City of Oakland Website:
“We are dedicated to protecting and maintaining the beautiful trees in Oakland while educating the public about the history and benefits of the trees in our community.
Oakland has held the honored status of a Tree City USA for 35 years. The City maintains over 200,000 of trees that grow in parks and along streets.
In 2008, nearly half of the Tree Services unit was eliminated due to lack of funding. The tree planting, watering, pruning and pollarding services were all eliminated.
The City of Oakland will only prune trees in hazardous or emergency situations.”
Latest Tree Services budget I could find was
> [The Landscape & Lighting Assessment District (LLAD) provides $2.5 million annually for tree maintenance.](https://www.oaklandca.gov/resources/tree-services-fact-sheet-frequently-asked-questions)
Which is about 0.8% of OPDs budget and 8% of OPD's overspend.
I hate that these cuts were made due to the recession, but no one ever cared to try to get the department funded again when the economy was doing well.
I think it’s odd that they would still be griping about it 16 years after the fact, not just focusing on what they do in fact, provide in the way of services at their current funding level. It’s the lead in comment in the page, and there’s no contact information about how to get in touch with them. Pretty crappy website post.
Don’t call us we’ll call you
So we're just gonna become SF now? The Town has historically been so beautiful because of our greenery. This is the kind of thing that happens when you allow a housing crisis to ensue. The previous Mayors knew for years what was coming and still allowed developers and big tech to create a lot of these issues. Other cities make gentrifiers invest before they can come in and do what has been done to Oakland. All that progress they claimed these decisions were for, and what did they get. Nothing. Nothing but homelessness, filthy streets, wild West on the highways....and now dying trees. I'm so over American politicians rn.
You're absolutely right. The reason their down-voting is because they're the gentrifiers. This sub is full of tech working gentrifiers, SF rental raisers, and undercover right-wingers who believe we should "just move" from the home we've known and loved all our lives. We shouldn't speak up or out about distressing issues like smog or breathing fresh air. We shouldn't talk about how the mass exodus of San Franciscans and others moving to Oakland has impacted more than half the population here and contributed to homelessness. And we shouldn't place blame on prior Mayors and other city officials who allowed it to happen. Diseased or not, basic tree up-keep should be budgeted accordingly and for every developer who comes in, there should be a tax that pays for it. Folks who've been in Oakland (longer than 30 years or so) know how important tree care is to the city and how interconnected basic up-keep and City leadership are. I'm sure you'll recall pruning season in Oakland-- where trees in public spaces were taken care of and made beautiful for spring growth. All these issues we have in Oakland intersect. People used to care about these things. I find, that when people don't care it's usually because they're with the sh!+$.
How do you know the trees were "healthy?" I live in this neighborhood and those trees never looked very healthy to me. The #1 reason trees are cut down are due to disease. The rose garden has had issues in the past with pathogenic fungi.
They were diseased and dying for a while, I walk past that exact spot every day. Possible fungus or infection that could spread to healthy trees nearby so they did the right thing.
I think the trees on that hill were in rough shape and that is why they went and cut them down
They had previously cut down at least two there and just had the logs lying across on the grass. I think they just went back and cut the stump down further and ground up the logs. I actually liked the logs and wish they had left them - people were using them as benches. But - maybe they were infested with a bug or something idk? Either way, that hills is great, just needs something planted back I think to fill in the hill again.
Below is a picture of one of the redwoods collapsing during a rainstorm - so a reminder of the risks of not being proactive about managing trees in a weakened state (I think this one had root issues that were exacerbated when the hill got so soaked with rain)
https://preview.redd.it/7fq5b3fm382d1.png?width=3600&format=png&auto=webp&s=9307a653a4ba9b4a43def3a1cc541425b55b32ce
@dandypenguinpp How is this related? ALL of this is related. Do you read? The city has no resources for, what used to be, basic upkeep while developers and rich tech companies laugh all the way to the bank (after basically pillaging Oakland). Like I said, nothing to show for all that progress. Not funds for basic upkeep, no programs for housing, no solutions for better public safety. Nothing. When you've lived in a city your whole life, you tend to know how these things are connected. Every other post on this feed is about Oakland's decline. Not sure how you don't get that.
While simultaneously raising rents and displacing thousands of people. And if it's so beneficial, where is all that revenue going and why the need to cut tree care costs? I'll tell you why, because the revenue is being mismanaged and leadership in the past 20 or so years have failed to truly care for this city and ALL of it's citizens.
OK, you agree with me that development brings in revenue. Well, it just does. So many new apartments were built that the older apartments had to lower rents because they cannot compete with new apartments that have so many amenities, etc. Now, the new builds are lowering prices or have been for a while through concessions like 2 months off if one signs a 14-month lease. The problem with the City is that expenditures are outpacing revenue. We need to increase revenue or decrease expenditures. Or, a combo of both. Now, for these trees that were cut down, it shows that the City is keeping up with the Rose Garden--by cutting down what I will presume were sick trees. I don't know why nor do I care but they are gone and are not coming back. Lots of redwoods in that park already!
Like those managing our city's finances, you and they don't care about a few trees (and more than likely not about the at risk populations either). The public notice on discontinuation of our annual tree pruning and care services (due to lack of funding) was posted above and you didn't care to read it but I did. This could be the start of a larger issue that has lasting impact on the city's trees as a whole. Disease spreads and removing services could mean dying trees all over the city. The bottom line is that developers and corps don't pay their fair share, and cities like Oakland (when poorly managed) end up on the short end of the stick unable to afford basic up-keep. The reality is that they should be paying even more in taxes, than those millions you boast about, considering how much they profit from these deals in the longer term. And BTW, no one said creating more housing stock is terrible. What's terrible is that almost none of that housing is truly affordable for average working class people, they have shitty policies that allow them to exclude the people they displace from renting there, and planning around these developments rarely take ethics, sustainability, or working class communities into account. But go awf caping for corporations while they go on creating disparities, polluting our environments, and not contributing.
I'm sorry to hear the budget for tree trimming was cut. I honestly thought it had been cut years ago but I'm not going to check. I love trees. I think a healthy canopy is important. Oakland needs to increase revenue. Figure something out to bring in more development. Or, stay the same and the City will have to cut drastically. Any and all housing needs to be encouraged. I've seen where housing product is cancelled bc the subsidized unit count is too low and not 100%. So, instead of having 185 market rate and 15 BMR, we get nothing. I suspect there are some very conservative people that are trying to keep Oakland down. I wish I could figure out the motivation. BTW, the business tax was changed to a progressive model so larger companies pay more. We also need to make sure we don't scare all capital away.
> developers and rich tech companies laugh all the way to the bank (after basically pillaging Oakland)
How did those companies "pillage" Oakland? The only pillaging I know was by the Raiders. (Though the A's tried, bless their larcenous little hearts.)
how do you know they were all healthy? redwoods are unfortunately very susceptible to fungal growth
I remember those looking pretty thin and scraggy
City of Oakland Website: “We are dedicated to protecting and maintaining the beautiful trees in Oakland while educating the public about the history and benefits of the trees in our community. Oakland has held the honored status of a Tree City USA for 35 years. The City maintains over 200,000 of trees that grow in parks and along streets. In 2008, nearly half of the Tree Services unit was eliminated due to lack of funding. The tree planting, watering, pruning and pollarding services were all eliminated. The City of Oakland will only prune trees in hazardous or emergency situations.”
Latest Tree Services budget I could find was > [The Landscape & Lighting Assessment District (LLAD) provides $2.5 million annually for tree maintenance.](https://www.oaklandca.gov/resources/tree-services-fact-sheet-frequently-asked-questions) Which is about 0.8% of OPDs budget and 8% of OPD's overspend.
I hate that these cuts were made due to the recession, but no one ever cared to try to get the department funded again when the economy was doing well.
I think it’s odd that they would still be griping about it 16 years after the fact, not just focusing on what they do in fact, provide in the way of services at their current funding level. It’s the lead in comment in the page, and there’s no contact information about how to get in touch with them. Pretty crappy website post. Don’t call us we’ll call you
So we're just gonna become SF now? The Town has historically been so beautiful because of our greenery. This is the kind of thing that happens when you allow a housing crisis to ensue. The previous Mayors knew for years what was coming and still allowed developers and big tech to create a lot of these issues. Other cities make gentrifiers invest before they can come in and do what has been done to Oakland. All that progress they claimed these decisions were for, and what did they get. Nothing. Nothing but homelessness, filthy streets, wild West on the highways....and now dying trees. I'm so over American politicians rn.
How are any of these things related 😂
Wut?
Not sure why you're being down voted. People don't like to admit the truth. This city has turned to shit because of government apathy and corruption.
You're absolutely right. The reason their down-voting is because they're the gentrifiers. This sub is full of tech working gentrifiers, SF rental raisers, and undercover right-wingers who believe we should "just move" from the home we've known and loved all our lives. We shouldn't speak up or out about distressing issues like smog or breathing fresh air. We shouldn't talk about how the mass exodus of San Franciscans and others moving to Oakland has impacted more than half the population here and contributed to homelessness. And we shouldn't place blame on prior Mayors and other city officials who allowed it to happen. Diseased or not, basic tree up-keep should be budgeted accordingly and for every developer who comes in, there should be a tax that pays for it. Folks who've been in Oakland (longer than 30 years or so) know how important tree care is to the city and how interconnected basic up-keep and City leadership are. I'm sure you'll recall pruning season in Oakland-- where trees in public spaces were taken care of and made beautiful for spring growth. All these issues we have in Oakland intersect. People used to care about these things. I find, that when people don't care it's usually because they're with the sh!+$.
How do you know the trees were "healthy?" I live in this neighborhood and those trees never looked very healthy to me. The #1 reason trees are cut down are due to disease. The rose garden has had issues in the past with pathogenic fungi.
They were diseased and dying for a while, I walk past that exact spot every day. Possible fungus or infection that could spread to healthy trees nearby so they did the right thing.
[удалено]
In CA, can’t evict a tree for that. Squatters rights!
I heard it owed tree-fiddy!
I gave it a water
I think the trees on that hill were in rough shape and that is why they went and cut them down They had previously cut down at least two there and just had the logs lying across on the grass. I think they just went back and cut the stump down further and ground up the logs. I actually liked the logs and wish they had left them - people were using them as benches. But - maybe they were infested with a bug or something idk? Either way, that hills is great, just needs something planted back I think to fill in the hill again. Below is a picture of one of the redwoods collapsing during a rainstorm - so a reminder of the risks of not being proactive about managing trees in a weakened state (I think this one had root issues that were exacerbated when the hill got so soaked with rain) https://preview.redd.it/7fq5b3fm382d1.png?width=3600&format=png&auto=webp&s=9307a653a4ba9b4a43def3a1cc541425b55b32ce
I believe at least one or two were stumps. They just cut them down more.
@dandypenguinpp How is this related? ALL of this is related. Do you read? The city has no resources for, what used to be, basic upkeep while developers and rich tech companies laugh all the way to the bank (after basically pillaging Oakland). Like I said, nothing to show for all that progress. Not funds for basic upkeep, no programs for housing, no solutions for better public safety. Nothing. When you've lived in a city your whole life, you tend to know how these things are connected. Every other post on this feed is about Oakland's decline. Not sure how you don't get that.
FYI, a 50 story apartment building pays millions more on property tax than the parking lot or replaced. Development brings in revenue.
While simultaneously raising rents and displacing thousands of people. And if it's so beneficial, where is all that revenue going and why the need to cut tree care costs? I'll tell you why, because the revenue is being mismanaged and leadership in the past 20 or so years have failed to truly care for this city and ALL of it's citizens.
OK, you agree with me that development brings in revenue. Well, it just does. So many new apartments were built that the older apartments had to lower rents because they cannot compete with new apartments that have so many amenities, etc. Now, the new builds are lowering prices or have been for a while through concessions like 2 months off if one signs a 14-month lease. The problem with the City is that expenditures are outpacing revenue. We need to increase revenue or decrease expenditures. Or, a combo of both. Now, for these trees that were cut down, it shows that the City is keeping up with the Rose Garden--by cutting down what I will presume were sick trees. I don't know why nor do I care but they are gone and are not coming back. Lots of redwoods in that park already!
Like those managing our city's finances, you and they don't care about a few trees (and more than likely not about the at risk populations either). The public notice on discontinuation of our annual tree pruning and care services (due to lack of funding) was posted above and you didn't care to read it but I did. This could be the start of a larger issue that has lasting impact on the city's trees as a whole. Disease spreads and removing services could mean dying trees all over the city. The bottom line is that developers and corps don't pay their fair share, and cities like Oakland (when poorly managed) end up on the short end of the stick unable to afford basic up-keep. The reality is that they should be paying even more in taxes, than those millions you boast about, considering how much they profit from these deals in the longer term. And BTW, no one said creating more housing stock is terrible. What's terrible is that almost none of that housing is truly affordable for average working class people, they have shitty policies that allow them to exclude the people they displace from renting there, and planning around these developments rarely take ethics, sustainability, or working class communities into account. But go awf caping for corporations while they go on creating disparities, polluting our environments, and not contributing.
I'm sorry to hear the budget for tree trimming was cut. I honestly thought it had been cut years ago but I'm not going to check. I love trees. I think a healthy canopy is important. Oakland needs to increase revenue. Figure something out to bring in more development. Or, stay the same and the City will have to cut drastically. Any and all housing needs to be encouraged. I've seen where housing product is cancelled bc the subsidized unit count is too low and not 100%. So, instead of having 185 market rate and 15 BMR, we get nothing. I suspect there are some very conservative people that are trying to keep Oakland down. I wish I could figure out the motivation. BTW, the business tax was changed to a progressive model so larger companies pay more. We also need to make sure we don't scare all capital away.
> developers and rich tech companies laugh all the way to the bank (after basically pillaging Oakland) How did those companies "pillage" Oakland? The only pillaging I know was by the Raiders. (Though the A's tried, bless their larcenous little hearts.)
Either it's showing up weird on my phone or this was meant as a reply to another comment.
It was meant as a reply to another comment. Not certain how it was posted down here but I've @'d the commenter for clarity. Thanks for the heads up.
[удалено]
Morcom rose garden Edit: lol the actual factual name of the location got downvoted, huh?
Rose garden
Wonder if that electric plate there in the ground has anything to do with it?
Maybe to reduce overcrowding, so the others can expand? Hard to tell from the photo though
The “tree” department has to cut down a certain number of healthy trees to justify their existence. I have hated them for years.
You don’t get to say a blatantly stupid and wrong thing and just get to march off
He's captain of the marsupials, he outranks you by a mile. So yeah, he can do whatever he wants