Tag Archives: Washington State Legislature

Testimony on HB 1078 before Washington State Legislature

Posted on by

My name is Steve Zemke representing TreePAC and Friends of Urban Forests. I served on the Seattle Urban Forestry Commission for 6 and a half years and also as VC.

There has been confusion on this bill as to the Bill summary for SHB 1087 including language from HB 1087. SHB 1087 needs its own separate bill summary.

OUR Specific Ask – Urge passage of SHB 1078 with new definition of “tree replanting areas” instead of tree banks as “tree replanting areas.

The use of the term “tree banks” is confusing and has different meanings, including trees in nursery situations and tree stock development.

Replace definition of “tree banks” with “tree replanting areas” and “tree bank programs” with “tree replanting programs”

Amend to:

“Tree replanting areas” can be designated by a community to replace trees removed that cannot be retained or replanted on site. To compensate for tree loss, tree replanting programs shall provide for the payment of a fee in lieu to cover the cost of buying replacement trees, planting, maintaining and watering them up to 5 years to ensure survival.  Trees replanted shall be roughly equivalent at maturity to the canopy lost.

Bill also provides needed funding for DNR to draft model ordinances. Many cities do not have the technical expertise on staff needed to draft this legislation. Added language in 2SHB 1078 to provide funding also to cities would be welcome

Please pass HB 1078 with amendments. Thank you.

Testimony on HB 1181 on adding amendment on “urban and community forests” to climate resiliency in Comprehensive Plans

Posted on by

My name is Steve Zemke. I am the current Chair of Friends of Seattle’s Urban Forest and Tree PAC. I recently completed serving 6 years on the Seattle Urban Forestry Commission  Over 20 years ago I was the campaign manager for I-547 which was ae precursor to the Washington State Legislature passing the GMA in 1990. I am speaking in support HB 1181

I have a simple ask. Please add  the words “urban and community forests” to HB 1181.  They are critical to climate resilience in our urban areas.

Urban forests are also a  budget and appropriations issue. Hilary Franz is requesting $8 million in the budget for urban and community forestry, The Federal Government is also adding millions to the states for urban and community forestry.

in Nov 2022 at the Partners in Community Forestry Conference in Seattle, Commissioner of Public Lands Hilary Franz said, “Our urban forests are no longer a nice-to-have. They’re absolutely a must-have. Our urban forests are no longer a preferred line item on our budgets. They’re actually a testament to whether we are truly fulfilling our moral responsibility to an economically, environmentally, and socially just society.””

DNR Urban Forestry Legislative Update

Here are my suggestions of where references to “urban and community Forests” could be inserted in HB 1181.

Page 6, line 13 – In Land Use element add after open spaces and green spaces, “urban and community forests”,

In the same paragraph on the Land Use element , add sentence – “The land use element must evaluate urban and community forest canopy and its role in climate resilience, reducing heat island impacts, providing health benefits, and  ecosystem services.”

P 17, line 37 Insert in last sentence. Identify, protect and enhance “urban and community forests “and natural areas to foster resiliency to climate impacts , as well as areas of vital habitat for “plant and animal diversity,” safe passage and species migration

page 6  Section 1. (10)  Environment is more than air and water quality. It should include “healthy soil and plants and animals”

Thanks for considering this.

‘Our urban forests are a key component to keeping our cities livable as we increase housing. Trees are essential for climate resilience. With good planning we can have both trees and housing in our urban areas. It is not a question of one or the other. We can have both. This legislation needs to detail the necessity of cities and towns to incorporate their urban forests and trees as part of their climate resiliency plans as we also grow our housing supply.

Washington State HB 1078 would allow developers to clearcut trees on urban lots!

Posted on by
Text of  e-mail below was also sent to all House Local Government Committee members
To: Davina.Duerr@eg.wa.gov <Davina.Duerr@eg.wa.gov>
Subject: Concerns regarding HB 1078 to void tree and urban forest ordinances during development

Dear Representative Duerr,
This bill needs to be amended or rejected.  If passed as is, it will become known as the Washington State Urban Clearcutting Bill.
This approach to override city and town tree and urban forest ordinances was in last year’s middle housing legislation and it has been pulled it out as a separate bill because it was controversial at the time. Adding “tree banks” to get people to support it now does not change the issue of removing existing trees that could be saved. in many cases with better planning. Trees and density can co-exist – it is not trees or housing we need both and can do that.  People need trees where they live to have healthy communities.
As written HB 1078 reads as a state mandate that would allow developers to override city and town tree protection ordinances that require tree retention or planting trees on a building site. It would allow developers to legally clearcut lots with trees and tree groves, not replant any trees on site, and create new blighted areas and heat islands.

HB 1078 directs that city and town tree ordinances “must allow an option that allows obligations for the protection and management of these trees imposed by the ordinance to be satisfied by the use of a tree bank”

HB 1078 implies that any city regulations to retain or plant trees on a building site can simply be ignored by paying a fee into a tree bank.

The bill declares “In regulating the removal of trees during development, however cities sometimes impose regulations that limit or prevent development opportunities that would provide additional housing, even if the removal of trees in these circumstances would not impair the health of the community.”

HB 1078  makes two false assumptions.
The first false assumption is that removing established trees in “noncritical areas will not impair the health of a community”

The area you remove trees from will lose climate resiliency and environmental services. Existing established trees provide heat island reduction, reduced storm water runoff, decreased air pollution, physical and mental health benefits, wildlife habitat, noise reduction and a sense of place. This occurs lot by lot and can extend to neighborhood impacts also.

The second false assumption is that trees are preventing developing a property but that is seldom the case.  Tree ordinances almost always allow developers to remove trees that limit the development potential of a lot. Seattle’s existing tree ordinance, for example, does not apply to “Tree removal shown as part of an issued building or grading permit as provided in Sections 25.11.060, 25.11.070, and 25.11.080;”

This bill needs to be amended to clarify that developers must comply with local tree protection ordinances to save trees when they can and replant trees removed when they can on site but can use a tree bank or tree mitigation fund or tree replanting fund to plant trees elsewhere as needed if they cannot do it on the building lot.

These replanted trees can be targeted for race and social and environmental equity when they cannot be replanted on the building site. All building sites in the city need to require tree replacement, not just those in “noncritical areas.”  Replanted trees must have equivalence to the size of the tree removed – replacement fees must increase as the size of the removed tree increases to make up for lost ecosystem services of the tree removed.

HB 1078 should also be amended to say that developers must maximize the retention of existing trees on all building sites like Austin, Texas does.   Seattle, e.g., also requires that in its platting and short platting process but needs to extend it to the total building process.

Several additional comments on amending bill:

Recommend changing Tree Bank to a Tree Planting Fund or Off Site Mitigation Fund or similar terminology as recommended by phytosphere.com that covers all trees removed, not just ones removed in “non-critical areas”  
“Although “tree bank” has a nice ring to it, it has been applied to a wide variety of programs (and in some cases to organizations). It is certainly legitimate to define the term in a tree ordinance and use it locally in that sense. However, the fact that different jurisdictions use the term in different ways may lead to confusion. In general, we recommend the use of more descriptive (albeit more prosaic) terms such as “tree planting fund” or “off-site mitigation planting” to describe the off-site mitigation tactics that are specified in the ordinance.”
An example of a Tree Planting Fund.; Portland, Oregon has a Tree Planting and Preservation  Fund  11.15.010
A.  Purpose. The purpose of the Tree Planting and Preservation Fund is to facilitate tree planting, to ensure mitigation or tree replacement when tree preservation or tree density standards are not met on a particular site, and to advance the City’s goals for the urban forest and intend to achieve equitable distribution of tree-related benefits across the City.
B.  Expenditures. Money in the Tree Planting and Preservation Fund may be used only as follows:

.  To plant trees on public or private property, including streets. Planting trees includes the cost of materials and labor necessary to install and establish a tree for a 5 year period;

2.  To purchase conservation easements for the perpetual retention of trees and tree canopy. Such conservation easements shall allow the City to replace trees that are removed when they die or become dangerous; and

3.  To acquire land to permanently protect existing trees or groves.

C.  Contributions. Contributions to the Tree Planting and Preservation Fund may occur through a number of means, including:

1.  Payment made in lieu of tree replacement as part of a tree permit issued as stated in Chapter 11.40;

2.  Payment made in lieu of preservation or planting where site or street characteristics or construction requirements make it infeasible to meet the requirements of Chapter 11.50;

3.  Payment of restoration fees for enforcement actions for Private Trees; and

4.  Voluntary contributions.

D.  Administration of the Tree Planting and Preservation Fund. The Tree Planting and Preservation Fund is administered by the City Forester, maintained in a dedicated separate account, and is independent of the general fund. Any balance in the Tree Planting and Preservation Fund will be carried forward into subsequent fiscal years.

HB 1078 seems at cross purposes as stated in the Department of Natural Resources Dec 2022 Newsletter – Tree Link Newsletter – Urban and community Forestry in Washington

“During her remarks last month at the Partners in Community Forestry Conference in Seattle, Commissioner of Public Lands Hilary Franz said, “Our urban forests are no longer a nice-to-have. They’re absolutely a must-have. Our urban forests are no longer a preferred line item on our budgets. They’re a testament to whether we are truly fulfilling our moral responsibility to an economically, environmentally, and socially just society.”

“Later that morning, Commissioner Franz announced her intention to seek an $8 million investment from the state Legislature when the 2023 legislative session begins in January. Urban and Community Forestry Program staff worked with DNR’s legislative and policy teams to draft a vision for the program that, if funded, will allow DNR to meet the demand for funding and the needs of our urban forests.”

Steve Zemke, Chair – Tree PAC , 

                             

Send a Be My Valentine E-Mail to State Senators- Add urban and community forestry amendments to E2Shb 1099

Posted on by

Dear Friends of Tree PAC

E2SHB 1099 is in the WA State Senate Housing and Land Use Committee. The bill would add a climate resiliency element that cities and counties need to consider when they update their Comprehensive Plans under the state’s Growth Management Act. They are considering amendments to the bill in Executive Session on Thursday before it is voted on in Committee.

Please help strengthen the bill by sending the Washington State Senators a Valentine Day email urging that they adopt the purposed urban forest amendments below.

 

We have a pre-written e-mail you can quickly sent them. Feel free to add your own comments.

Here are our proposed amendments we are asking for:

In Sec. 4 (1) – Page 7 line 14 – Add underlined words – “A land use element designating the proposed general distribution and general location and extent of the uses of land, where appropriate, for agriculture, timber production, housing, commerce, industry, recreation, open spaces, general aviation, airports, public utilities, public facilities, urban and community forests, and other land uses.”
In Sec. 4 (1) – Page 7 line 22 – Insert following sentence – “The land use element must evaluate urban and community forestry canopy cover and its preservation and enhancement to mitigate heat impacts and associated health impacts on humans and the natural environment,”
In Sec. 4 (9) (b) (i) (A) – Page 17 line 30 – Add following words (bolded only to designate they are new words to add to current new sentence in bill) to the following – “Identify, protect, and enhance urban and community forests and other natural areas to foster resiliency to climate impacts, as well as areas of vital habitat for plant and animal diversity, safe passage and species migration; and”

Thanks for your help!

Steve Zemke

TreePAC – Chair

www.TreePAC.org

Contributions to support TreePAC are always welcome. Click here to donate.

Help Needed NOW! Urge Washington State Senators to Pass E2SHB 1216

Posted on by

Thanks to everyone for your  previous strong support and e-mails sent to the Senate Agriculture, Water, Natural Resources and Parks Committee. The Committee voted to remove a bad  amendment added to E2SHB 1216 at the last minute in the House. It would would have let private property owners “opt out” of local tree and urban forests ordinances. Public support to remove the bad amendment won in the end. It was removed.

E2SHB 1216 is currently in the Senate Ways and Means Committee. A Hearing is scheduled for Tuesday, March 30th at 1:30 PM.

E2SHB 1216 would provide $2.7 million per biennium for the Washington State Department of Natural Resources to assist cites, counties and tribes in doing tree inventories and canopy studies, developing Urban Forest Management Plans, and drafting Tree and Urban Forest Protection Ordinances. 

Your help is critical now to keep the bill moving and get it enacted into state law. Here’s how you can help.

Sign in “Pro” on E2SHB 1216

This must be done 1 hour before the Committee meets.

Send an e-mail now to State Senators urging they pass this bill!

Click on the link above to send Senators a pre-written e-mail that you can edit.

Once passed out of Ways and Means, E2SHB 1216 will go to the Senate floor for a final vote. Like we did in the House, we need to show strong public support to get this bill passed!

Thanks for your help.

Your Help Needed Now to Pass E2SHB 1216 to Protect our Urban and Community Forests

Posted on by

Urge Washington State Senators to Amend and

Pass E2SHB 1216

Thanks to your strong support E2SHB 1216 (Engrossed 2nd Substitute HB 1216) was passed by the Washington State House of Representatives and is now in the State Senate.

E2SHB 1216 – concerning urban and community forests – would direct the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to assist Washington cities and towns and counties in our state conducting tree inventories and canopy analysis, developing Urban Forestry Management Plans and drafting local Tree Ordinances.

A hearing on the bill is set for Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 1:30 PM in the Senate Agriculture, Water, Natural Resources and Parks Committee.

How you can help.

Sign in Pro on E2SHB 1216  

must be done by 12:30 PM on 3/16/2021

Send public comments to Key Committee members

Executive Action scheduled for 3/18/2021
Action network e-mail urges Committee to amend the bill and then pass it.

Thanks for your help.

Update – Urge Washington State House Legislators to Pass HB 1216 to Increase Protection for Urban and Community Forests

Posted on by

       Update – Urge Washington State House Legislators to  Pass HB 1216 to Increase Protection for Urban and Community Forests

Thanks to the over 200 people who responded to our previous e-mail on HB 1216 asking you to send an e-mail to the members of the House Rural Development, Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee.  The committee voted ‘do pass” on HB 1216  and sent it to the Appropriations Committee. A hearing has been set for Tues, Feb 16th at 1:30 PM. To stay alive the bill needs to be voted out of the Appropriations Committee by Feb. 22nd and sent to the House Rules Committee in order to be added to the calendar to be voted on by the full House. 

We have changed the text of the e-mail for you to send and expanded it to include all House members. We need you to send the new e-mail to let all House members know there is strong support for passing HB 1216. You can make a difference.

HB 1216 would direct the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to assist Washington cities and towns and counties in our state conducting tree inventories and canopy analysis, developing Urban Forestry Management Plans and drafting local Tree Ordinances.

HB 1216 was sponsored by Representative Ramos and 8 other House members. This bill was requested by the Department of Natural Resources and is supported By Governor Jay Inslee. Governor Inslee has earmarked $2.7 million dollars in his proposed State Budget to support DNR’s efforts to increase protection for trees and urban forests. HB 1216 would help the state meet its goals of increasing climate resilience, protecting human health and addressing environmental equity.

Please do these two Quick Action items:

1. Send an e-mail today to keep HB 1216 moving in the Washington State House of Representatives.  

Submit Public Comment to House Members Now!

2. Sign in as “pro” HB 1216 on the Appropriations Committee hearing page. You must do this by 12:30 PM Tues, Feb. 16th. to be counted. 

I would like my position noted for the legislative record 

If you would also like to submit written testimony for the Appropriations Committee Hearing legislative record click here. Submit written testimony for Hearing record HB 1216  Written testimony can be submitted up to 24 hours after the hearing starts.

Thanks for your help.

Take Action – Urge Washington Legislators to Pass HB 1216 to Increase Protection for Urban and Community Forests

Posted on by

 

 

Take Action – Urge Washington Legislators to Pass HB 1216
to Increase Protection for Urban and Community Forests

 

 

We need your help to increase protection for urban and community trees and forests in Washington State. HB 1216 has been introduced by Rep. Ramos and 8 other sponsors in the Washington State Legislature. It is a high priority bill to pass this session.

HB 1216 would direct the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to assist Washington cities and towns and counties in our state conducting tree inventories and canopy analysis, developing Urban Forestry Management Plans and drafting local Tree Ordinances.

This bill was requested by the Department of Natural Resources and is supported By Governor Jay Inslee. Governor Inslee has earmarked $2.1 million dollars in his proposed State Budget to support DNR’s efforts to increase protection for trees and urban forests. HB 1216 would help the state meet its goals of increasing climate resilience, protecting human health and addressing environmental equity.

HB 1216 had a hearing on Tuesday, Jan 26, 2021 at 10 AM in the House Rural Development, Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee. To stay alive in the session, HB 1216 has to be voted out of the committee by Feb 15, 2021. It is currently scheduled for executive session on Wed, Feb 3rd, 2021 at 10 AM.  Once voted out of committee it will go to the House Appropriations Committee. It must be voted out of the Appropriations Committee by Feb. 22, 2021.

The quickest and easiest way to let House Rural Development, Agriculture and Natural Resources committee members know you support this bill is to send them an e-mail via Action Network. We have written a short e-mail draft supporting the bill to which you can add your own comments to personalize the message. With one click it will be sent to all the Committee members as well as the bill sponsors.

Submit Public Comment Now!

Thanks for your help.

Steve Zemke – Chair – Tree PAC
stevezemke@TreePAC.org

Bill information – HB 1216 – Go to this legislative page to see the proposed text of HB 1216, to see the sponsors of the bill, the House Bill analysis, the history of the bill, to indicate your support for the bill, to send an e-mail of support to your own Legislative District Legislators and to sign up to get e-mail notifications of any changes in the bill’s status.

Urge WA Legislators to Pass HB 1099 to Respond to the Climate Crisis! 

Posted on by
 Take Action – Urge Legislators to Pass HB 1099

to Respond to the Climate Crisis!
Dear Friends,

The Washington State Legislature is considering legislation to address climate change as a required goal in revising the Washington State Growth Management Act. HB 1099 would require cities and counties in their comprehensive planning process to address climate resiliency and mitigation as well as reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and vehicle miles traveled. We are asking that they adopt this much needed legislation.

HB 1099 is currently in the House Environment and Energy Committee. A hearing is scheduled for Tuesday, Jan 19, 2021 at 8 AM. At a subsequent meeting, not yet scheduled, the Committee can go into executive session to vote on the bill.

We are asking that the Committee amend HB 1099 to add the words “urban and community forests” to the text of the bill in the environment, land use and climate resilience goals. We urge they vote to adopt the bill and send it to the House Rules Committee to be voted on by the full House.

Identifying and protecting urban and community forests is a vital component in increasing climate resiliency and mitigation. Our urban and community forests function to protect public health, reduce heat island effects, reduce energy use for heating and cooling, mitigate air and water pollution, and address environmental inequities.

We have prepared a pre-written letter that you can add your own comments to and quickly e-mail to the House Environment and Energy Committee members to urge they amend and pass HB 1099.

  SUBMIT PUBLIC COMMENT NOW  

Thanks

Steve Zemke  – Chair – Tree PAC
stevezemke@TreePAC.org
websites:
www.TreePAC.org