The Eureka Springs City Council will now get to have input on any tree removal denial decisions made by the city’s Board of Zoning Adjustment.

At its regular meeting on Feb. 10, the council unanimously approved three readings and an emergency clause to amend the city’s tree preservation ordinance to read that denials by BOZA can now be appealed for further review by the city council.

Previously, the ordinance stated that anyone wanting to appeal a BOZA decision regarding a tree removal had to do it in court.

“So many people and so much time was poured into this tree ordinance, and I want to, again, thank everybody that participated, that had input,” council member David Avanzino said. “It was a long process, and I’m happy with what we have.

“However, and before it gets, I don’t want to say out of control, but before we see too much of it, there has been a couple of issues that were brought to my attention that part of what we wrote in this ordinance was that a certified tree professional, whether that be an arborist or someone who’s been trained with years of experience, if they give their opinion about a tree and what might happen if that tree falls, or whatever the case may be, that we trust their opinion. I’ve now had two occasions where a certified arborist that has been doing this for decades has been employed to give their opinion on a tree. And only one instance so far, to my knowledge, where that person’s expertise and knowledge was overturned by Planning/ BOZA regarding this tree.” Avanzino was referring to a Jan. 14 decision by BOZA to deny a request to remove a tree at 70 Clay St. despite the recommendation of arborist Mike Larrew and Paul Sutherland, the city’s building inspector and code enforcement officer.

Sutherland wrote in a letter to BOZA that the tree was “compromised by the root ball impacting the public street by uprooting, causing a large bump in the street and breakage of the asphalt,” also writing that the tree also posed a hazard to the house on the property “should the compromised root ball continue to rise.”

“Should this tree remain, it will continue to impact the street causing more damage, and is a danger to the house structure itself,” Sutherland wrote. “It is in our opinion that the solution to these issues is the removal of the tree.”

Some BOZA commissioners, however, said they felt the tree was healthy and wasn’t in danger of damaging the house.

“My ask is that we take a look at this ordinance and put in a clause that will allow … the way the ordinance is currently written, a person who is denied tree removal has to take it to court,” Avanzino said at the Feb. 10 council meeting. “So, additional attorney’s fees, court costs, whatever the case may be. To me, that should not be the case. Like with anything else within the city, if something is denied, then they can come to the city council to listen to it again. If we think that it’s not worthy of being denied, then we vote against it, or however we want to do that. I would just like for us to take a look at this and add that amendment that says that a citizen can appeal that decision to the city council.

“I just want citizens that have an issue with a tree, if it’s denied for whatever reason, after an expert has looked at it, like what we’ve asked, that they have the option of coming to us for an appeal process other than attorney’s fees, court costs, whatever the case may be.”

Avanzino first brought up the issue at the Jan. 27 council meeting and requested that city attorney Forrest Jacobi rework the ordinance to include the appeals amendment.

“The point of this ordinance is that the appeal comes from the Board of Zoning and Adjustment to the city council,” Jacobi said regarding the ordinance changes at the Feb. 10 meeting. “That’s the way it should be, because it was unclear who you appealed to and why.”

Jacobi said while the new procedure can still lead to an appeal to the courts if the council upholds the denial, the new process is taking the appropriate steps.

“There was no clear appeal other than to send to a court,” Jacobi said. “Well, that’s inappropriate. It costs money. If they can bring it to the city council, the city council has enough ability to weigh in on it. And if it’s an appropriate cut, then we can end it here and they don’t have to go straight to a court.”

The amended ordinance now reads that any resident denied a request to remove a tree can appeal to the city clerk within 30 days. The appeal will then be placed on the council agenda “no sooner than 12 days after filing and no later than 45 days after filing.”

SOLAR PROJECT UPDATE Council members heard an update on the city’s success using solar energy from John Coleman with Entegrity, a consulting firm aimed at energy efficiency measures.

“Solar is obviously one of the highlights of the project, but we also did a number of energy efficiency measures looking at about 73,000 square feet of city-owned facilities over 11 buildings,” Coleman told council members. “We implemented measures between May 2021 and March 2022, and then we’ve been dong two years of measurement and verification over that period of time.

“So, this is the final report of the two years of measurement and verification.”

Coleman said, in summary, there were LED lighting retrofits installed across facilities, including a “375-kilowatt solar array that we built at the Berryville Industrial Park that offsets electricity for your Carroll Electric accounts.”

Coleman said other projects put in place were water conservation, smart thermostats and tune-ups to HVAC systems.

“During the construction period, we realized $10,732 in savings, where we were projecting about $3,600 in savings over that period,” he said. “In the year one performance period, we realized $37,164. And then in the year two performance period, $39,293. So over those three periods, a total of $87,189 compared to what our projection was at about $76,500.

“All in all, the project is performing exactly like we had expected. So that’s exciting, and exactly what we wanted to see.”

Coleman said the city has saved a cumulative total of $83,577 in associated natural gas, electricity and water during the project.

“So the $87,000 over the two-plusyear period, that’s actual hard dollar savings, correct?,” council member Terry McClung asked. “… That’s impressive.”

“It’s a really promising project,” Coleman responded. “These are always fun to present because they’re performing well.”

The city’s agreement for the solar project is a 25-year term, Coleman said.

REMEMBERING SMOLE Former council member LauraJo Smole, who passed away Feb. 4, was remembered during comments at the end of the meeting.

“We did receive sad news that Laura-Jo Smole passed away this past week,” council member Steve Holifield said. “She had been a member of this council a few years ago and it’s always sad to hear one of our neighbors is gone. She will be remembered.”

Smole resigned from her Ward 1, Position 2 seat because of health concerns in October 2021, but after declaring she was cancer-free, ran for the Ward 1, Position 1 seat in November 2022. She lost that race to Autumn Slane 490448.

According to an online obituary, Smole passed away in Ohio, her home state, and a “Celebration of Life” will be held in Eureka Springs with details to be announced at a later date.

Memorial contributions can be made in Smole’s name to A Cup of Love Ministry at 4032 E. Van Buren in Eureka Springs, the Human Rights Campaign, or to any charity, according to her obituary.

SALES TAX LOOMING?

Also during his council member comments, McClung mentioned the possibility of the city having to ask the public to pass a sales tax to help fund needed repairs to the water and sewer equipment.

“I would like people to start thinking about a one-cent sales tax for water and sewer infrastructure,” he said.

“That may be an avenue we have to take to help reduce that debt and make it so it came be removed for any, or used for any other thing like has happened before when we had sales tax get diverted to other project and put into the general fund.

“No one likes sales tax, but we’ve got some tough decisions to make ahead of us.”

MOYER SWORN IN

Soon after being selected from four candidates to fill the Ward 1, Position 1 council seat, Rachael Moyer was sworn in and took part in the remainder of the Feb. 10 meeting.

“It’s great to have you here and a full council again,” Holifield said.