Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tree Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Saint Paul holds public hearing on tree preservation ordinance; council lays first reading over to July 15
Summary
After extensive public testimony and staff work, the council accepted community input on a proposed tree preservation ordinance, emphasized that replanting is not preservation, and laid the ordinance over for final adoption on July 15 to allow staff time for implementation planning and annual evaluation provisions.
The Saint Paul City Council on July 9 heard public testimony and council discussion on a proposed tree preservation ordinance, then laid the item over to July 15 for final adoption.
Public commenters and community input-group members urged stronger protections for mature trees and periodic reporting on the ordinance’s effectiveness. A public commenter stated, “Tree replanting is important, but replanting is not preservation,” arguing that mature canopy benefits take decades to replace. Bridget Allen Alice, a member of the tree input group, said preserving mature trees offers “lowest barrier, highest value” for the whole city.
Michael John Peace, president and chief parks champion of the Saint Paul Parks Conservancy, described the ordinance as a paradigm shift that acknowledges trees as public infrastructure and praised the collaborative process that produced standard operating procedures. Councilmembers repeatedly praised the breadth of public engagement—citing 19 public meetings and input from advisory bodies including the Parks Commission and the Mayor’s Advisory Committee on Disabilities—and emphasized that implementation will require Parks and Public Works to coordinate closely.
Council discussion stressed that the draft is not perfect but that the lengthy process and community-led input strengthened the proposal. Councilmembers endorsed including a requirement to evaluate the ordinance annually to see how it’s performing. The council voted to lay over the ordinance to July 15 for final adoption so staff can finalize implementation details and ensure the standard operating procedures align with the ordinance.
Because the item was at first reading, no final rule or ordinance was adopted on July 9. Council statements and public testimony indicate continued support for a preservation-first approach, but councilmembers also acknowledged questions remain about enforcement and associated costs during implementation.
