Feds Gives $10 Million for City’s ‘Urban Forest’ Despite Gloria’s Track Record in Keeping Trees

I had to laugh sarcastically this morning when I read in today’s Union-Tribune about how “San Diego plans to boost the city’s urban forest with $10 million in federal climate funds that will help it plant thousands of trees in vulnerable neighborhoods and preserve many threatened trees.”

A good part of the article was about how trees help mitigate heat. City Forester Brian Widener even was quoted as saying:

“Trees provide shade, ecosystem services and a host of other benefits to make a greener and more livable San Diego. We are thrilled to receive this funding which will improve San Diego’s urban forest in our city’s historically underserved communities with new trees and expansion in growing space around our existing trees.”

Readers of the Rag are familiar with Brian Widener. OB and Widener have not had a cozy relationship – or Kensington. Widener wanted to cut down 110-year old healthy Pepper Trees in Kensington because he claimed they were so badly decayed, they were a safety hazard. He based his assessment on photos or limited inspection of just a few trees. A private assessment by a retired UC arborist found most of the trees were sound and could have lived another 30-40 years.

Widener explained that by looking at only a few trees, “we’re able to extrapolate” and say the rest on the list are in that same category and in decline at pretty much the same rate. “The reality is all of these trees are at their end of life,” he said. Yet, a January 2021 windstorm that knocked down 200 city trees but failed to topple any of the remaining 33, supposedly end-of-life, peppers. Still, Widener asserted that would not change his conclusion.

A June 2022 Reader article reported:

In Ocean Beach, neighbors were similarly appalled when, on short notice last October, city crews showed up with chainsaws, ultimately killing five of the century-old palms and planning to return for more; allegedly a request of the airport and FAA, which the lawsuit disputes.

Both cases accuse the city and Widener of pressing ahead with the removal of healthy trees and failing to give notice or seek community input, as called for by the 2005 tree policy. Under the policy, all tree removal permit requests must be sent to community planning groups, council members and the currently inactive community forest advisory board.

Of course, we don’t have to go to the Reader for stories about Widener.

Back in October 2021 – referring to the incident in OB in the Reader article – Rag reporter Geoff Page was on the ground with other OB and Pt Loma residents upset by the city’s efforts to remove the Palm Trees. Page wrote:

The City of San Diego is moving forward aggressively to cut down iconic and historic, tall palm trees on Newport Avenue, Santa Monica and Santa Barbara.

They are lying to the public saying it is because of a safety issue.

These are healthy trees — there is no safety issue whatsoever. But, when talking to the city’s forester, Brian Widener, it soon becomes clear that he is one of those people who believe if you repeat a lie over and over, people will eventually believe it is true. No matter how many times he says it is a safety issue, it is still not true.

The city is not only using public safety as an excuse, they are bypassing all the normal procedures for removing city trees by designating these as emergency removals. There is no emergency, the city just does not want to take the time to explain to the public why removals are necessary.

To add insult to injury, the city had the airport send residents a letter dated October 8 but not received until October 14, and it stated:

“The Tree(s) identified above are scheduled for removal by a City of San Diego contractor within the next few weeks.”

The tree removal crews showed up unannounced Tuesday, October 19 and began cutting a tree before a resident stopped them.  This was not a contractor; these were City of San Diego employees.

After at least one resident tried to block crews from cutting down a palm tree in front of her house, Widener threatened to use police if any other residents interfered.

Then, later that month, Widener’s department removed four palms at the intersection of Cable and Niagara on October 28 and he refused to say why. His uncooperative response generated a Public Records Request by Page – which showed the bogus claims of the city — and of Widener.

Things worsened. In April 2022, Page reported:

The City of San Diego committed a crime against the Point Loma / OB community on the morning of Monday, April 25, there is no other way to put it. They came out to Newport Ave. and thumbed their noses at the public while hiding behind a phalanx of police officers as they murdered historic palm trees.

What is so infuriating is that the city did this very same thing last October. Only the public outcry the morning they showed up and quick legal action saved the trees in 2021. In both cases, the city attempted to come out and quickly, and stealthily to kill the trees, with barely 24 hours of notice to anyone. On Monday, it was less than 24 hours.

Page found that city forester Brian Widener tried to abuse the immediate safety hazard mechanism to get rid of more palm trees. The Municipal Code defines “Imminent Life Safety Hazard” as “any condition which creates a present, extreme and immediate danger to life, property, health or public safety.”

Since all of the trees are still standing just five months later, this definition clearly would not have applied as the city forester attempted to apply it.

In essence then, the City and Widener lied to the public about the”‘Immediate Safety Hazard” in its effort to remove the Point Loma Palms.

So, yes, this is where my cynicism about the city planting trees springs from. And at my sarcastic chuckle when reading Widener’s quote.

With all this money coming in, perhaps the city needs to enhance its “award-winning Community Forest Advisory Board.” The last time Geoff Page looked at the Board’s website, he found that when he hit the link for the current 14 board members, it showed that 12 members were marked as expired and two members marked as vacant. Of the 12 expired members, 7 expired in Jan., 2021, 2 vacant as of Jan., 2020, and others have been vacant since 2011 thru 2019.

So much for Widener. What about the city itself?

Earlier this year, Page discovered that the city had chopped down 13 trees in the Midway District for no good reason. So much for our urban canopy.

Don’t get me wrong. All this federal money to plant more trees here is a good thing.

But under the current administration of Mayor Gloria, the city — and its forester — really have a checkered history in protecting our trees, our urban canopy. The city lied to the public; Widener lied to the public – and up to now, have cut down more trees than they’ve planted. So, we have to carefully watch and ensure this $10 million is spent actually planting trees.

UT reporter Joshua Emerson Smith wrote a recent piece in April about the city’s canopy count and doubted the city could close in on its goal.

However, it’s unlikely that significant progress has been made. The city has planted about 1,220 trees a year on average since 2020. But officials confirmed Tuesday that it’s losing just as many trees to old age and new development.

That means the city may have actually lost canopy coverage in recent years, said Anne Fege, the longstanding chair of the city’s Community Forest Advisory Board. “You actually go backwards because the removed trees are bigger,” she said. “Trees don’t grow that fast.”

The city’s newest goal for canopy coverage would require planting about 100,000 new trees by 2035, or about 8,333 a year. This year, the city estimates it will only plant about 1,000.

Fege said she’s advocated for years to increase the city’s forestry budget with little success. “The story is tired,” she said. “They’re not spending the money. They’re not doing the job.”

Recently, Anne Fege wrote an article we reposted entitled, “San Diego Trees Are Going, Going …”:

In recent decades, trees are being lost in older neighborhoods to infill development, with limited tree protection or replacement required by newly approved code changes. Other older trees, such as Torrey pines, have “outgrown” their sidewalk or yard spaces; are uprooted in storms and high winds; die because they aren’t watered deeply (once, each month without rain); or have to be removed because of public safety risks.

The vice-chair of the OB Planning Board told the Rag that over the last 5 years, the city has cut down nearly all the trees on his block and have planted only one.

On the good  news side of this story, San Diego city residents can request a free street tree by filling out an application at sandiego.gov/trees. That website also has details about the city’s urban forest.