Laserfiche WebLink
-2- <br />The af�ect of the above bi 11 i ng procedure waul d be to 3o�ver the herz�e owners <br />c�s� from �120 to $80.00. Such a proced:�re would cost the ci�y $10 per private <br />tree or, approximately �4,000.00 as opposed ta the �8,900.Q0 that is now being <br />speni, based on an estimate of 400 private trees. I� can be assumed that this <br />nur�ber could double agazn next year, based on the G00 tree estirnate. Sl�ould <br />ti�e cpunei 1 want to gi ve the ci ti zen the maxi �um bene�F� t of the potenii a� state <br />funds, i� �ould cost the city $b0 per tree, to be matched by $60 af state maney, <br />plus the iRSpec�ion cost of $�0 ar, $80.U0 per tree. Shis, taken over the 4Q0 <br />estimated priva`�e trees that we are going to find this year, would result in �the <br />expenditure of $32,000.00. <br />This $3�,Q�0 in addition to the estimated �14,0�0 the c7ty wo�1d have to expend <br />this year for removal of c�ty owned trees. Toge�her these expenses wauld, <br />- _ .;:. �here€are, :be :apAr.o�chi.ng -- ��1,000:00 _ .-: -.. =_: : <br />_ -: _ _ <br />REGOM�IEPJDED ACl'IDfd: A motion approving a pol i cy governing the bi 1 i i ng vf <br />diseased trees fQr removal an private praperties. The <br />� policy beinc� that the home owrier shall be 6illed for <br />50% of th� contractor's cost :for removal o� a tree, <br />(�h� other 50� being a�sumed by matching state and cTty <br />funds), p2u$ a$20.�fl inspection fee per tree, �vith a <br />maximum of $1.00.00 per gr^ou� of trees being billed. <br />c <br />