Classics
The following article has been selected because it is deemed very important to the arboricultural profession and deserves special recognition. It has appeared in a previous Seminar and because of this it is not eligible for earning certification credits; there is no test at the end of this article.
Tree Advisory Boards
By Gordon Mann
Focused public support for a municipal tree maintenance program can be channeled through a tree advisory board, advocacy group, commission, non-profit organization, or community support group depending on the desires and support of the community. This is a group of volunteers who may establish the policies and make the recommendations that a community and forestry department can follow. The board is most effective with some agency support such as a board of supervisors, an elected council or mayor, a park and recreation commissioner, a planning commissioner or someone other than staff to serve as the supporter of the urban forest. Some latitude and responsibility may have to be relinquished by the City Council.
The Challenge
Through my personal experience, communications with other municipal arborists, and observing programs that have prospered and faltered, the following observations may help a staff person consider their perspective during the formation, direction for the tree board, and scope of duties.
Many professional municipal arborists have tried really hard to push their programs through a city or county structure. What usually happens is the staff person is so far down the decision-making chain from the City Manager's vision and the City Council's attention that they rarely get the opportunity for a personal presentation of their ideas. Instead, their ideas are presented by a higher position in their department with 2 to 20 other ideas from their department. The passion and details are too often left out in the need for brevity and the presenter’s lack of knowledge. The great ideas are lost in comparison to the other issues and presentations of all the other items on the agenda. The worst tragedy of this scenario is that the decision makers never see all the options to decide among because they are presented by department heads working to balance the needs of the entire department.
The arborist has the proper perspective and wants the best for the community. However, the information usually doesn’t get into a decision maker’s hands in the right format for the desired outcome. In these situations, a citizen's tree advisory board may bring the program into proper context and take the program to the next level. A quality, well-facilitated board will have the ears and eyes of the elected officials. They may interact with these officials privately for cards, golf, lunch, or business. They know how to present an idea to their colleague that will get their attention. Most of all, they want to speak for the trees.
Tree Advisory Board Responsibilities
Once a tree advisory board is established, attention can be given to consider the following ideas as appropriate:
Staff Responsibilities
In the public forum, the arborist may be able to step back from some of the finger pointing because the tree board has put forward the desired activities and goals. The arborist can answer questions about the feasibility of the recommendations or discussions without being the focal point of the discussion. With a board, the arborist gains a sounding panel to test ideas, review presentations for clarity and understanding, and gain increased public support for trees.
Tree Advisory Board Members
Why do people invest their time in service to their community? Although many give of themselves in the name of service, most have a pet peeve, a project, an issue, or a “want” to change, and they invest their time and energy to reach an outcome to resolve their concern. As more community members realize the value of trees and that trees are infrastructure, the greater the community support will be. As people see value, they respond with support. Staff’s role should be to find these people and partner with them to make sure staff’s needs are compatible with their needs.
Additional support can be gained when tree care professionals in the community participate and support a raised level of awareness about the value of trees and the importance of proper care in growing large trees for maximum community benefits.
In defense of a worried staff person, there have been times when the tree board went after a staff member for a change or replacement. My observations are that these have been the minority. During my sometimes limited review of the circumstances, I found the staff person could have done something differently to change the course of the conflict. The primary action staff can take is to meet with the board or a board member that may not be clear on the process, goals, challenges, and biggest needs of the staff person. For example, a board member is angry because not enough is getting done, yet the existing budget doesn’t permit more to be done. The staff member needs to explain to the board member that more could be done if there were more resources. Sometimes, by working together, resources can be shifted without a budget increase.
This is the best place for some philosophic interjection – we have to realize there are those things we can change and have control over, while there are also those things that we have little to no control over, and have to react to. Many issues in a community are because of control. Someone else has it, someone else wants it, or someone did not share it. When the issue comes down to how a community is going to be regulated, trees, water, taxes, building rules, zoning, to name a few, someone is going to stand up against rules they feel are compromising their rights. The pathway to public acceptance is to find ways to show that the direction the staff is headed, aligns with most objectives and does not negatively impact or affect the majority of citizens. A tree board can help show the minimal impact of what is proposed. Again, if the right people are serving, they know who and how to talk, and help avoid or minimize a public outcry.
Summary
I am obviously in favor of community involvement. My experience in Redwood City and at the Sacramento Tree Foundation showed me the passion residents can have on an issue. I saw first-hand the power of community consensus in driving forward with things that people are passionate about.
Tree boards can add benefit and advocacy to a city's tree program. There are some potential pitfalls but if problems can be avoided and the work of the group is done right, the outcome is usually very positive and a benefit to the community and the staff working with the group. My experience has been that it is more successful to get in the process early and work to educate and explain what the status quo is, and help respond to requests for change with what is possible short-term, long-term, and what needs policy changes to implement.
Gordon Mann is an ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist, an ISA Certified Arborist and Municipal Specialist, PNW-ISA Certified Tree Risk Assessor, and an urban forestry consultant in Auburn, CA. He is a past SMA ANSI A300 Committee representative and President of ASCA.
The following article has been selected because it is deemed very important to the arboricultural profession and deserves special recognition. It has appeared in a previous Seminar and because of this it is not eligible for earning certification credits; there is no test at the end of this article.
Tree Advisory Boards
By Gordon Mann
Focused public support for a municipal tree maintenance program can be channeled through a tree advisory board, advocacy group, commission, non-profit organization, or community support group depending on the desires and support of the community. This is a group of volunteers who may establish the policies and make the recommendations that a community and forestry department can follow. The board is most effective with some agency support such as a board of supervisors, an elected council or mayor, a park and recreation commissioner, a planning commissioner or someone other than staff to serve as the supporter of the urban forest. Some latitude and responsibility may have to be relinquished by the City Council.
The Challenge
Through my personal experience, communications with other municipal arborists, and observing programs that have prospered and faltered, the following observations may help a staff person consider their perspective during the formation, direction for the tree board, and scope of duties.
Many professional municipal arborists have tried really hard to push their programs through a city or county structure. What usually happens is the staff person is so far down the decision-making chain from the City Manager's vision and the City Council's attention that they rarely get the opportunity for a personal presentation of their ideas. Instead, their ideas are presented by a higher position in their department with 2 to 20 other ideas from their department. The passion and details are too often left out in the need for brevity and the presenter’s lack of knowledge. The great ideas are lost in comparison to the other issues and presentations of all the other items on the agenda. The worst tragedy of this scenario is that the decision makers never see all the options to decide among because they are presented by department heads working to balance the needs of the entire department.
The arborist has the proper perspective and wants the best for the community. However, the information usually doesn’t get into a decision maker’s hands in the right format for the desired outcome. In these situations, a citizen's tree advisory board may bring the program into proper context and take the program to the next level. A quality, well-facilitated board will have the ears and eyes of the elected officials. They may interact with these officials privately for cards, golf, lunch, or business. They know how to present an idea to their colleague that will get their attention. Most of all, they want to speak for the trees.
Tree Advisory Board Responsibilities
Once a tree advisory board is established, attention can be given to consider the following ideas as appropriate:
- the board should have a diversity of members from the community and not be heavily weighted with tree or urban forest professionals or green industry workers. While the technical information is readily available, the opinions of the community are more important to have represented,
- new board members should consider the goals that define the forestry needs of the community,
- the board needs to understand clearly their task, expected outcomes, and if they are advisory, decision making, or regulatory, authority, etc.,
- the board must be very clear about their decision making process – consensus, voting, or how a decision or agreement will be reached, the board will need to know the scope of their responsibilities – make
recommendations, decisions, decide appeals, etc., - the rules for participants should be clearly laid out including attendance, values, behavior at meetings, and ground rules, etc.,
- the board needs to be led by a strong facilitator who will keep focused on goals,
- the board members should be educated by someone familiar with the city’s programs, strengths, and needs as well as by other urban forestry professionals to learn what options and possibilities are available,
- board members should receive training in proper tree planting and tree care, including the ANSI A300 standards,
- the board must develop a report based on the decision making process and decide if they will allow minority reports,
- the board should understand the current budget and programs that are in place,
- the board should develop a work plan with priorities,
- the criteria for decision making and recommendations are very hard to keep on track,
- they have to be partners and serve as a check and balance on how the community operates and recognizes the value of its trees,
- the board, with staff should set the standards and expectations for the community to follow.
Staff Responsibilities
- the staff should plan to spend extra time as needed to continually educate the board about the program goals and progress,
- there may also be some direction given to provide a framework for what the task and decision making
authority of the board will be, - the staff should be prepared to respond or react to what happens,
- the staff should be intimately involved in the formation, education, and goal setting of the board, which may occur without any authority or oversight by the staff position,
- the staff should help the board by serving as a resource by providing information and answering
questions so the board has a clear understanding of what the scope of urban forestry is, the status of the program in the community, and the current budget. Staff may benefit from bringing in outside educational resources such as the State urban forester. - the staff can provide options, show big picture views, and show potential as well as find success stories to emulate,
- the staff should support the board because it is a group formed through the request of an elected or influential community leader and they usually have more “clout” and will be taken seriously by the community leaders,
- finally, the staff can create an idea with the board and have them run with it and make it happen. The staff goals are in place, the board gets the credit and feels good, and the staff has advocates for their
work. This role is critical to the success of the board.
In the public forum, the arborist may be able to step back from some of the finger pointing because the tree board has put forward the desired activities and goals. The arborist can answer questions about the feasibility of the recommendations or discussions without being the focal point of the discussion. With a board, the arborist gains a sounding panel to test ideas, review presentations for clarity and understanding, and gain increased public support for trees.
Tree Advisory Board Members
Why do people invest their time in service to their community? Although many give of themselves in the name of service, most have a pet peeve, a project, an issue, or a “want” to change, and they invest their time and energy to reach an outcome to resolve their concern. As more community members realize the value of trees and that trees are infrastructure, the greater the community support will be. As people see value, they respond with support. Staff’s role should be to find these people and partner with them to make sure staff’s needs are compatible with their needs.
Additional support can be gained when tree care professionals in the community participate and support a raised level of awareness about the value of trees and the importance of proper care in growing large trees for maximum community benefits.
In defense of a worried staff person, there have been times when the tree board went after a staff member for a change or replacement. My observations are that these have been the minority. During my sometimes limited review of the circumstances, I found the staff person could have done something differently to change the course of the conflict. The primary action staff can take is to meet with the board or a board member that may not be clear on the process, goals, challenges, and biggest needs of the staff person. For example, a board member is angry because not enough is getting done, yet the existing budget doesn’t permit more to be done. The staff member needs to explain to the board member that more could be done if there were more resources. Sometimes, by working together, resources can be shifted without a budget increase.
This is the best place for some philosophic interjection – we have to realize there are those things we can change and have control over, while there are also those things that we have little to no control over, and have to react to. Many issues in a community are because of control. Someone else has it, someone else wants it, or someone did not share it. When the issue comes down to how a community is going to be regulated, trees, water, taxes, building rules, zoning, to name a few, someone is going to stand up against rules they feel are compromising their rights. The pathway to public acceptance is to find ways to show that the direction the staff is headed, aligns with most objectives and does not negatively impact or affect the majority of citizens. A tree board can help show the minimal impact of what is proposed. Again, if the right people are serving, they know who and how to talk, and help avoid or minimize a public outcry.
Summary
I am obviously in favor of community involvement. My experience in Redwood City and at the Sacramento Tree Foundation showed me the passion residents can have on an issue. I saw first-hand the power of community consensus in driving forward with things that people are passionate about.
Tree boards can add benefit and advocacy to a city's tree program. There are some potential pitfalls but if problems can be avoided and the work of the group is done right, the outcome is usually very positive and a benefit to the community and the staff working with the group. My experience has been that it is more successful to get in the process early and work to educate and explain what the status quo is, and help respond to requests for change with what is possible short-term, long-term, and what needs policy changes to implement.
Gordon Mann is an ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist, an ISA Certified Arborist and Municipal Specialist, PNW-ISA Certified Tree Risk Assessor, and an urban forestry consultant in Auburn, CA. He is a past SMA ANSI A300 Committee representative and President of ASCA.