Request to remove trees from historic courthouse grounds on tap for BOC
A request to remove five elm trees and two maple trees from the grounds of the historic courthouse was presented to the Jackson County Board of Commissioners Monday night.
The BOC will take action on the request when it meets at 6 p.m. on Monday, March 21.
At the BOC work session this week, Charlotte Mealor, chairman of the historic courthouse committee, presented the report evaluating the trees and recommending that they be removed.
“We realize these are historic trees and we would like to save them,” Mealor said. “However, we also realize the cost associated with further evaluation and maintenance, without any guarantees about the longevity of the trees, would not necessarily be advisable. We also realize this may be an opportunity to plant new, healthy trees for future generations.”
BOC chairman Hunter Bicknell said, “We appreciate you getting experts involved who can guide the process.”
For more BOC stories, see the March 9 issue of The Jackson Herald.
At the BOC work session this week, Charlotte Mealor, chairman of the historic courthouse committee, presented the report evaluating the trees and recommending that they be removed.
“We realize these are historic trees and we would like to save them,” Mealor said. “However, we also realize the cost associated with further evaluation and maintenance, without any guarantees about the longevity of the trees, would not necessarily be advisable. We also realize this may be an opportunity to plant new, healthy trees for future generations.”
BOC chairman Hunter Bicknell said, “We appreciate you getting experts involved who can guide the process.”
For more BOC stories, see the March 9 issue of The Jackson Herald.
Meetings covering topics such as these is a waste of time, and also a strict act of avoidance. Tbere are real issues that should be discussed.
It would have been nice Mike if your reporter who was there would have covered the information provided by the Courhouse Committee adn the Jefferson Tree Council at the meeting. I'm not sure if you just avoided printing the facts or not but if you were there it was pretty easy to understand why the trees need to be taken down before damaging the building, before damaging a passing car or hurting someone walking by. Now that the Commission has been advised by professionals about the poor condition of the trees they will be even more liable if someone or soemthing is hurt or damaged.
I can only guess but I say that your sensationalized poll will only be about as accurate as your poll on the ELOST. Ever think about showing the number of people who vote so that it will have more credability?
It is hard to not agree with that. But the flip side said “…the cost associated with further evaluation and maintenance, without any guarantees about the longevity of the trees, would not necessarily be advisable.” I disagree—it is advisable.
The courthouse is honored to have such venerable neighbors as those trees. They have clung to their dirt in poor health and shape and asked for nothing. They show characteristics worthy of good citizens.
Chairman Bicknell mentioned “experts.” Commenter Phillips mentioned “professionals.” It would make me feel better to hear the word “arborist” used. Talk with an arborist about saving the trees.
I suspect that the “experts and professionals” mentioned were licensed, insured, free estimate giving tree removers. Necessary, yes, but don’t use them yet.