STATE OF CALIFORNIA NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY Gavin Newsom, Governor “The Department of Forestry and Fire Protection serves and safeguards the people and protects the property and resources of California.”
DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTECTION
P.O. Box 944246
SACRAMENTO, CA 94244 -2460
(916) 653-7772
Website: www.fire.ca.gov
December 6, 2021
Helen Chapman, Policy and Legislative Advisor
Office of Sergio Jimenez | City of San José, District 2 200 E. Santa Clara St. T-18 | San José, CA 95113
Dear Helen Chapman,
Per your request I am offering my perspective, as the appointed representative of CAL FIRE, on the San Jose Community Forest Management Plan (CFMP). I am not going to provide a comprehensive list of omissions or suggested corrections because it would be counterproductive to the significant efforts invested thus far. CAL FIRE has previously provided corrections pertinent to the Urban and Community Forestry Grant agreement which have been responded to by City staff. I will offer my general impressions and recommendations as City Council considers adoption of the CFMP.
Community input and engagement are important to creation of a viable plan, but even more to its implementation and refinement over time. Establishment of the Community Forest Advisory Committee should be one of the highest priority objectives. This acti on will continue ongoing conversations between stakeholders and the City, concurrent with action on other objectives. The CFMP should be a living document where actions are responsive to addressing issues as quickly as possible, yet adaptive to reality. Stakeholders will always be influential to success.
Interdepartmental coordination and unified policies are needed for urban forestry governance, projects, services and activities, best practices, data analysis, and other subjects. Consistent and transpa rent decisions by qualified professionals should be supported by the best available information. Consider a policy of no net loss of canopy to apply broadly so that progress is made toward canopy cover goals. Maintain accountability by providing annual progress updates about the CFMP.
Partner with entities and organizations that will complement implementation. CAL FIRE is willing to provide technical assistance, impartial assessment, and feedback, as well as grant opportunities (as funding is available). Others have assistance to provide also.
Consider the CFMP a starting point. Work with stakeholders to refine the plan while acting on priority issues. Invest to the extent possible to reverse historic trends of declining canopy cover and inadequate maintenance.
I encourage City Council to adopt the CFMP, direct staff to return with budget and staffing requests, identify future policies and best practices to consider, and establish a recurring dialog with stakeholders. Please contact me if I can assist you,
Walter Passmore, State Urban Forester
CAL FIRE
January 20, 2022
San José Mayor and City Council
City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara Street
San José, CA 95113
Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council:
The Draft Community Forest Management Plan coming before you on January 25 remains shockingly deficient. Despite hundreds of written concerns and conversations with council member offices and city staff, errors and omissions persist, and this draft is not even close to a plan. A front page article in the January 10 Mercury News makes the depth of San Jose’s urban forest crisis painfully clear. Now it’s up to you, the Mayor and Council, to shift course on how San José can better grow, manage, and protect its urban forest.
The draft report could be accepted as an initial study, but first, inconsistencies must be corrected. Then council members can outline what additional information is needed before considering any real plan - particularly data on city tree spending and a substantiated analysis of why the tree canopy is vanishing. Planting trees is important, as always, but it is not the solution. San José must look deep within to stop the bleeding.
Here are three key areas that need improvement:
1. Missing financial data. Increased mitigation fees and revenue from assessment districts are important revenue sources not discussed. In addition, the draft states residents have been responsible for all street tree care since 1951, yet S.J. had a citywide street tree pruning and trimming program until 2008. To consider viable tree management options and offer recommendations, such data is essential.
2. Inadequate scope. The grant from Cal Fire that funded this plan stipulated that it cover 100% of San Jose’s existing and potential tree canopy yet the draft focuses almost exclusively on the 15% or less managed by the city. The remaining 85% is owned privately or by public agencies or districts. There is no discussion or analysis of broader best-practice policies such as a no net loss standard, increasing native trees per the 2040 General Plan, or what policies and laws are needed to curtail removals.
3. Stewardship. Cities with successful urban forest programs have independent Tree Commissions of stakeholders. Staff recommends instead a weak advisory committee appointed and managed internally by DOT, whose primary purpose is roads and transportation. Ideally the tree program should be moved to Environmental Services or another department with a compatible mission. Even then, a Tree Commission with a direct line to Council is the way to provide guardianship for our trees because it allows for unbiased review and recommendations around city policies, programs, and spending.
Coalition to Advance Urban Forestry
In San José
We know you understand the cooling power of mature trees as the climate warms, but you need more and better information to make educated choices on how to turn the tide that is destroying our trees. Please seek that information, and don’t move forward with a plan until you have it.
Sincerely,
Coalition to Advance Urban Forestry in San José
Linda J. LeZotte
Director, Valley Water and Former City of San José Councilmember
Vicki Moore
Chair, Santa Clara County Planning Commission
Barbara Marshman
San Jose Mercury News Former Editorial Page Editor
Rita Norton
Former Chair, SCVWD Environmental Advisory Committee
Bob Levy
Vice-Chair, Santa Clara County Planning Commission; former San Jose Planning Commissioner
Cindy Blain
Executive Director, California ReLeaf
Michelle Yesney
Former San José Planning Commission; Former President, Greenbelt Alliance
Irma Balderas/Christina Egan
Our City Forest Board of Directors Chair/Director
Rhonda Berry
President & CEO, Our City Forest
Margot Sidener
Chief Executive Officer, Breathe California
Justin Wang
Advocacy Manager, Greenbelt Alliance
Susan Butler-Graham
Team Coordinator, Mothers Out Front
Shani Kleinhaus
Environmental Advocate, Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society
Linda Ruthruff
Conservation Chair, California Native Plant Society
Gladwyn d’Souza
Chair, Conservation Committee, Loma Prieta Chapter, Sierra Club
Fernando R. Zazueta
La Raza Historical Society of Santa Clara Valley
Deb Kramer
Executive Director, Keep Coyote Creek Beautiful
Terry Trumbull,
Retired Professor, San José State University
Elizabeth Sarmiento
Board of Directors, Smart Yards Education
Peri Plantenberg
Coordinator, Silicon Valley Youth Climate Action
Jennifer Thompson
Executive Director, Sustainable Silicon Valley
33 Las Colinas Lane, San Jose, CA 95119 | 408.224.7476 T | 408.224.7548 F | openspaceauthority.org
Andrea Mackenzie, General Manager
Alex Kennett, District 1
Mike Flaugher, District 2
Helen Chapman, District 3
Dorsey Moore, District 4
Shay Franco-Clausen, District 5
Mike Potter, District 6
Kalvin Gill, District 7
January 24, 2022
Mayor Sam Liccardo,
San Jose City Councilmembers
City Council Meeting Portal
Via email
Re: Support Approval of Community Forest Management Plan, Agenda Item 5.2
Dear Mr. Mayor, Councilmembers:
On behalf of the Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority (Open Space Authority), I am writing to express support for approval of the City of San José Community Forest Management Plan (CFMP, or Plan), which will be considered on January 25, 2022, and also express support for the memo drafted by Mayor Liccardo and Councilmembers Carrasco, Esparza, Davis and Cohen, dated January 21, 2022.
The Open Space Authority is a public, independent special district created by the California State Legislature in 1993 to conserve the natural environment, support agriculture, and connect people to nature by protecting open spaces, natural areas, and working farms and ranches for future generations.
Having a comprehensive, forward-looking plan to maintain and expand San Jose’s urban forest is extremely important. We are grateful to City leadership, staff, consultants, and stakeholders for the extensive work that has gone into development of the CFMP and the associated Strategic Workplan. We especially applaud the analysis of the current urban tree canopy and emphasis in the Plan to bring greater tree canopy equity to City residents, especially communities of color, that suffer disproportionate impacts from urban heat island effects.
We strongly agree with Key Findings in the Memorandum from Director Ristow dated November 29, 2021 that emphasize the need for “immediate action” to reverse the trend of declining canopy cover. Improved management of and prevention of further loss of our current urban forest - especially the existing mature trees - is of primary importance, first and foremost as an equity issue as we discussed above, though also as the “most cost effective and efficient way to maintain canopy cover” that is mentioned in the Memorandum. Connecting this to the second Key Finding regarding limited financial and human resources, we would be in strong support for significant allocation of financial resources in next year’s budget – on the order of the tens of millions of dollars mentioned in the Memorandum - to facilitate City stewardship of all trees in the public realm, since private property owners, often with very constrained financial resources themselves, may not be in a position to prioritize tree maintenance. As pointed out in a recent San Jose Spotlight article on the CFMP , trees give back to the
community many times more financial value than what is invested to plant and care for them.
We are encouraged by greater treatment in the Plan regarding support for habitat and biodiversity goals in the selection of tree species. In particular, we note inclusion - in the Strategic Workplan page 143, “Standardize and Improve Planning and Development” Strategy 2d - of local urban forestry and urban biodiversity efforts in which the Open Space Authority has been involved: the “Integrating Planning with Nature ” report in partnership with San
Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI) and SPUR, which brings in expertise from multiple sectors to provide Santa Clara Valley-focused recommendations for urban greening benefits, including urban forestry, and the Urban Ecological Planning Guide developed in partnership with SFEI, that provides recommendations for biologically interconnected
1/25/22, 9:10 AM Mail - Agendadesk - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/ inbox/id/AAQkADUxOWI4ZjE3LTRkNDEtNGUzMS04MjAwLTIzNzdiYTdkMjc5NAAQA… 2/3 Dear Mayor Liccardo, Vice Mayor Jones, and Councilmembers Jimenez, Peralez, Cohen, Carrasco, Davis, Esparza, Arenas, Foley, and Mahan,
Mother Out Front Silicon Valley urge you to protect our climate and cool our city by voting no on the incomplete and deficient Draft Community Fore t Management Plan until ignificant correction and change are made and there i a clear path forward for the city to partner with key takeholder
Our city’s dwindling and unbalanced tree canopy can only be addressed if all the facts are considered and all key stakeholders have meaningful input into the plan. There are a number of questions that must be answered in order to make an effective plan. Why are the city’s trees disappearing? Where are funds for tree maintenance coming from? How do other cities with exemplary urban forestry plans successfully manage their trees? Who will coordinate tree planning, planting, maintenance, and enforcement between all the different departments? Who has been planning, planting, and maintaining the majority of the trees in the past decade? Why have key stakeholders such as Our City Forest not been consulted in the development of this plan?
1/25/22, 9:10 AM Mail - Agendadesk - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/ inbox/id/AAQkADUxOWI4ZjE3LTRkNDEtNGUzMS04MjAwLTIzNzdiYTdkMjc5NAAQA… 3/3 This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
We cannot keep planting tree without a plan to care for them, becau e re ident will be burdened with the co t of maintenance or the ri k from unhealthy tree , the tree will not urvive, and the city will not reach it canopy goal It’ al o vital that equity be centered in thi plan o that we can focu refore tation in the di trict with the lea t amount of tree canopy to help protect them from the danger of the urban heat i land effect
We need a carefully crafted, coordinated plan for our urban forest and ideally, it should be integrated into the Climate Smart San Jose plan. Please correct this Plan before approving it.
Sincerely,
Susan Butler-Graham
Team Coordinator
Mothers Out Front Silicon Valley
Pronoun he/her/ella
"Climate justice is making sure that everyone has an equal opportunity for a healthy and safe life." -Dr. Ayana Elizabeth John on
“The iron law of climate change i that the le you did to cau e it, the ooner you feel it effect Tho e who poured the most carbon into the air will be dead before its effects are fully felt.” -Bill McKibben
1/28/22, 8:40 PM Mail - Agendadesk - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/ inbox/id/AAQkADUxOWI4ZjE3LTRkNDEtNGUzMS04MjAwLTIzNzdiYTdkMjc5NAAQA… 2/3 This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. be planted in the specified locations because of unknown utilities that were discovered.
Staff was supposed to identify other locations, but this was never completed. To date, no effort has been made to find alternative locations for these lost trees. The Public Works Department should be directed to work with the community to find locations and plant the remaining trees
Pellier Park 12 Lost Trees Without meaningful notice, city staff directed the park contractor to remove three historic 100+ year old Palm trees in Pellier Park. The removal was based on the mistaken belief that these century old Palms were "invasive" and not permitted in the park! The HP permit issued for the park reconstruction called for a 4:1 replacement ratio if the trees were ever removed To date, the Administration has taken the position that no additional trees need to be planted for the lost trees, despite the mitigation requirement in the HP permit Staff has suggested the mitigation trees are the trees that were already planned for the park. If such were the case, there would have been no need to include a mitigation requirement for the destroyed palm trees Ironically, the trees planned for the park are replacing trees that were destroyed in 2005 when the park was demolished (A copy of the condition requiring 4 to 1 planting is attached.) Consistent with the HP permit issued for the Pellier Park project, the council should direct the administration to find locations for the required mitigation trees. If the city expects residents and developers to follow tree planting requirements, the City needs to play by the same rules
188 West St. James Street (aka Silvery Towers) 34 Lost Trees The construction of this multi-million dollar residential high-rise has languished over the last seven years and still has not completed construction One of the collateral consequences is the failure of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement Staff to stay on top of the tree planting requirements The Site Development Permit for the project required the developer to plant 46 trees or provide equivalent funds to Our City Forest for tree plantings. A receipt of funds paid to Our City Forest is missing in the City's permit file The builder bought the smallest available street trees (5 gallon trees), but only planted 12. (A picture of one of these trees is attached ) I have emailed Planning Department staff and asked for their determination of the trees that still need to be planted or funded. Based on the site development permit, 34 more trees need to be planted or equivalent funds need to be provided to Our City Forest. (Please see the attached table.) The Council should direct the staff to fully enforce the tree planting requirements for 188 West St. James Street and ensure that the required trees are planted or Our City Forest is funded to plant replacement trees in the vicinity of the project
If the city is serious about planting new trees and increasing its urban forest, it needs to ensure that it follows through on approved plans and requirements There are a lot of good policies already in place. Plans and policies are only as good as the city's commitment toward them.
The city needs to follow its own plans, play by its own rules and when it requires new trees to be planted, make sure the trees are planted.
Please include the above recommendations in your actions on this important issue.
Thank you.
David Pandori
1/28/22, 8:40 PM Mail - Agendadesk - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/ inbox/id/AAQkADUxOWI4ZjE3LTRkNDEtNGUzMS04MjAwLTIzNzdiYTdkMjc5NAAQA… 3/3 This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
2/1/22, 11:29 AM Mail - Agendadesk - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/[email protected]/AAMkADUxOWI4ZjE3LTRkNDEtNGUzMS04MjAwLTIzNzdiYTdkMjc5NAAuAAAAAAC… 2/2 This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. centered in this plan so that we can focus reforestation in the districts with the least amount of tree canopy to help protect them from the dangers of the urban heat island effect.
Please correct this Plan before approving it. If it’s a Community Plan, let the community plan it.
Sincerely,
Sharon Schuetze
Dear Mayor Liccardo and City of San Jose City Councilmembers: Feb 2, 2022
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected]
Subject: 2/8/22 CFMP Agenda Item 5.2 Community Forest Management Plan
Should the Mayor and City Council proceed with the recommendation under consideration I urge:
1. Direct staff to return with an amended report with specific references and corrections to the numerous charges of misleading information, and
2. Return with recommendations as to where to best house the interdepartmental Community Forest Office.
The City of San Jose has been an environmental leader on many fronts.
Under your leadership, San Jose Clean Energy is making strides in providing fossil-free energy and with investments in new renewable power production. Under your leadership, Climate Smart San Jose has set ambitious goals with metrics to lead in enacting new programs for emission reductions.
These accomplishments have been made with the proper foundation of both:
1. Comprehensive studies and,
2. Delegating staff, with specific direction, to the appropriate department.
Unfortunately, both necessary foundations are lacking when it comes to the Community Forestry Management Plan (which is more like a Study) thus rendering its success in achieving the goal of a 20-25% healthy and sustainable tree canopy, very unlikely.
According to local urban forestry experts, the recent Forestry Study has numerous errors and omissions and lacks a clear path toward achieving its canopy goal. These errors and omissions have not been adequately corrected nor discussed in a meaningful way. The Study was funded by a grant from Cal Fire and the total amount of the funding was never utilized nor was the study completed as approved. Building on a half-completed Study with many errors and omissions is not a solid foundation.
Secondly, The City continues to lower its own rules for tree planting and mitigation. Entrusting the San Jose's Community Forest to the Department of Transportation will not solve this serious problem.
Thank you for all your work on behalf of a better environment for San Jose and the region in which we all live.
Sincerely,
Rita Norton
Retired City Employee
LINDA J. LeZOTTE & KEN KELLY
San Jose, CA 95124
February 2, 2022
Via e-mail
San Jose Mayor and City Council
City of San Jose
200 E. Santa Clara Street
San Jose, CA 95113
RE: Draft Community Forest Management Plan
Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council.,
This morning Our City Forrest planted a beautiful Emerald Sunshine Elm tree in our park strip. While the OCF crew was here we pointed out at least 5 trees on 3 different properties adjacent to ours that have received and planted trees provided by OCF. Our neighborhood is slowly planting trees that were removed years ago despite regulations that require replanting.
The lack of an inventory of trees in the City and a mechanism to enforce the requirement for planting missing trees upon the sale of a residence contributes to the loss of our tree canopy.
We have witnessed many “illegal” removals of trees over the years. We both have worked with OCF, while I was a councilmember and my husband directed an urban environmental program, to re-populate our urban forest. The Draft Community Forest Management Plan should be the starting point for a real, robust plan by the City to grow our urban forest.
We know there are many priorities you face in determining where to spend City dollars; however, growing and maintaining our urban forest is a generational legacy you can all be proud of. Thank you for the time you have given the Coalition to express our concerns about the Draft Plan to you personally.
Please direct staff to answer your thoughtful concerns and those of the Coalition about the adequacy of the Draft Plan and return with a Plan that you can be proud of, and the community can support.
Yours truly,
Linda J. LeZotte & Ken Kelly
2/3/22, 2:48 PM Mail - Agendadesk - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/ inbox/id/AAQkADUxOWI4ZjE3LTRkNDEtNGUzMS04MjAwLTIzNzdiYTdkMjc5NAAQA… 1/3 [E ternal Email]
FW: City of SJ Urban Tree Canopy Plan
City Clerk <
Thu 2/3/2022 2:36 PM
To: Agendadesk <
From: <
Sent: Thursday, February 3, 2022 1:57 PM
To: The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOffi District1
< District2 < District3 < District4
< District5 < District 6 < District7
< District8 < District9 < District 10
< City Clerk <
Subject: City of SJ Urban Tree Canopy Plan
Importance: High
Mayor and Councilmembers,
I am a long me advocate for tree canopy, living in the heat island that is D5. Aside from the need to mi gate climate change, a mul tude of studies cite that tree canopy reduces crime, increases property values and provides mental health benefits. Mayor, you may remember par cipa ng in a tree plan ng with us in the Mount Pleasant Neighborhood in 2017.
Since that tree plan ng, another plan ng should have taken place using D5 Par cipatory Budget funds. A er over four years of reques ng accoun ng of those trees from DOT, only recently was it suggested that I ‘trust’ that the work had been completed.
I request that you to reconsider the plan that is currently being considered for the following reasons:
1. DELAY PLAN APPROVAL or ADOPT DOCUMENT AS “ INITIAL DRAFT REPORT” a. Does not contain cri cal financial data to inform any future budge ng or programming. This includes in-house program assessments, revenue streams and expenditures for mature tree work on city property, fees paid by residents, special district budgets, and other programs managed by DOT. This also pertains to Planning in-lieu fees, as well as tree work performed through Public Works, Parks, Airport. etc.
b. Does not provide data or discussion re: CSJ 10-year cycle street tree pruning provided for residents through 2008 (no baseline or assessment for council) c. Contains misleading informa on regarding support to OCF - inflated amounts have not been addressed
d. Delaying adop on has no impact to any opera ons, programming, planning, etc - and city can move forward on no net loss policy work without it e. Delaying adop on will have no impact on grant funding to DOT (contract was ended, a er 2 or more extensions, due to failure to complete parks tree inventory, etc. since 2017 - there were two years prior to the consultant being hired to get that underway)
2/3/22, 2:48 PM Mail - Agendadesk - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/ inbox/id/AAQkADUxOWI4ZjE3LTRkNDEtNGUzMS04MjAwLTIzNzdiYTdkMjc5NAAQA… 3/3 This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
2/3/22, 11:20 AM Mail - Agendadesk - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/[email protected]/inbox/id/AAQkADUxOWI4ZjE3LTRkNDEtNGUzMS04MjAwLTIzNzdiYTdkMjc5NAAQA… 2/2 This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
Sincerely,
Rebecca H.
2/7/22, 11:09 AM Mail - Agendadesk - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/ inbox/id/AAQkADUxOWI4ZjE3LTRkNDEtNGUzMS04MjAwLTIzNzdiYTdkMjc5NAAQA… 2/2 This message is from outside the City email system Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
I have been a citizen of SJ for over 50 years. I have watched the trees in my own neighborhood decline over time and have despaired that no one is able to do anything about it. I am thrilled with the idea that San Jose can have a plan. But please make it a real plan. We need clarity on money, responsibility, and a focus on the future. Please vote NO at this time so the draft can be developed into a plan. The citizens of San Jose deserve no less.
Thank you for your time. If you have questions or comments, feel free to contact me. Keep smiling, Sarah Viaggi
646 N.King Rd.
San Jose, CA 95133
(408) 998-7337
ourcityforest.org
February 4, 2022
San José Mayor & City Council Members
City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St.
San José, CA. 95113
Honorable Mayor Liccardo and San José Council Members:
Thank you for the opportunity to address the matter of the Draft Community Forestry Management Plan (CFMP). Our single mission at Our City Forest is to create a healthier and more sustainable city by engaging and educating others in growing, appreciating, protecting, and caring for our urban forest.
Since the initial CSJ Draft CFMP was released last March without outside review or discussion, OCF has followed its mission, spending untold hours providing feedback to City staff and the Plan consultant in hopes of improving a citywide plan that will long impact San José. During this time, OCF has also informed and engaged others in this very important discussion that will impact our future quality of life.
Through these efforts and those of others, the Coalition to Advance Urban Forestry in San José has emerged. This network of leaders and organizations brings an even broader community voice and additional expertise to the table. OCF has spent decades encouraging San José to adopt tree-friendly policies and practices, and the Coalition can only bolster this effort. It has since been providing input for your review as to what a transparent and meaningful citywide plan would look like - and why it matters.
OCF has always been proud to help save City of San José staff time and money by providing information and education services throughout San José, and by planting some 80,000 trees – 97% which have been financed primarily with outside funding. Just this week, OCF was awarded another large State grant to continue planting in our most under-canopied census tracts. This is the fruit of our partnership with you.
This partnership has enabled San José to have an urban forest that is almost keeping pace with ongoing mature tree removals. It is important to acknowledge that many of these trees could have been saved - and can be in the future - through existing avenues such as code enforcement, policy compliance, and smarter care for city-managed trees during severe drought. These discussions are missing in the Draft before you. Because the knowledge that our canopy is clearly declining, these avenues require your strong direction and a clear expectation of accountability more than ever.
Due to the continuing and substantial gaps in the Draft CFMP for financial and program management data, the Coalition respectfully asks that you accept it only as a “preliminary report” rather than as San José’s official citywide plan. Our City Forest agrees.
Sincerely,
Chair Irma Balderas, Board of Directors
Rhonda Berry, President & CEO
Coalition to Advance Urban Forestry
In San José
February 7, 2022
Mayor Sam Liccardo and City Councilmembers
City of San Jose
City Hall - 200 East Santa Clara Street
San Jose, CA 95113
Re: February 8th City Council Agenda Item 5.2: Additional comments re: Community Forestry Management Plan (“CFMP”)
The Coalition to Advance Urban Forestry in San Jose respectfully submits the following recommendations for City Council action:
1. ACCEPT THE DRAFT CFMP AS A “PRELIMINARY REPORT” ONLY Accept the Draft CFMP as a “preliminary report”, not as San José’s official Citywide Community Forestry Management Plan. The reasons include:
a. The Plan does not contain critical financial data to inform any future budgeting or programming. This includes in-house program assessments, revenue streams and expenditures for mature tree work on city property, fees paid by residents, special district budgets, and other programs managed by DOT. This also pertains to Planning in-lieu fees, as well as tree work performed through Public Works, Parks, Airport. etc.; b. The Plan does not provide data or discussion regarding the City of San Jose 10-year cycle street tree pruning provided for residents through 2008 (no baseline or assessment for council);
c. The Plan contains misleading information regarding support to OCF - inflated funds from the City have not been corrected;
d. Delaying adoption has no impact to any operations, programming, or planning -- and the City can move forward on no net loss policy work and other important initiatives without an adopted Plan;
e. Delaying adoption will have no impact on grant funding to DOT (contract was ended, after 2 or more extensions, due to failure to complete parks tree inventory, etc. since 2017 - there were two years prior to the consultant being hired to get that underway); and f. Delaying adoption shows that the City Council seeks greater transparency and accountability within City Hall.
2. FULL ACCOUNTING – Department of Transportation (DOT) TREE EXPENDITURES Request a full accounting for the past 5 years of all revenue and expenditures pertaining to DOT urban forestry staffing and commercial contractor work, by program. This accounting should include infrastructure maintenance, special assessment districts, tree removals, fees paid to DOT, and all commercial tree contractor expenditures throughout these programs administered through DOT and include recommendations related to this data as an essential component of San José's citywide tree management plan
3. FULL ACCOUNTING - IN-LIEU PROGRAM
Request a full accounting for last 5 years of the Planning Department in-lieu fee program, the rate used, how revenue is tracked and spent, and request recommendations regarding the program as an essential component of any citywide tree management plan. (Refer to the November 6, 2018 City Council meeting staff memo and minutes which outlines this new program including reporting requirements).
4. TRANSPARENT COST ANALYSIS FOR BUDGETING TREE PLANTING Direct staff to compile more complete data to assess all actual costs, including overhead, and all benefits of various tree planting campaigns and models prior to budgeting and implementation.
Please consider project development work such as identifying planting sites, obtaining permits, arborist expertise, maintenance plans, etc. that is required prior to planting -- and providing or tracking tree stewardship for 3 years after planting. The City also should consider whether trees will be planted on city-managed property only (major thoroughfares and medians) or throughout the community and transcending jurisdictional boundaries such as for private yards, streets, schools businesses, parking lots, other public agency lands, and more (the other 85%).
For pertinent background information about OCF tree plantings throughout San Jose (100%), use this link OCFTreesThroughTime.mp4 to view GIS map of OCF tree installations using database records with planting site longitude-latitude data.
5. CITY-DIRECTED TREE REMOVALS
Direct staff to collect tree removal data from all departments and include a recommendation to track tree removals as a critical component of any citywide tree management plan.
6. OUTSTANDING CONCERNS
Appoint the City Manager’s office to conduct a review of outstanding issues cited in previous letters from the members of the public. These include comments from California Native Plant Society, Santa Clara Valley Audubon, Our City Forest, and many others.
Thank you for your careful attention to this important issue. It’s important to get it right and we simply aren’t there yet.
Sincerely,
The Coalition to Advance Urban Forestry in San José
Linda J. LeZotte
Director, Valley Water and Former City of San Jose Councilmember
Vicki Moore
Chair, Santa Clara County Planning Commission
Barbara Marshman
Former San Jose Mercury News Editorial Page Editor
Bob Levy
Vice-Chair, Santa Clara County Planning Commission; former San Jose Planning Commissioner
Michelle Yesney
Former San José Planning Commission; Former Director of San José Office of Environmental Management; Former President, Greenbelt Alliance
Irma Balderas and Christina Egan
Board of Directors, Our City Forest Board of Directors
Susan Butler-Graham
Team Coordinator, Mothers Out Front
Margo Sidener
Chief Executive Officer, Breathe California
Shani Kleinhaus
Environmental Advocate, Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society
Linda Ruthruff
Conservation Chair, California Native Plant Society
Rhonda Berry
President & CEO, Our City Forest
Nicole Kemeny
President, 350 Silicon Valley
Justin Wang
Advocacy Manager, Greenbelt Alliance
Rita Norton
Former Chair, SCVWD Environmental Advisory Committee
Gladwyn d’Souza
Chair, Conservation Committee, Loma Prieta Chapter, Sierra Club
Fernando R. Zazueta
Past President, La Raza Historical Society of Santa Clara Valley
Deb Kramer
Executive Director, Keep Coyote Creek Beautiful
Elizabeth Sarmiento
Board of Directors, Smart Yards Education
Peri Plantenberg
Coordinator, Silicon Valley Youth Climate Action
Terry Trumbull,
Retired Professor, San José State University
Cindy Blain
Executive Director, California ReLeaf
Dave Cortese
California State Senator, Senate District 15
Richard Hobbs
Executive Director, Human Agenda
Jennifer Thompson
Executive Director, Sustainable Silicon Valley