Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Urban Forestry topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would require Commerce to draft a model urban‑forest ordinance, with grants for adoption
Summary
HB 2267 directs the Department of Commerce to produce a model urban‑forest ordinance and grant program to help local governments prioritize avoiding tree removal, minimizing impacts and mitigating losses. Environmental groups supported the model; builders warned grants‑linked adoption could become effectively mandatory.
Lawmakers heard House Bill 2,267 on Nov. 25, which would direct the Department of Commerce to develop a model urban forest management ordinance by July 1, 2028, provide guidance updated every 10 years, and operate a grant program for jurisdictions that substantially adopt the model.
Staffer Kellen Wright told the committee the model ordinance would prioritize avoiding tree removal first, then minimizing impacts and finally mitigating loss through tools such as tree banks and incentives for retention during development. The Department would produce guidance on best available science, cost estimates for establishing and maintaining new trees, and options to estimate the financial benefits of canopy retention.
Environmental and conservation groups urged support. Holly Hines (Washington Conservation Action) told the committee the bill would protect stormwater management, air quality and reduce urban‑heat exposure, while Jesse Pastana (Nature Conservancy) and Bryce Yeaton (Futurewise) said the model ordinance could help balance housing growth with tree canopy protection and prioritize tree‑bank placement in lower‑canopy communities.
Industry representatives urged changes. Andrea Smiley (Building Industry Association) and Alex Hurd (Master Builders Association) said making grant eligibility contingent on adopting the model risks turning guidance into a de facto mandate, reduces local flexibility and may create GMA‑related legal exposure. Smiley asked for more flexibility so climate advisory groups and local jurisdictions can choose from a broader menu of options. Rob Crabill (Puget Sound Partnership) said the ordinance is voluntary and would provide practical options to balance canopy and housing.
The committee closed the hearing without a vote. Stakeholders requested further drafting work to clarify grant eligibility, legal placement of the model within the Growth Management Act and protections to preserve local decision‑making.
