City of Tacoma is set to get all gung-ho on going green. I mean really green. Like tree green. City officials in charge of Tacoma’s Urban Forestry program recently presented to Tacoma’s Environment and Public Works Committee a comprehensive set of policy guidelines that would make it easier for citizens and others to plant and manage trees along Tacoma’s crumbling streets, and elsewhere.



Aside from being pretty, trees provide a host of benefits for the cities in which they grow. Trees literally clean the air by absorbing air pollutants and releasing oxygen. They reduce storm water runoff and erosion; they temper climate; they can save energy; they create wild life habitat; they can improve health, serve as screens, and strengthen community. They can even help contribute to a community’s economy and way of life.



But planting trees in a concrete jungle can be tough — mostly because trees have a will of their own, and can mess up more utilitarian features of the landscape such as power lines, homes and sidewalks. But a growing body of research shows that trees are a boon to the cities that choose to plant and manage them. Because of such conflicts, businesses, residents and community improvement organizations in Tacoma are required to plant only certain kinds of trees, and apply for a so-called tree-care permit if they decide to start seeding an urban forest, for example.



But current city codes aimed at managing trees in Tacoma are meager at best, says official Urban Forester Ramie Pierce. Citizens who plant, cut or trim trees without a permit, for example, are subject to criminal fines and even jail time. But to enforce city codes, which have no policy guidelines to support them, Pierce or another city staff member would have to collect hard evidence such as a confession, video tape or witness statements. They would then have to go before council and present their case, and then ask for a council resolution. If they weren’t laughed out of council chambers, staff could then apply the criminal penalty, which includes a $100 fine and up to 30 days in jail. That leaves Pierce and others in charge of policing trees with a ridiculous penalty that they can’t really enforce.



“It’s essentially unenforceable,” says Pierce.



The first step in correcting that problem and a host of others is to develop policy guidelines. The ones we have are sparse to non-existent, and are based on outdated science and  practices. Pierce, who was hired full-time in 2008, presented newly drafted policy guidelines to a council committee in February. Those guidelines will circulate for the next several months, with hopes that the public will provide feedback and concerns, which Pierce says she takes very seriously.



“The overall goal is to have the urban forest recognized as an asset and as part of the city’s infrastructure and to have it not only recognized, but managed,” says Pierce. “We really want public input on this. We’re not trying to scoot this through. This is a big deal.”



Urgent matters currently include updates to the list of allowed trees; changes to enforcement measures, such as making planting without a permit a civil rather than a criminal violation; and collection of public feedback regarding the newly proposed policies, which will guide comprehensive plan amendments in 2010. Long term goals include development and dissemination of an urban forestry manual and final development of a comprehensive urban forestry management plan.



“This will make us more accountable,” says Pierce. “Going through this process will make sure it (new urban forestry policy) is what the public wants, and that it’s what’s best for the community.”