The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07-23-26 Public Comment - M. Kaveney - Public Comment for UPF Board members, UFMP Update folderFrom:BozemanTreeCoalition To:Bozeman Public Comment; Alison Sweeney; Alex Nordquest; Mitchell Overton Subject:[EXTERNAL]Public Comment for UPF Board members, UFMP Update folder Date:Thursday, July 23, 2026 10:20:59 AM Attachments:2026.July 23. BTC- UFMP comments..pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello-Please share the attached letter with the UPF Board members and the public comments folder before the noon deadline for today's, Thursday July 23, UPF meeting and work session. Please also forward the attached letter to Mitch Overton, Alison Seeney, and Alex Nordquest if the email addresses above are no longer current. Thank you,Marcia Kaveney for BTC To: Mitch Overton, Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department Alex Nordquest, Forestry Division Alison Sweeney, City Commissioner Bozeman Urban Parks and Forestry Advisory Board members Re: 2026 Urban Forest Management Plan (UFMP) Draft July 23, 2026 The Bozeman Tree Coalition (BTC) is writing today to share some perspectives on the June 25th, 2026, Urban Parks and Forestry (UPF) Board meeting. We appreciate the work that has been done so far by the consultant team, city staT, and UPF Board members and look forward to additional opportunities to give input on the UFMP draft. Comments related to the June 2026 UPF meeting: 1.) Carbon Sequestration: A board member commented that “older trees sequester less carbon than younger growing vegetation.” A point of clarification might be helpful here. While younger trees are known to absorb carbon more quickly, it is the larger, mature trees that are known to store a greater quantity of carbon because of their large canopies and greater number of leaves, and also because they too were young once, storing carbon quickly and then keeping it stored. (Please see the link below for more details.) Perhaps more importantly for Bozeman’s climate and canopy goals, mature trees provide more shade, habitat, and storm water mitigation while requiring less supplemental watering than young trees. All together, these benefits support the argument for retaining as many mature trees as possible in Bozeman’s urban forest. https://www.pacificforest.org/wp- content/uploads/2014/01/EEOldTreesHoldMoreCarbon_140116.pdf BOZEMANTREECOALITION@GMAIL.COM 2.) Setting policy and code guidance: At the end of the UMFP work session, the board chair invited the consultants to ask questions to the board. One consultant asked if the UPF Board would find it “a reasonable path to proceed with — to try to codify some of [the] tree care responsibilities… when it comes to development”. They explained that the public showed interest in this and felt it was left out of the Unified Development Code update. The board chair and one other board member responded with what appeared to be general opposition. Paraphrasing, one stated that adding policy information would deflect from the purpose and readability of the UFMP, unless perhaps included in an appendix. Another added that [setting policy or code guidance] feels more like a stick and provides complications to the community. BTC would like you to consider the following in response to the statements above: a) Did this seemingly simple question and answer period fall outside of the agenda and proper meeting procedure? This statements by the two board members give the appearance of giving direction to the consultant team on an item that is openly listed as one of the main goals in the UFMP draft. (See quote below.) Shouldn’t a major modification of the UFMP plan require it to be an action item with public notification, board discussion, public input, and vote? BTC respectfully requests that the consultants and board members continue to operate with that in mind. Page V of the Executive Summary states, “Integrate Trees into Development, Infrastructure, and Water-Conscious Site Design: Recommendations relate to ensuring trees are planned, planted, protected, and maintained as part of Bozeman’s growth, capital projects, streetscapes, parks, stormwater systems, and private development. (Emphasis by BTC.) b) Additionally, many of you may remember that throughout the UDC update, Community Development Director Erin George and Community Development Manager Chris Saunders repeatedly communicated to the public that all code update requests relating to trees would have to wait for the completion of the 2026 UFMP update — that city plans inform and oTer guidance for city codes and policy. So, not only would it be a reasonable path to proceed with, but it is also expected by the community that this plan will give sound philosophical and specific guidance to allow for the kinds of tree protections the community has been asking for since the beginning of the UDC update. Again, this goal is clearly stated on page v in the Executive Summary of the UFMP draft and deviation will be unwelcome by the public. c) On this same topic, some of the confusion around managing private trees may come from attempting to manage all private trees as the same. BTC has regularly encouraged delineating private trees in residential backyards from large properties undergoing new development. They should be managed diTerently. Incentives (carrots) such as the City’s cost share program are useful for small property owners. However, large property owners and developers depend on and benefit from clear rules written in the UDC (Chapter 38 of the municipal code). This has been the subject of many conflicts over new development during the past several years. Good rules will make good developments and be easier for staT to enforce. It’s not a “stick” or punishment to have clear expectations for new developments when it comes to removal of mature trees or groves. For example, Bend, Oregon has recently adopted new city codes for retaining mature trees on private property undergoing development review that use a point system. Follow the link below for more details. https://bendoregon.gov/resources/city-codes-policies-ordinances-and-resolutions/tree- regulation-code/ It is BTCs strong hope that the consultant team and advisory board will consider our comments during their next work session, tonight, and continue to work on developing a robust UFMP that not only includes reasonable canopy increase goals, best practices for tree care, incentives for small property owners, but also clear code recommendations for retaining a meaningful portion of the mature trees on private property undergoing development review. Thank you all for your consideration of these comments. The BTC looks forward to future engagement opportunities on the UFMP Update. Marcia Kaveney, BTC cofounder Daniel Carty, BTC cofounder April Craighead, BTC cofounder Angie Kociolek, BTC cofounder Annie Sheets, Retired City Arborist, BTC member