmental Education is City funded; my position is grant-funded.
All right. I was left with the impression from somewhere in the testimony that there were upwards of eight or nine positions in question, not five.
Correct. There are nine positions in question. We have the five environmental educators, then there are four administrative assistants, one at each of the centers -- in Pennypack, Wissahickon, and Cobbs; and one administrative assistant for the Environmental Education Division. Those four positions are all grant-funded. 2470 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001
All right. So it's not just five positions we're talking about; there are actually nine positions we're talking about.
There's nine positions in the Environmental Education Division that are currently funded by the grant, correct.
Okay. Now, let me just -- let's do a little bit of the history here. The original proposal was to have these centers -- let me step back for a second. These centers existed before the William Penn Grant; is that correct?
Two of them did -- Pennypack and the Wissahickon -- and the Cobbs Creek Center has been opened -- was just opened that past fall.
All right, but Cobbs Creek didn't open soley as a result of the William Penn Grant, right?
Correct, correct. 2471 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001
Okay. So I'm not discounting at all the support from the William Peen Foundation for Cobbs Creek, but Cobbs Creek pretty much, for all intents and purposes, was going to happen?
Right? Okay. All right, so we have these three centers. The William Penn Grant comes along, we then fund these new positions.
And we funded these positions because we thought that environmental education was important?
And what was the proposal at the time of the grant -- I mean, I understand that things often become even more important when you have grant funding for them, but you don't necessarily expect them to then go away, so you get them started with the grant, and then you expect to continue the program -- I mean, we've had this back and forth and kind of the up and down with the Rangers Program, for instance but, I mean, 2472 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 no one thought that the rangers were going to be a kind of a one-time thing or a five-year thing or a ten-year thing, however long it's been, and then it would just go away. I mean, generally, you try to keep the good ideas, right? So what was the original proposal to have these environmental educators or the admin. assistants stay in their positions?
Our approach to this, Councilman, from the inception of the grant, has been to try and sustain the positions through a combination of public and private funding. And as part of that, in the recent application to the William Peen Foundation for what we consider the next phase of the program, we requested funding from William Penn to continue the positions. We also requested funding in the Park's FY '03 operating budget for three environmental educator positions.
Mm-hmm. Sure. The William Penn Foundation, in 2473 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 February, decided not to continue the funding of the environmental educators; that would be the nine positions that we spoke of earlier.
And in addition, on the City side, we were not able to successfully parlay those into our FY '03 Operating Budget.
Back at the time of the start of the grant, was the concept here that over the five years, we would try to figure out a way to have these people transitioned from grant-funded positions to full-time public-employee positions? I mean, was that a part of the strategy?
Yes, I think the strategy was that once the program started, we would, you know, make every attempt to keep them in place from a number of different partnerships and funding sources. And we're still hopeful, here in March, that to some extent, that will continue. I think we've learned a lot since we've -- since we've began this program in finding folks who can support the program in a number of 2474 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 ways and other organizations. And on February 27th at my operating testimony, I did speak to some of the initiatives that we have underway.
Well, I read through that. I guess what I'm not so clear on -- and, again, Councilman Rizzo raised the question at that time. He said back then -- naturally, this is February -- "June 30th is coming."
We're now, you know, three weeks later, I think, and June is still coming.
What is the game plan for -- I mean, let me -- I mean, in the worst-case scenario, where nothing happens and positions go away, what happens to environmental education at those locations? Let's start with that scenario first.
At Pennypack Environmental Center, there is a City-funded staff position, a nature specialist, who is at that facility so that facility would remain open and continue to offer programs to a lesser extent than it does now with 2475 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 its staffing levels, but it would remain open and offer programs. Cobbs Creek --
Well, I understand that and -- okay, you tell me what's going on at each place, I'm sorry.
Cobbs Creek has staffing through the nonprofit tenant organizers of the building; the Cobbs Creek Community Environmental Education Center, Inc. would continue to offer programming with their own staffs through the center as a lessee.
And at the Wissahickon Environmental Center, there's been some discussion of the Environmental Education Division's director, Debbie Carr, who used to work out of the Wissahickon Center, moving back to the Wissahickon Center in order to offer programming out of that facility.
She's currently in the Case 2476 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 Building.
Well, let me ask this question; I mean, you alluded to it when you started. I mean, whatever their current staffing levels are at the various centers, Cobbs Creek basically loses three people, the Pennypack loses two, the Wissahickon loses three. I mean, how do they provide the level of service from those particular centers with three fewer people?
Well, then, I guess, from a Park perspective or a City perspective, is environmental education important?
From the Park's perspective, I can answer the question as, yes, I'm very committed to environmental education. I think what you have here is a series of events which have unfolded recently that has placed the Park Commission's ability to continue at the same level as a real challenge. As we were nearing the completion of the five-year grant, we, as Mr. Focht had indicated, had a certain level of expectation that the William Penn Foundation would 2477 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 in fact continue to fund, among other initiatives of the original grant, environmental education. When they chose not to -- and, again, we were informed of that in February -- we have strategized as to how we can continue to meet our goal of environmental education. Last year, we served 53,000 people through environmental- education outreach programs and educational programs that this expanded staff has been providing. We've always had a commitment to environmental education, as we think that it's, in the long run, going to help improve the Park. Some of the strategies that I alluded to on February 27th, none of which I can sit here this morning, Councilman, and say that they will absolutely occur, and we are mindful of the deadline, and we are working expeditiously -- include partnershipping with the Department of Conservation and Natural Resource, who had indicated in a number of ways -- most recently on March 6th, signing a memorandum of understanding in partnership with the U.S. Department of Forestry that they will commit resources to Philadelphia in environmental education. 2478 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 So it is examples like this, funding support from the recently-established Fairmount Park Commission Conservancy, which has identified environmental education as one of their primary goals. So we have a number of sort of irons in the fire. As I said on February 27th, my goal is to maintain at least the level of commitment of 53,000 people for FY '03, and that's what I keep my eyes on. And the full funding of the Park Ranger Program as an example, many of our rangers have been trained in conservation and in environmental education, so I see a role for our Park Ranger Program. So it's most likely going to come down to a series of programs and partnerships that will provide the ongoing commitment. It's not unreasonable and certainly the William Penn Foundation can speak for themselves, but it's not unreasonable to expect that they won't receive requests for funding of environmental education in Fairmount Park either directly from Fairmount Park or from some of the Friends groups as well. 2479 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001
Right. Well, I understand that and, I mean, obviously, the Foundation has a process that they go through. I guess what I'm trying to understand is -- I mean, by your own testimony back on the 27th, you indicated that these people were hired with a full understanding that this grant was for a five-year period. Is this the total number of people who were brought on at the time of the grant, the nine people?
Councilman, are you speaking specifically about environmental education?
They were brought in -- they were brought on board over a series of almost a year and a half, as we built the program.
I guess what I'm trying to figure out is, again, knowing that there was a five-year grant and knowing that you cannot count, no matter how well the program is going on, extensions of funding, was there an attempt over that five-year period of time to transition some of these people from grant-funded positions to City-funded positions such that -- 2480 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 I mean, maybe the math just kind of works out this way, but it's nine positions, it's a five-year grant. If you brought along two people every year transitioned from grant funded status to City-funded status, all of these people would be working as City employees by the start of the next fiscal year, and as the grant ends, you still have nine people on the payroll. Was that ever done? Or attempted? Obviously, it wasn't done. I mean, I understand why you're not getting nine people on the payroll in your FY '03 budget. I mean, as -- I mean, I tease him often but, I mean, as difficult as Rob Dubow can be, I mean, I'd understand why he wouldn't approve nine people in one fiscal year for Fairmount Park. I mean, nobody's going to do that. But I think to some extent, if you nickel and dime them every year or so with two people here or one person there or something, I mean, he might not even notice.
My name is Paul Nice, Deputy Director. Our primary focus was on the volunteer coordinators trying to get those hired over the 2481 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 last few years. But as little as three years ago, and it could have been four even, we hired a consultant through the grant to look at the possibility of making the Environmental Centers self-sustaining so we could continue with, as we brought those people on, after the end of the grant, to continue providing, you know, those programs through self-staining educational programs, charging some minimal fees and applying for grants and doing that. We spent quite a bit of time with the consultant and we have a report that they've produced and --
Well, it got into basically building the other -- well, part of it was building the other environmental centers and how much revenue the total all these centers could generate in charging for the programs and --
That did not happen, no, sir. But we did spend a lot of time looking at and 2482 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 trying to explore that aspect first. And the last thing we've done is this last budget, knowing that there could be a possibility of losing the grant funding, 'cause we hadn't requested an extension, was to try and get some of the positions hired for '03, and that request, as the director has explained, was not --
How many volunteer coordinators were there ever? What was the total number of volunteer coordinators that ever existed? Was it this five?
Okay, and that just happened this year, right? Are we funding the five this year for the first time, or were they funded last year?
Well, the testimony earlier was that you've spent your time over the past few years trying to get the five on. Are you 2483 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 saying that in the past years, you were not successful and that for this upcoming budget, this is the result of that multi-year effort?
All right. So your real problem is, you were trying to get the five at the same time that people were talking about the nine, and there was no way in the world that you were going to get fourteen, so then you had to apparently make a strategic decision of which group is -- I don't want to say "more important," but, I mean, you had to make a priority decision about these groups. You chose volunteer coordinators; is that right?
And also, there are actually staff positions funded by the grant, and 21 ideally, we would want to institutionalize all 23. 22 So it wasn't just 14; we are looking at 23, 23 prioritized the 5 volunteer coordinators, and took several cycles to achieve that funding.
Well, of the 23, how 2484 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 many actually have, or will, transition from grant-funded positions to public positions?
Out of 23. The William Penn Foundation will fund 9 others, 9 of the 23 positions for the next fiscal year, and then the 9 environmental-education positions that we're talking about today are the ones we do not have funding for. That totals 23.
The other 9 are 4 field supervisors that support the volunteer coordinators, a natural land restoration manager and project coordinator, 2 positions that run all of our contract restoration projects, and --
Now, is this being funded through Now Reap or through the Conservancy? 'cause, again, I was under the impression that June 30th --
It's money from the William Penn Foundation through the Conservancy to fund Now 2485 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 Reap.
All right. So the bottom line of all of this is, as we speak at least, there is no certainty with regard to the nine positions at the three Environmental Education Centers.
And between now and the end of the fiscal year, you're seeking, through various partnerships, to see how you're going to be able to serve, in essence, the same number of people that you're currently serving in environmental education, notwithstanding the fact that you might be a total of nine positions down.
When do you think you'll have an answer to what the future's going to be?
Middle to the end of 2486 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 May, all right. And you're going to keep the various centers informed and updated as to what's going on?
Okay. I appreciate your testimony and thank you very much.
Thank you very much. Are there any further questions? (No further questions.)
I'm sorry, I'm sorry. I do have one last question. I apologize. The tree removal, there still seems to be a lingering commitment at some level by some of the staff to send letters to constituents after they've made a request to have a tree removed, or they believe that a tree is either diseased, dead, or dying. I still get copies of letters that, without quoting them verbatim, basically say, We came out, we looked at your tree. Yes, your tree 2487 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 is dead. We will put it on a list, but it would either quicker or easier for you to take it down yourself, but we'll still put it on the list if you want us to. I mean, that's kind of a very lose translation of what those letters say.
Now, I mean, we've -- notwithstanding what some people say or think, and I will say it, including your friend Mr. Trentonberg (ph), we actually do work together on a variety of issues, and this was one of them, restoring the responsibility with funding to the Fairmount Park for street-tree maintenance and removal. And, obviously, there's more of it that can now be done because of additional funds that have been made available. Even prior to the creation of NTI. I'm well aware that the demand will always, in the short term here, because of the backlog, outstrip available resources. On the other hand, we have more money than we've ever had available, and so I guess I have a two-part question: 2488 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 One, why do we keep sending those letters? Two, does anyone ever get a letter that actually says, Your tree is dead and we're going to remove it on "X-Y-Z" date because we actually have the money to do it? Why do we keep telling people, You can go on the list, but the easiest thing to do is to take care of it yourself?
Well, I appreciate the fact that you're paraphrasing from those letters.
I know we work very closely together, Councilman with your office and with really all of the Council District and large offices. And street trees, particularly the removal of trees, is a high priority with the City Council, and I think the Administration has responded to that, as you've indicated. And I testified again on February 27th that it would appear that we have about a two-year backlog, given our resources, of removing trees, but those that we consider to be dead and dangerous trees. So at a minimum, we could tell a resident that it could take as long as two years to remove 2489 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 your tree. Sometimes that's a pretty difficult thing for a resident to hear, you know, so it's -- we try our best to, you know, break it to them softly, if you will. The problem is -- and you're very aware of this -- it's not a static list.
We may discover a tree, you know, next month, quite frankly, that should be done immediately, which means that a tree, you know, that is not as serious, you know, will have to wait.
I mean, there's dead and then there's dead and then there's significantly dangerous.
You're absolutely right. And we hope that towards the end of that two-year period, we're removing trees that their roots have uplifted the sidewalk and are causing, you know, significant hazardous conditions, tripping hazards. But yet our priority is not that; our priority is still the dead one. So, look, I will investigate the specific language of these letters. We've gone 2490 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 through an evolution of what we should say and --
You know, I don't want to be ambiguous. We do -- but yet it's difficult sometimes to be specific, and sometimes the truth is inflammatory to a resident who says, I'm going to have to wait months before anyone shows up, 9 and this is a dead tree. 10 We put that language in there that, you 11 know, if they -- if they wish to take action 12 themselves -- and, again, I don't know the exact 13 wording, but, you know, if they wish to take action 14 by hiring a qualified contractor, we will certainly 15 assist them in that matter. 16 When we do know that a tree is on a 17 list, let's say, again, and all District Council 18 folks send us their list, we will them, This tree 19 is scheduled for Fiscal '03. And as an example, we 20 try to be specific perhaps to what quarter in that 21 fiscal year. 22
So when a new one comes 24 in, it's really difficult, but I will personally look at the language going out in these letters. 2491 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001
And I would be glad to work with you on that. I just think that, one, whatever we say in the letters, we should acknowledge ultimately that whether it was the old law, the new law or any other law, we have the responsibility.
Mm-hmm. What's the term, we have "exclusive" responsibility.
Right. Second, as I indicated and you well know, one, I'm not an arborist, but I've had a little experience with trees over the years. I mean, some trees, yes, they are dead and may not be a particular danger; others are.
And in a somewhat similar fashion to the system that L&I tries to utilize again, I mean, there's a dangerous building, there is an imminently dangerous building, and then there's just kind of your raggedy, ugly building, but it's not going anywhere.
I think our number- 2492 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 one priority certainly needs to be on trees that are a danger to the health, safety, and welfare of people, that can fall on somebody, fall on a house, fall on a car coming down the street. And I don't know if the arborists can make distinctions between and among those kinds of trees. But I think ultimately, if someone goes out and makes a determination that this tree is not only dead, but it is a serious danger to someone, we've got to deal with that.
Councilman, no question. If need be, if it's that imminent, our own Fairmount Park arborist will take action within a 24-hour period.
I just want to make sure that we're conveying accurate information to people.
And leaving them with the impression -- I wrote to these people, they now tell me that I have a dead tree in front of me. I understand it's harsh information, and sometimes we all have to deliver not-so-pleasant information, we don't always get to be in the 2493 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 happy-new business.
Because sometimes it is going to take a while. And if ultimately the person decides to do something else, obviously, that's their business. But also I don't want to leave them with the impression that their government has somehow abandoned them. They've got this monstrous thing in front of their house and that the next time the wind blows, it's going to come crashing through their living room or bedroom window.
Mm-hmm. Well, two works quick responses. One, our arborists are all certified by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and can make determinations as to the seriousness of the deterioration of that tree, and they have the liberty to modify the list and reorganize priorities. That's number one.
And, number two, let me work on a draft of a letter, and I will send it for your review and see if you can wordsmith something that we can both feel more comfortable with. 2494 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001
Okay, all right. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. And I am absolutely finished.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Likewise, Mr. Mifflin, that is one of the toughest letters that I have to forward to my constituents because it is the most vague. They don't have a clue sometimes what that means. And there's some people I don't even send it to; I just rework the response because I know they're going to go nuts when they see that they've been put on the list. I'm glad we're not plumbers and telling people, you know, you're on the list. So they understand that. But I want to go back. I took some notes and these may not be in the order that they should be presented, but after coming from the utility industry, I think also what we need to do -- and I believe the Public Utility Commission 2495 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 and Fairmount Park Commission, if PECO Energy or a utility company throughout the Commonwealth prunes, trims trees on a particular electric circuit and that tree dies, that's the responsibility of the utility company; who touches it last is responsible for its removal in the event it dies. We're all aware of that, right?
You're aware of it. I'd like to believe that that's the existing policy, but I think this body may benefit from asking PECO Energy Company to come down and testify as to their existing policy.
Well, I think really they should be brought before the Fairmount Park Commission since it's the responsibility of Fairmount Park to trim the trees.
And if you're trimming trees that -- if they're removing trees that they're responsible for because they had some direct or indirect involvement in the death of that tree, that they should be brought into the Commission and, on the record, state what their responsibility is, and also have the Law Department 2496 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 do some research on exactly who touches it last, who touches it last, trims it last, that's the responsible party to remove it. That was a policy at one time.
And I would hope that we're holding their feet to the fire on that.
We try to do our best. I'll say to you, I'll testify this morning that if we can determine a direct cause and effect between what PECO Energy Company would have most recently performed on a tree and its immediate demise, I feel fairly comfortable that PECO Energy Company would take responsibility for that tree.
And, again, not being -- I want to be very, very objective here. Some of the work that I have seen lately with the utility companies -- and I don't want to single out PECO. Exelon, PP&L -- they are getting away with more today, and I don't know whether I stated this before, it's a lack of oversight, it's a lack of supervision, but their job, those contractors are basically said, Go in there and do what you can do, 2497 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 take as much out as you can, because it saves the company money because they don't have to go back on their cycle.
And I believe they're getting away with a little more than they should be getting away with because, as you know, down in South Philadelphia -- was it Queen Village?
And I can't imagine any Fairmount Park oversight allowing that. It's tough to go back and put the limbs back after they've been cut, but to see the pictures and to visit that personally, it's --
And I think you'll agree that that should never have occurred.
I concur that it should not have, and it was brought to their attention.
Now, I want to go back to step two. We take down the tree. Would 2498 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 you, for the record, so I understand, what are we doing with the stumps now?
When we take down the tree through our contractual services, which comes to about 98 percent of the street-tree removal, the contractor -- Phase 2 or Phase 3, depending upon the size of the tree -- is responsible for removing the stump. So the 4,000 trees that we're predicting that we're removing annually will include the removal of the stump.
All right. Now I want to hear about your green plan. If you take a tree out and you remove the stump, are we ever going to see -- is there anywhere in the plan -- are we ever going to see a tree there again and the right specie?
I can certainly answer the second part more easily than I can the first part of that question. With regards to the appropriate specie, you know, our research and our information today is much greater than it was 10 or to years ago, and I think the quick answer to that is yes, we will spend a great deal of research on this field most 2499 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 recently, and we think we have the right type of tree and specie of tree that will be replaced. And, you know, here's where it gets a little complicated, not terribly. With the money that we have available to us to remove the 4,000 trees through the Managing Director's Office, there is not a requirement today to replace those trees. So, in fact, if a tree is removed at, you know, 1234 Jump Street, we are not required to replace a tree in that particular location because with the limited funding, our approach is to remove the dead and dangerous trees. Let's eliminate the liability. It's a five-year program. And in the back end of the five-year program is a much more aggressive tree-planting program. If we remove a tree through our Capital Budget -- and we remove a couple hundred years per year in Capital Budget -- we are required to replace each and every one of those trees. If we remove 250 trees, we replace 250 trees. We do it at a maximum, if you will, within the same zip code. It is often not physically possible to replace a tree at the same 2500 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 address that we have removed the tree, 'cause, you know, people have put in driveways, they have modified their sidewalk, and it's just not possible to do it. So we try to do it at the same location, try to do it at the next-door neighbor, we try to do it the third on the block face of that tree removal, and then lastly, we do it the same zip code.
You have a tree 123 Jump Street and the constituent calls my office and says, Look, you took out the tree, removed the stump, I want a tree
You said at the end, that's five years away so I don't think we want to be in a situation where in five years, we're going out there and aggressively removing trees and don't at least see some replacement other than the Capital Budget trees.
Right. We do have other tree-planting initiatives with other -- I'm always 2501 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 talking about partnerships, but with groups like the Pennsylvania Horticultural Society and other -- they have their Tree Tenders Organizations who are planting trees. So we have reached out to other organizations to assist us in tree-planting. I previously mentioned, I think, in response to Councilman Nutter this agreement that we originally executed with the U.S. Forest Service. Part of their agreement is to assist in, as they call it, their "Re-Leafing Programs," and so I think we're going to see street-tree plantings through the Forest Service as well. So again, Councilman, you know, we're spending our money up front to remove trees. I have to tell you, in some locations people really, because they've had a bad experience with a tree, we have a tough time convincing them that they should replant.
Well, I just want to nail you down here to the point where -- there are people -- let's talk about that universe that maybe wants a tree. You take one tree out in front of 123.
Right. 2502 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001
And a person wants a new tree where the old one was, exact same --
They go to the top of the list for tree-planting, but that could take as long as months to two years. 7
The final question, 8 and I think it would be helpful if you would put 9 this on the record. We get lots of calls that are 10 basically requests for services that aren't what 11 you do. We get requests for trees that are on 12 private property. 13
We get a call from a 15 constituent that says, I have a tree in my 16 backyard, they hear about this tree-trimming. 17 Could you, for the record, please explain what you 18 do and what you don't do? because I believe this is being televised today so that people can understand that if a tree is on their property, but also, I would appreciate you talking about that dangerous tree that L&I involves itself with that will send a crew out to remove it and then bill the property owner. So if you could just briefly explain the 2503 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 process.
The Fairmount Park Commission's authority is defined by the public right-of-way, and most of those trees are between the sidewalk and the curb. On occasion, we have trees that are planted behind the sidewalk, but still within that anywhere from to, I think, as 9 15-foot right-of-way. That is the extent of our 10 authority. So unless it is within that right-of- way, we really do not have the authority to go on to private property. We get, as your office does, if you can only imagine timesing [sic] that by another 16, we get requests from elected City Council officials routinely for backyard, alleyway, side yard, abandoned property. We will do our best to determine the owner of that property. If it is City-owned property -- sometimes the City has acquired the property through all of the mechanisms, you know, which the City has available for acquiring property. Now, with the NTI initiative, and there's a crew of arborists who are Fairmount Park Commission employees, funded through the Managing 2504 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 Director's Office, we're now assigning them to remove these trees and at least remove the danger, if not the entire tree, and take appropriate action on City-owned property. If, in fact, it's privately-owned property, we refer it to the Department of Licenses and Inspections, who have used the same contractors we do on the requirements contracts, and they will take appropriate action in removing the danger, and then do what they normally do with recovering costs for that service. I mean, their first attempt is to get the homeowner to take action as well. And the same is true for alleyways. Alleyways are a joint responsibility of the abutting property owner. So it's pretty clear that our responsibility right now ends now at the public right-of-way.
We've been talking about removals. If there's a street tree that's overhanging a property and has some big limbs, can we request a specific-location street tree not to be removed but at least trimmed if it's healthy?
Is it in the public 2505 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 right-of-way? Yes.
So in other words, it's not one or -- you can specifically do a request --
-- that asks for a tree to be cut back and not removed.
You can, yes. Our estimates for '03 is that we will prune approximately 14,000 street trees. Now, before the additional money coming through the Managing Director's Office, we were doing about 6700 trees a year. So our ability to prune trees has more than doubled, so we have a much better response. We prefer not to go and respond to one address. When we get the requests, we make the inspection, and then we attempt to do the entire block face.
I'd be interested to know -- and if you don't know, you can let me know -- what's the specie of the tree that we're zooming in on here? What kind of a tree are we talking about for -- 2506 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001
We have lots of favorites, not one particular tree. It really depends upon, you know, the location, a broad boulevard or avenue --
Just let me know so if anyone ever asks the question, I'll be prepared to answer that.
We can do better. We can send you a list of recommended street trees.
And I would appreciate you following up with the utility (indiscernible) level --
-- to find out exactly what their responsibility in all of this is because some of the aggressive pruning that I have seen to me has contributed to the demise of some of our street trees.
As long as it doesn't hurt my dividend. Just kidding. Thank you, Bill.
Mr. Mifflin, I 2507 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001 would like the record to be crystal-clear. At one time, we hear that trees will be removed from alleyways, and I think I just heard you say that they will not. I thought that under the NTI Program, we were going to be removing alley trees.
Council President, I did say that. I am not personally familiar with the details of what NTI will do with alleyway trees, so I may have, you know, misspoken.
But I thought that under NTI, that they would be removing alley trees. Are they or are they not; does anybody know?
Councilwoman, I will have to get back to you with that answer. I'm personally not familiar with their position on alleyway trees.
Certainly. 2508 3/18/02 - CONT'D OPERATING BUDGET TESTIMONY - 020001