City demands Portland homeowner pay $11,000 to cut down elm tree within 30 days
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ต.ค. 2024
- The city stopped paying to remove street trees with Dutch elm disease in 2017, forcing homeowners to cover unexpected, costly removal.
Learn more: www.kgw.com/ar...
Subscribe: / kgwnews8
Watch the latest KGW newscast: www.kgw.com/watch
Get the KGW app: kgw.com/appred...
If the tree is diseased then it needs to be removed before other trees in the area become infected. I don't agree with the city attempting to charge the homeowner. The tree was there before she owned the house. If it's not on her property then how can the city justify charging her based on proximity alone? Meanwhile, crime runs rampant and the homeless problem continues to be out of control. If the city doesn't get its priorities straight they will continue to lose the residents that actually cared about it at one time. I left ten years ago and I am honestly glad that I did. But it still hurts to see my former home in such terrible condition.
It is on her property, and it is her tree because she bought the house.
so are the homeless but nobody wants them removed
@@LaFox23 Its her tree but the portion of the tree that is over the street is the property of the city.
@@silentmajority8365 Oh yes... People definitely want them removed. If you voice your concerns though, you won't be seen as "woke" enough or "weird" enough" for Portland City Council, social media and young socialists who have flocked to Portland because of our woke, weird, socialist vibe. Portland loves to be the center of attention. They love being in the media and they love being on MSNBC and CNN. Our City Council members and mayor wheeler and DA Mike Schmidt...they all have their sight set on holding greater political offices. Some of them just love the attention that being a City Council member brings them But they don't have enough actual experience to do the job. They also love their hefty salary and nobody's there to make them do their job. THERE IS NO OVERSIGHT OR ACCOUNTABILITY IN THE CITY OF PORTLAND. Part of the problem is that our form of city government is archaic. I also think that there are some city council members, Hardesty, in particular, that are extremely difficult to get along with and some of them don't play nice or work well together. The only way to get anything done in Portland is for these people to come together and to work together. But they all refuse to do that. WE MUST VOTE THEM OUT IF WE WANT TO SAVE PORTLAND. Portland is worn out. We are financially tapped out, emotionally tapped out and disgusted by the state of our city and we definitely want all of this gone. Our homeless problem was brought on by our City Council and Mayor. They literally broadcast to the nation that we are a bunch of bleeding hearts and that we have some of the best homeless services in the nation. I know for a fact, that the vast majority of people living on the streets in Portland today are not even from Portland. So many of them were literally bussed here from cities like Baltimore, LA, Philadelphia, New York City and others. Why? Because those cities have extremely poor homeless services. Homeless people don't want to live in those cities because there aren't as many handouts and freebies and they can't pitch a tent and camp anywhere they like. Even Seattle has ended public camping. Portland has fairly mild weather, even during our winter months. Social services and welfare agencies in these larger cities have quite literally told their homeless populations "if you have a friend or a family member in Portland, we will put you on a bus with a one-way ticket to Portland at our expense". That is exactly what Happened. People flocked here from all over the country because we have a plethora of drugs readily available 7 days a week, fairly nice weather and plenty of bridges to camp beneath and today you can pitch a tent pretty much anywhere you like. The "sweeps" aren't really sweeps at all. You can come right back the very next day and pitch your tent again and not be swept again for another 3 to 6 months. We have a vast number of resources that offer free clothing, free food, free medical care, free acupuncture, free counseling, free drug treatment, and the list goes on and on. When Portland City leaders and homeless agencies tell you that they need more or they don't have enough to take care of Portland's homeless, it is a bold-faced lie. There are so many resources in Portland it is unbelievable. The problem is is that we have had literally tens of thousands of people flock here from all over the country who are homeless and addicts and Portland is an extremely easy city to be homeless in and we have some of the best homeless services in the country. As someone who has worked in social services and volunteered in social services most of my life, I tell you that this is the God's truth.
Well it’s your job as a home owner to look after and up keep your property and she didn’t keep on top of it so now it’s diseased and she’s having to pay out money just because she didn’t know she had to don’t mean she doesn’t have to pay most of us don’t understand banking properly and we still need to pay them so why you complaining 😂
Free testing, and if your tree has it we charge you $11,000. Wow, glad the test is free
The home owner should be granted a dollar for dollar tax break for city and county property tax for the full amount of the cost of a mandated removal.
That is fair considering the shifting of the city's burden completely upon the property owner now.
That still means the county pays for it.
Dutch elm disease is no joke. But having to pay for the removal is crazy. It’s not even her property, it’s on the public parkway no?
She can afford it. Shes not upset about that, she doesnt want the tree down. Even if its dangerous to other people, trees and cars in the area
That's a city tree,i tis on their property.
11,000 is way to much. Shop around, should be able to get it done between 3 and 4 thousand.
All the tree companies know that she is on the hook. They are going to charge accordingly
In Portland maybe not quite that cheap??
Wow, that is completely wrong . I hope that lady takes them to court.
This is just plain wrong to expect this woman to foot this outrageous bill. Portland has homeless all over much of the city now and so much crime. Yet is focusing on a tree. The city needs to learn about priorities. I'm another Portlander that left over the incompetence and unfairness towards residents. I no longer understand why Portlandeds remain there. It is a poorly run dump now. The city has a responsibility with that tree, and I think the woman was treated terribly. I hope she is planning to leave Portland in retirement. I can't imagine why she is tolerating Portland.
Past the sidewalk is a city tree
Right? It's noce the city sees they can just snap their fingers and change that in response to.a crisis with DED.
Guaranteed if any homeowners in Portland stepped outside their homes and walked across the sidewalk and randomly chopped down whatever healthy tree or trees were there... the city of Portland would be singing a different tune! All the sudden it would be the city's tree and you would be charged with destruction of city property or something similar that came with a hefty fine. 🙁
If the city planted these trees way back when... The homeowners should not have to be responsible for paying to remove them. I am wondering how City Hall/City Council was able to shift the burden to whichever homeowner is closest to the tree..which is clearly located on the public roadside strip between the sidewalk and the street. It seems to me that city council and city hall should have sought input from Portland residents and possibly even a vote to the people. In my opinion, city council and city hall have way too much power if this was their only solution. So...in 2017, the city decided they weren't going to pay to have these trees removed anymore and so they just decided to make whoever lived closest to the tree, responsible? It would be interesting to know how so many elms came to be planted in Eastmorland and who planted them? Was it the city who typically takes responsibility for that strip of property in between the sidewalk and the street..or was it individual homeowners? It doesn't really matter. The point is City Hall and the City of Portland City Council decided to make everybody else responsible for something that they have always covered before 2017 and in actuality, like most cities across the country, they should continue to be responsible for them. There is no way to prove that the original builders of these homes were the ones who actually planted those trees. Like so many other things at Portland City Hall and with the City Council... They're constantly granting themselves entirely too much power and yet produced very few positive results for the people. These kinds of decisions made in the dead of night, as it would appear, usually benefit City Hall/City Council, and no one else. Both are useless. You can never get them to return phone calls, or emails, when you do try to contact them, they are virtually impossible to deal with. What exactly do they get paid to do if they don't do anything? Perhaps they no longer want to pay to have these sick elms cut down because they've repeatedly continued to dump tens of millions into the bottomless pit known as drug addiction and homelessness With absolutely zero beneficial results. We're all seeing exactly where Portland's money goes. Portland's money goes down the toilet to help people who will not help themselves. Certainly it does not go to homeowners and tax paying citizens of Portland..the lifeblood and the financial backbone of our city. I suppose they assumed Portlanders are just a bottomless well of wealth and generosity. We have only to look at Portland today to see the significant ongoing failures of Portland City Hall and the City Council. They draw a considerably hefty salary, for shirking their support of tax paying, law abiding citizens but continue to poor our millions into bottomless pits that are sucking the life out of Portland. Where is the appreciation for hard-working tax paying, law abiding Portland residents? That's right. There isn't any. You would think that the least they could do is to show some appreciation and take responsibility for these elm trees instead of shoving that exorbitant cost, off onto the shoulders of responsible Portland residents as well. One more time, our city council and city hall slap our greatest contributing residents in the face as they tell them just how very little they matter. If I'd been this woman, I would have taken it to court and ask them to prove that the original homeowners are the ones responsible for planting that tree. Also, I'd have them explain in a court of law, how Portland City Council took it upon themselves, without any input from Portland residents, to withdraw one of the last remaining ways in which they had shown some support for some of Portland's hardest working and greatest contributing residents. Better Yet...WHO is responsible for this slap-in-the-face city ordinance? WHO's big bright idea was it? just decided that the city shouldn't have to pay anymore? WHO voted to quietly pass this city ordinance without the approval of the people. This whole situation stinks of wrong doing...passing city ordinances in the dark of night without notifying Portland residents?...As if everyone just has $11,000 laying around every day of the week. Portland is one of the most expensive cities to live in, in the country. I think many Portland residents are beginning to understand that in Portland, you are far more appreciated and you are certainly better off if you are renting or even living in a tent. You're better off choosing NOT to work at all, possibly even engaging in meth or heroine addiction, contributing nothing to society except taking what others have worked hard for and demanding more. You are better off refusing to help yourself and demanding that everybody else pony up so you can have a free tiny home. You'd even be allowed to throw your junkie needles on the ground and crap in the children's parks and homeowners yards and bushes AND you could get most everything you need...health care/insurance, SNAP food stamp benefits, free clothing from donors like Columbia Sportswear and major department stores, and you'd be able to draw SSI, Social Security Income, because in Oregon, you can claim addiction as a disability, granting you nearly $800 a month, free gratis, from Uncle Sam. Plus, you can rack up a ton of pity points for your self-imposed "condition" along the way. At least you'd never have to come up with $11,000 in 30 days to chop down a tree that you never planted. Thank goodness there weren't three or four more elms lined up along that strip of public lawn. 🙄🤬
Ha ha ha, support from the city. A Y F KIDDING ME?
Typical Republic of Oregon BS. Offload the cost of city maintenance onto the responsible homeowner. Why are people paying city taxes if they aren’t used to cover this kind of maintenance expense?
She needs to get an attorney and pre-emptively sue the city. It’s on city property, not hers. This is open & shut. This needs to happen to establish precedent or they’ll continue to pull this kind of crap on Portland residents.
That city - which I love & called home for 15 years - has enough problems already & you can see why with dumbasses like this running it.
That's when neighbors need to stand up for each other. If the city can do it to her they can do it to any of them too. The city should pay for the removal since the city is probably the one that planted them in the first place.
The amount of taxes Multnomah County charges, let the city of Portland pay for it's removal.
Isn't it in the easement, which belongs to the city?
Nope, the easement is just for utilities. The homeowner is required to install and maintain the sidewalk and anything else the city requires, like the tree.
@@LaFox23 Not where I live. It would be ludicrous for each homeowner to install the section of sidewalk (or not) in from of their house.
Where I live the city is responsible for trees in the easement. I had a tree hit by lighting that was in the easement. The city refused to cut it but couldn't force me to cut it, so I let it fall eventually. Fortunately, it fell perfectly at an angle into the street . A couple of years later some people up the street had 2 dead pines. The city cut the one in the easement. There was a difference. One of the owners there was a man. I'm a woman. What is the gender of the person in this news article? Gee, and she probably earned far less on average than a man did. They just expect women to acquiesce.
Thanks
Just another reason I left Portland is in '98. Plus, I don't like the smell of urine.
just like every other democrat diverse city
I was stuck at a red light under an overpass near OHSU yesterday, near an RV with home Depot shit buckets outside. Had my air on recirculate, could still smell the fucking urine... On a rainy day... In my car
Just a few more reasons to get out of Portland. It is crazy to burden the homeowner with this cost and it is crazy to have tree cops patrolling our streets... and not enough real cops to keep our streets safe. The city council should be ashamed for so many things.
All of America is going this way Don't kid yourself
Boomer hippies rule the roost here. Nobody who is able bodied can afford to live here anymore and trees matter more than building housing
Wow!!! This is crazy. I live in Washington, D.C. and the street tree is the responsibility of the City. We don't have to pay to have a tree planted or removed. When a tree is planted we are asked to take care of it - like watering and mulching it. Making a homeowner pay for removal of a tree that was there when they moved into the neighborhood - that would never fly here in D.C.
MOVE TO THE COUNTY!
The city plants the trees on city property. Then expects a home owner to pay? I dont think the home owner owns anything by the street
She should get her property taxes reduced a few hundred each year to equal the amount of removal, that would be fair. The city needs to civil, and work with the people that pay their wages.
Take them to court, there's no way that if it's on the city right of way and it was there before she was even born it should be on her.
This is what happens to responsible homeowners. But, look at the mess and disease that the homeless are causing. Can’t touch them because they are protected by the law.
All because we took shame away from the 🍎🍊🍐🍋🍌🍓 We unleased the most left group in America. If they don't control the media explain their propaganda? Even in the new Marvel movie lol This group puts criminals foreigners deadbeats and the sexually confused as the priority.. If this were not true why did the city side with rioters against store owners? crickets
Meanwhile, Portland resident somehow forget that homelessness doesn't negate humanity.
Isn’t Boulevard belong to the city. If this the case then, this tree belong to the city and it should the city Job to take down the tree, not her
Nice tree but they cause massive problems for public roadways and maintenance when places on sidewalks. Looks like the tree is in the front easement of the property so I'm not sure it's even her responsibility. If they're killing 40 trees a year they haven't been controlling Dutch Elm Disease very effectively at all.
That tree belongs to the city because it’s on the devil strip (the right away).
She better check here property survey. Looks like it's on public property..
The right of way has always been the city's problem. It's great that they plant the trees no one necessarily asked for then forces property owners to foot the bill? Get a lawyer. They're panning their responsibility off on you to save them.money? NOPE.
If the tree is on my property, you should thank me if I ALLOW you to pay for its removal! In no way should the property owner be forced to remove it AND forced to pay!
You can easily have the tree taken down for 2k.
The tree cutter is probably taking advantage of her time constraint situation. USA USA.
those price points are pure extortion , "place a lien " against your home ?!? that's f CRAZY ! in 2008 i had a 300 year old live oak that covered half an acre and an entire house , taken down for $3,000 , six men , five 10 hour days , it was strategic , as , if the tree ever must be removed , these criminal tree removal crews can literally charge anything they can get away with , case in point , large trees are not your friends , unless you are a real estate agent , $11,000 is INSANE !
Any way they can get you to sell.
But no cost for any clean up for homeless camps...
the city planted it, they should hold all responsibility of maintenance or removal.
im an arborist and 11k is over double what that tree is worth. it be a full day removal at $3,500-4k (CAD) with the company i work for and we'd bring a crane.
this guy made a killing that day rigging afew limbs and logs.
Sue the city. That’s on the boulevard. That’s technically not your land. If they widened that street you would basically have no say on keeping that land. Leave it to a govt entity to lean whichever way keeps your money in their pockets.
If the elms are planted by city and it’s on parkstrip which is basically city land then they should foot the cost of taking them out. The homeowner didn’t plant these trees nor have any decision about it. Sue the city . With inflation now most people could not afford these nor should they have to .
Sounds like time to vote for a different city council... 😡
We must vote every single one of these people out if we want to save Portland.
My electrical company cuts trees down/prunes for free if its touching wires.
what does that mean its more 'equitable' for them to pass the cost on to the adjacent home owner?
well ,so who ended up paying for this tree removal??
So that tree is on essentially on public land due to easement. How can she be held to account for this tree? Just because her city put some crazy shit in their ordinance doesn't mean it will hold up in state court.
What would be more equitable would be for the city to cover the cost based on the ability of the homeowner to pay. It seems like their decision about what is equitable comes down to the fact that homes with these trees on average tend to have high property value based on the neighborhood, and they are assuming based on that fact that the owners *must* have the ability to pay. Which definitely may not be the case, especially if we're talking about a senior or widow/widower who has lived in Portland since they were born, i.e. before property values exploded or they've possibly inherited their home. I get where they're coming from on the equity issue, it's just as usual there's really poor execution of their ideals. Not everyone is using their property as a revenue stream, some people just want to stay in their home instead of being priced out.
hows that her tree ? so her property has a public footpath on it ?
The city is taking unconstitutional action !
I never understood what’s so beautiful about these trees
That’s probably because you are an overvaccinated city dweller with mental illnesses.
F the city
She doesn’t understand
Welcome to Socialism.
Not sure how socialism applies here...
@@jcout25 then you must be a socialist.
Bet the older Portlanders use to complain about the tree workers and so now the bill is on the home owners. Idk 🤷
It only costs $600 to 1,200 for a municipality to remove Parkway trees. $11,000 is when you have a difficult to access tree requiring Crane Rental.
Not any more. The labor alone would be 3k now a days
How is that her property?? That looks like city property to me
Could of ask the tree to wear a mask
Unreal. Lesson here is to not live in Portland.
This tree is CLEARLY in the PUBLIC right-of-way, NOT on the homeowner's property! SLAM DUNK for a law-suit which the city will LOSE HANDS DOWN!!!