Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Urban Forest Council Restructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rules Committee weighs proposal to shrink Urban Forest Council from 15 to 5 members; public and Council object
Summary
A supervisor proposed reducing the Urban Forest Council from 15 to 5 members to improve quorum and cut costs; the Department of the Environment supported budget savings, while the Urban Forest Council and many public speakers warned the change would reduce representation and functionality.
The Rules Committee debated an ordinance to amend the San Francisco Environment Code to reconstitute the Urban Forest Council from 15 members to five.
Sponsor Supervisor McGoldrick said the change is intended to "gain some efficiency and some effectiveness" and to reduce frequent meeting cancellations and administrative costs. Department of the Environment representative Mark Westland described a fiscal shortfall and told the committee reducing meetings and members could save roughly $44,000 annually in administrative costs.
Urban Forest Council Chair Terry Milne and numerous public speakers strongly opposed the proposal. Milne said the council's current membership "provides valuable input, valuable insight" from city departments and neighborhoods and warned that removing city department representatives would hamper the council's ability to implement policies. "If these 5 departments disappeared from the council, the council, I can imagine they would ignore any budget requests from the council," Milne said. Landmark Tree Committee chair Mike Boss and nonprofit leaders argued a smaller council would lack the geographic and technical diversity needed to oversee landmark nominations and an upcoming urban forest master plan.
Committee members discussed alternatives, including keeping staff as nonvoting support, creating alternate seats or a 7‑member body instead of five. Supervisor McGoldrick said he would consider alternates or a 7‑member compromise. Several supervisors recommended working with council members and the budget committee before final action. The chair ultimately moved to continue the item to the call of the chair so sponsors and stakeholders can negotiate revisions.
Next steps: The sponsor will work with the Urban Forest Council and the budget committee on alternatives (alternates, different seat counts or removing staff as voting members); the item was continued to the call of the chair.
