Members of Rehoboth Beach’s Environmental Advisory Committee want the city to undertake a count of its trees and develop a plan for urban forests.
Andrea Hoffman, a member of the city, made a presentation to committee members at a meeting last week. She said that Rehoboth did undertake a tree census more than 15 years ago, but that survey was not a complete picture, focusing primarily on street trees in South Rehoboth and Central Park.
“There were 2,800 trees on streets and in parks,” she said. “Of this total, there were 536 trees in Central Park.”
From that data, Davey Resource Group, which conducted the survey, prepared a plan to maintain the existing trees and preserve urban forests. That plan seems to have languished since it was written in 2010. City laws require the city’s arborist to provide regular updates to the Parks and Shade Tree Commission about how many trees are being cut down and planted. That is something the city’s current arborist seems to be doing. But, Hoffman says the language in the code isn’t clear.
“There is no clear definition of what an urban forest plan is,” she said. “It seems to be a term that the Delaware Forest Service uses to promote systematic and consistent planting and canopy maintenance.”
Hoffman said there is the possibility of state funding to help conduct a tree census, something she encouraged the committee to pursue.
“It looks as if there is a grant program which covers the following: tree inventories, urban forestry plans, canopy assessments, and tree planting and maintenance programs,” she explained.
Craig Thier, a Rehoboth Beach commissioner who chairs the committee, urged Hoffman to work with the city manager’s office to work on applying for grant funding.
Committee members also heard details on what led to the felling of two healthy oak trees on Henlopen Avenue, an issue that caused some consternation in the neighborhood.
While the issue hasn’t been completely clarified yet, Environmental Advisory Committee member Elise Burns says what is clear is that the city’s staff did not communicate well.
“We pride ourselves in being a tree city, but there are times when we are not working together to preserve and protect our irreplaceable tree canopy,” she said.
Burns laid out a timeline of what she was able to discover, noting that in November 2025, the city’s arborist granted permission for one oak to be taken down because it was unhealthy.
“The other two red oaks, as I said, in the setback, were explicitly noted by the arborist, ‘do not remove’ - in red ink, ‘do not remove,’” she said.
The problem arose when the city’s arborist was on vacation, she continued.
“When he returned the following week he found the building permit had been issued,” Burns said. “At that point his hands were tied; he had to issue the tree permit to allow for removal.”
That could be a violation of city law, she contended.
“We don't believe the tree code was followed with respect to proper mitigation that might have protected trees,” Burns said. “We have a process in place in the code. All appeals need to go to the Parks and Shade [Tree] Committee. That did not happen.”
