HomeMy WebLinkAboutRESOLUTION 2026-028 N.C.S. 03-16-2026
Resolution No. 2026-028 N.C.S. Page 1 of 2
Resolution No. 2026-028 N.C.S.
of the City of Petaluma, California
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PETALUMA APPROVING THE
PETALUMA URBAN FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN
WHEREAS, in 2022, the City of Petaluma was awarded a $222,679.52 grant from CalFire to develop an
Urban Forest Management Plan; and
WHEREAS, Urban Forest Management Plans guide the long-term growth, maintenance, and
enhancement of urban forests; and
WHEREAS, development of an Urban Forest Management Plan is listed as a cornerstone action in the
City’s Blueprint for Climate Action; and
WHEREAS, the development process of Petaluma’s Urban Forest Management Plan involved extensive
feedback from the Tree Advisory Committee and an Urban Forest Management Plan Working Group,
consisting of interested community members.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Petaluma as follows:
1. Finds that the Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference.
2. Finds that the proposed action is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15378, in that the approving the UFMP does not
meet CEQA's definition of a “project,” because the action does not have the potential for resulting either a
direct physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the
environment, and because the action constitutes organizational or administrative activities of governments
that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. Relatedly, the proposed action
is exempt under the common-sense exemption, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be
seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed action could have a significant impact on the
environment.
3. Approves the Petaluma Urban Forest Management Plan attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated
herein.
//
//
//
//
//
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
Resolution No. 2026-028 N.C.S. Page 2 of 2
Under the power and authority conferred upon this Council by the Charter of said City.
REFERENCE: I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted by the
Council of the City of Petaluma at a Regular meeting on the 16th day of March
2026, by the following vote:
Approved as to
form:
__________________________
City Attorney
AYES: McDonnell, Barnacle, Cader Thompson, DeCarli, Nau, Quint, Shribbs
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
ATTEST: ______________________________________________
City Clerk
______________________________________________
Mayor
Attachments: Exhibit A – Urban Forest Management Plan
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
URBAN FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN
PETALUMA
SPRING 2026
Exhibit A - Urban Forest Management PlanDocusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
Special thanks
We would like to extend our gratitude to the following
for sharing their time and expertise with us:
The Urban Forest Management Plan Working
Group members
Ben Anderson, Consulting Arborist
Gina Benedetti-Petnic, Assistant Director of Public Works
Patrick Carter, Assistant to the City Manager
Deb Fox, Climate Action Manager
Drew Halter, Director of Parks and Recreation
Heather Hines, Special Projects Manager, Community
Development Department
Eric Leland, ReLeaf Petaluma volunteer
Charles Little, ReLeaf Petaluma volunteer
Roger McErlane, Tree Advisory Committee member
Darren Racusen, Tree Advisory Committee Chair
Stephanie Sanchez, Tree Advisory Committee member
ReLeaf Petaluma volunteers
Petaluma Tree Advisory Committee members
City staff from the following departments:
City Manager’s Office
Community Development
Parks and Recreation
Public Works
Water Resources and Utilities
The Davey Institute for their help with the i-Tree analysis
PlanIT Geo for their work on the canopy analysis
Photo contest competitors for sharing their tree
photographs
And a special thanks to Wendy Jacobs for her unceasing
work speaking for the trees.
SPRING 2026
PREPARED BY URBAN ECOSShops in historic downtown Petaluma by Peter Blottman Photography (iStock)Front cover: Downtown Petaluma by Scott Hess
Funding for this project has been provided from the California Climate Investments
program by a grant administered by the California Department of Forestry
and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) Urban and Community Forestry Program.
URBAN FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN
PETALUMA
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
Table of Contents
Vision statement 02
What is an urban forest? 04
Benefits of trees 06
Why an urban forest management plan? 09
Our process 11
Experts 13
The community 13
Data collection and analysis 16
Research 17
On the ground 17
Petaluma’s urban forest today 19
The ecological context of Petaluma’s urban forest 20
The civic context of Petaluma’s urban forest 24
Roles and responsibilities 26
Guiding documents 28
The structure and function of Petaluma’s urban forest today 31
Citywide canopy cover 31
Urban forest benefits 37
Trees in parks and along streets 38
Key concerns and recommendations 49
Strategic plan 55
Goal: MANAGE 58
Goal: PROTECT 64
Goal: GROW 68
Goal: ENGAGE 72
Implementation plan 77
Appendices 86
Our urban trees clean the
air, fight climate change,
cool our homes, and help
protect our waterways.
Petaluma turning basin by Giuseppe Lipari
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
3VISION STATEMENT
Vision statement:Petaluma thrives
in the shade of
a well-managed
urban forest.
2 VISION STATEMENT
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
5
Our urban forest is a complex system
of trees, other plants, wildlife, soil, air
and water within the city including the
many people who care for and enjoy it.
Petaluma River by Scott Hess
Bird’s eye view of Petaluma by Scott Hess
Petaluma fall colors by Giuseppe LipariLiving wall by Giuseppe Lipari
Red shouldered hawk by stephmcblack
Suburban Matilija poppy Retail area with trees
4 WHAT IS AN URBAN FOREST?
What is an urban forest?
The urban forest is the living system
of trees and vegetation that grow in
and around our city, together with the
soils that sustain them and the habitats
they create. Extending across streets,
parks, schools, yards, and waterways,
the urban forest supports wildlife and
local ecosystems while connecting the
city to the natural world beyond. As the
canopy over our city grows, it provides
shade and cooling, cleaner air and water,
climate resilience, and healthier, more
sustainable places for people to live.
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
7BENEFITS OF TREESWHAT IS AN URBAN FOREST?6
CLIMATE RESILIENCE1
Urban trees lower temperatures and absorb greenhouse gases —
fighting climate change and helping cities adapt to increasing heat.
PUBLIC HEALTH2
Trees clean the air, cool our streets, reduce UV exposure, and support
mental well-being, creating healthier neighborhoods block by block.
CLEANER AIR3
Trees intercept and capture many air pollutants (ozone, particulate matter,
nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide) before they can enter and damage our lungs.
CLEANER WATER4
Rainfall is intercepted by the tree canopy, reducing and slowing runoff.
The soil under trees filters pollutants before they reach the groundwater.
ECONOMIC VITALITY5
Shade from trees lowers energy bills, protects infrastructure,
and boosts property values and local business activity.
COMMUNITY LIVABILITY5
Tree-lined streets encourage walking, strengthen neighborhood pride,
and make public spaces safer and more welcoming.
BIODIVERSITY6
Urban forests provide habitat for birds and pollinators, stabilize soil, and
support resilient local ecosystems.
1. Norton et al. (2015) “Planning for cooler cities: A framework to prioritise green infrastructure to mitigate high temperatures in urban landscapes.” Landscape and Urban Planning 134: 127-138
2. Wolf et al. (2020) Urban trees and human health: A scoping review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17:4371.
3. Nowak et al. (2006) “Air pollution removal by urban trees and shrubs in the United States.” Urban Forestry and Urban Greening 4:115-123.
4. Berland et al. (2017) The role of trees in urban stormwater management. Landscape and Urban Planning 162:167-177.
5. Wolf (2017) Social aspects of urban forestry and metro nature. In: Routledge Handbook of Urban Forestry. Chapter 5.
6. Padpa-Schioppa (2017) Urban forests and biodiversity. In: Routledge Handbook of Urban Forestry. Chapter 9.
Benefits of Trees
BIODIVERSITY
CLEANER AIR
CLEANER WATER
COMMUNITY LIVABILITY
PUBLIC HEALTH
ECONOMIC VITALITY
CLIMATE RESILIENCE
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
9WHY AN URBAN FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN?WHAT IS AN URBAN FOREST?8
We ask our urban trees to shoulder a heavy burden for us:
clean our air and water, fight climate change, shelter us with their
shade, beautify our streets, give a home to birds and animals. And
we ask for that help in a brutal environment: compacted poor soils,
polluted air and stormwater runoff, hotter and drier conditions,
exposure to vandalism, and poor maintenance.
City trees are a public asset, in some ways like any other bit of civic
infrastructure. But while we plan for the maintenance and eventual
replacement of most urban infrastructure (no one is surprised when
a road needs repaving), too often we leave trees—alive, growing,
wild—to fail or thrive on their own. Without intentional
management, canopy declines, slowly, quietly, expensively.
Petaluma has adopted ambitious climate commitments,
including goals related to carbon reduction, urban heat resilience,
and nature-based solutions. A healthy, expanding urban forest
is one of the most practical and cost-effective tools available
to help meet those commitments. Trees store carbon, cool
neighborhoods, reduce energy demand, and improve public
health, all while strengthening community resilience.
Implementing this plan is therefore not only an environmental
priority—in fact one of the cornerstone items of the Climate
Action Blueprint—it is also a necessary step toward achieving the
City’s adopted climate goals.
This urban forest management plan places trees squarely
within Petaluma’s civic responsibilities. It offers strategic
guidance for city staff and other stakeholders to care for trees,
grow the urban forest and provide generations of Petalumans
with the sustainable and beautiful city they want.
Why an urban forest
management plan?
Keller Street, Petaluma by Brycia James (iStock)
Street trees in declining health by ReLeaf Petaluma
Healthy street trees
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
11OUR PROCESSOUR PROCESS10
This Urban Forest Management Plan is
grounded in local knowledge, community
input, and data about the trees
themselves. To understand Petaluma’s
urban forest, we used a five-part process
combining professional expertise, public
perspectives, field observation, data
analysis, and policy review.
Our Process
Downtown footbridge by Peter Blottman Photography (iStock)
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
12 13OUR PROCESS
Arbor Day outreach
THE COMMUNITY
We engaged residents through two
community meetings, outreach at
farmers’ markets, and a citywide survey
to understand how people experience
the urban forest today and what they
hope for its future.
City Hall from Petaluma City website
EXPERTS
We drew on the experience of Petaluma’s
urban forestry practitioners through
interviews with City staff and key
stakeholders, guidance from a dedicated
Working Group, and public discussions
with the Tree Advisory Committee. These
conversations helped identify long-standing
issues, practical constraints, and local
priorities.
Community outreach at the Farmers’ Market
Community meeting notes
Community input on vision statement
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
15COMMUNITY SURVEY HIGHLIGHTSOUR PROCESS14
Community survey highlights
Survey results showed overwhelming support for the benefits of trees,
alongside concerns about maintenance costs and infrastructure conflicts.
253
Number of
respondents:
1. Improve public infrastructure
2. Clean air and water
3. Climate resiliency
Top three
priorities
for Petaluma:
1. Sidewalk damage (70%)
2. Cost of maintenance (62%)
3. Fire risk (50%)
Tree concerns
(% worried a little
or a lot):
1. Shade & heat reduction (99%)
2. Beautification (98%)
3. Clean air (98%)
Tree benefits most
appreciated (% who find
the benefit valuable):
1. Supports birds and pollinators
(98%)
2. Drought tolerant (97%)
3. Native to the region (83%)
Valued attributes for
street trees (% who find
the attribute very or
somewhat desirable):
1. Only 40% are aware that
street trees are not cared
for by the city.
2. Only 34% are aware that
most trees in Petaluma
are non-native.
3. Only 29% are aware that
a permit is needed to prune
a street tree.
Some misunderstandings:
1. $0: 12%
2. $1-20: 14%
3. $21-40: 15%
4. $41-60: 20%
5. $61-80: 8%
6. $81-100: 18%
7. $100+: 14%
Willingness to pay for
a street tree (annual):
Respondents with
trees at home:
1. 63% had 5 or more trees
on their property
2. 55% were happy with
the number of trees
3. 42% would like more
trees at home
Petaluma fall colors by Giuseppe Lipari Redwoods by Mary Tilbury Maples by MaryBeth Ray Suburban trees by Sean McCracken
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
17OUR PROCESS16
Old Petaluma Map from the David Rumsey Map Collection
RESEARCH
We examined the region’s natural history
and ecological context and reviewed existing
City plans, policies, and reports related to the
urban forest.
Recent planting site visit
ON THE GROUND
We spent time throughout Petaluma visiting
neighborhoods, parks, the historic downtown,
major thoroughfares, and recent planting sites.
New trees in a park by ReLeaf Petaluma
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
To establish an objective baseline, we
commissioned a citywide urban canopy study
and conducted an on-the-ground inventory
and analysis of trees on public property.
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
Keller Street, Petaluma by Brycia James (iStock)
19PETALUMA’S URBAN FOREST TODAYPETALUMA’S URBAN FOREST TODAY18
To understand the state of Petaluma’s urban forest
today, this section examines three of its dimensions:
the ecological context in which trees grow, the
structure and benefits of the urban forest as revealed
through data and fieldwork, and the civic context that
determines how trees are managed across the city.
Petaluma’s urban forest today
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
21THE ECOLOGICAL CONTEXTPETALUMA’S URBAN FOREST TODAY20
The ecological context of
Petaluma’s urban forest
MEDITERRANEAN CLIMATE
Petaluma’s urban forest grows within a
Mediterranean climate characterized by cool,
wet winters and long, dry summers. This
seasonal pattern places predictable stress
on trees during the dry growing season and
makes water availability a defining factor in
tree health and survival. Species selection,
planting practices, and long-term care must
account for these conditions. As temperatures
rise and precipitation patterns shift, these
Mediterranean conditions are expected to
intensify, increasing pressure on species not
adapted to prolonged drought and heat.
Petaluma watershed by Friends of the Petaluma Watershed
A SINGLE WATERSHED
Petaluma sits entirely within a single
watershed, an unusual condition for a city.
This means that rainfall, runoff, soils, and
waterways are tied together across the
city. The urban forest plays an important
role in shaping water quality, erosion, and
downstream conditions throughout the
watershed. Because the entire city shares
one watershed, urban forest decisions in one
neighborhood can affect water quality and
downstream conditions elsewhere.
Oak woodlands by Mary Tilbury
OAK WOODLANDS
Before urban development, much of the
Petaluma area was characterized by
oak woodlands and oak savannas. These
landscapes were not static; they were shaped
over time by climate, soils, and the land-
management practices of Indigenous peoples,
including the Coast Miwok. Remnants of
these systems provide ecological context for
understanding regional habitats and long-
term landscape patterns that continue to
influence the urban forest today.
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
California buckeye in Petaluma by jeffwqc (iStock)
23THE ECOLOGICAL CONTEXT
Acorn woodpecker by Megan Nagel/USFWS
NATIVE FLORA AND FAUNA
Trees in the urban forest, both native and
nonnative, support a wide range of animals
and plants, from birds and pollinators to the
aquatic life in local waterways. The presence,
diversity, and structure of trees influence
how well urban areas function as habitat.
Even within a developed landscape, the urban
forest can strengthen ecological connections
across the city.
Bad trees by ReLeaf Petaluma
URBAN CONDITIONS
While Petaluma’s urban forest is shaped by
its natural history, it grows within distinctly
urban conditions. Pavement, buildings, and
infrastructure absorb and radiate heat, creating
hotter and drier microclimates. Air pollution,
stormwater runoff, and soil compaction further
stress trees. Grading, underground utilities,
and limited planting space restrict root growth
and water infiltration. These altered conditions
mean that trees in the city face challenges
very different from those in surrounding
natural landscapes. Urban forest management
must address not only species selection,
but the physical conditions in which trees grow.
PETALUMA’S URBAN FOREST TODAY22Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
THE CIVIC CONTEXT 2524PETALUMA’S URBAN FOREST TODAY
The civic context
of Petaluma’s
urban forest
While the urban forest grows within an
ecological context, it is shaped day-to-day
by civic systems. Where trees are planted,
how they are cared for, and whether they
are protected are influenced in Petaluma
by multiple city departments, community
partners, advisory bodies, and of course,
the owners of the properties on which
they are planted. Together, these actors
operate within a framework of ordinances,
regulations, and established practices that
shape the urban forest over time.
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
THE CIVIC CONTEXT 2726PETALUMA’S URBAN FOREST TODAY
PLANTING
Tree planting in parks is coordinated
by the Parks and Recreation
Department, often in partnership
with ReLeaf Petaluma, with oversight
from the Tree Advisory Committee
and the Recreation, Music, and Parks
Commission, and following outreach
to the public. Planting in the public
right-of-way is typically undertaken by
the adjacent property owner or ReLeaf
Petaluma, requires an encroachment
permit and must be consistent with
the Approved Street Tree List. Planting
in Landscape Assessment Districts
and along roads without adjacent
property owners is managed by Public
Works. Development-related planting
is reviewed through the Community
Development process. Post-planting
inspection and enforcement are not
guided by a standard, consistently
applied process.
MAINTENANCE
Maintenance of park trees is carried
out on an as-needed or emergency
basis by Parks staff and tree care
contractors. Early establishment care
in parks is sometimes supported by
ReLeaf Petaluma. Maintenance of
trees in the public right-of-way is
generally the responsibility of adjacent
property owners and may be subject
to encroachment permit requirements
overseen by Public Works. Trees
that present an immediate risk to
people or property may be pruned or
removed by Public Works, with costs
billed to the property owner. Trees in
Landscape Assessment Districts and
along roads without adjacent property
owners are maintained on an as-
needed and emergency basis by Public
Works staff or contractors.
Currently, there is no proactive,
routine maintenance program for
public trees. In addition, there is not
a consistently applied process for
post-maintenance inspection and
enforcement of contracted work.
PERMITTING
Tree removal permits for trees in the
public right-of-way are reviewed by
Community Development, Public
Works, and Parks and Recreation,
sometimes in consultation with a
contracted arborist. An encroachment
permit from Public Works may be
required to carry out planting or
pruning work in the right-of-way.
Responsibility for post-permit
inspection and enforcement is not
clearly established. (Anticipated
revisions to the Tree Preservation
Ordinance will significantly affect the
permitting process for trees on private
property and in the right of way.)
DEVELOPMENT
Tree protection, removal, replacement,
and planting requirements associated
with development projects are
reviewed through the Community
Development process, with oversight
of the Planning Commission and City
Council for larger projects. Public
Works and the Building Division are
responsible for inspecting required
tree protection measures during
construction and for ensuring that
tree planting requirements have been
met. Code enforcement staff within
Community Development address
post-inspection violations based on
complaints.
COMMUNITY OUTREACH
The City does not currently conduct
dedicated urban forestry outreach.
Public education, volunteer
coordination, and community tree
planting efforts are led primarily by
ReLeaf Petaluma with some support
from City departments. As a result,
the scope and continuity of outreach
efforts depend largely on the capacity
of volunteer community partners
rather than a municipal program.
Tree planting by ReLeaf Petaluma
Acacia flowers by MaryBeth Ray
Poplar by John Glover
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Responsibility for planting, maintaining,
and regulating trees in Petaluma has
developed incrementally over time rather
than through a single, coordinated
framework. This evolution has produced
redundancies in some areas while leaving
gaps in others.
RECENT COORDINATION CHALLENGES
The process for obtaining a permit to
remove a tree in the public right-of-way
may involve review by up to four City
departments and a contracted arborist.
At the same time, replacement standards
are not always clearly defined in the permit,
and post-work inspection is limited.
Similarly, a recent community-led
planting effort near a local stream
required coordination with several
City departments and advisory bodies.
After planting, a number of trees had
to be removed as newly developed
stormwater management plans from
the regional water authority revealed
conflicts with the planting locations.
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
THE CIVIC CONTEXT 2928PETALUMA’S URBAN FOREST TODAY
POLICY
DIRECTION
These documents establish
Citywide priorities and long-
term goals related to land
use, climate resilience, and
environmental quality.
• General Plan (currently under
revision) – Establishes land
use and environmental policy
guiding tree preservation,
development, and public
space planning.
• Blueprint for Climate Action
(Resolution 2024-141) – Identifies
urban forestry and nature-
based solutions as key
climate strategies.
• City Goals and Priorities –
Establishes Tree Preservation
Ordinance work and urban
forestry initiatives as active
policy priorities.
MUNICIPAL CODE AND
ZONING ORDINANCES
These enforceable regulations
govern tree protection, planting,
and maintenance.
• Heritage & Landmark Trees
(Ch. 8.28) – Establishes
designation and protection
standards for heritage and
landmark trees.
• Trees & Other Vegetation
(Ch. 13.08) – Regulates trees
in the public right-of-way.
• Implementing Zoning Ordinance
(Ch. 14 and 17) – Establishes
street tree guidelines (14.010)
and tree protection,
preservation, and planting
requirements associated with
development (Ch. 17). Significant
revisions to the Tree
Preservation Ordinance (Ch. 17)
are currently under review.
• SmartCode – Establishes
citywide development
and streetscape standards,
including requirements
for street trees and
parking lot shade.
TECHNICAL STANDARDS
& ADOPTED GUIDANCE
These documents guide species
selection, planting design,
and implementation.
• Approved Street Tree List
• Heritage Tree List
• Tree Technical Manual
• Integrated Pest Management
program (in development)
Civic trees by Peter Blottman Photography
GUIDING DOCUMENTS
The management of Petaluma’s urban
forest is shaped by a collection of policies,
codes, plans, and technical standards
adopted over time. The following
documents represent the primary sources
of guidance for tree-related decisions.
Together, they establish important
protections and standards; however, they
were adopted at different times and are
not always aligned under
a unified urban forest strategy.
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
Petaluma by Google Earth
31THE STRUCTURE AND FUNCTION OF THE URBAN FOREST
CITYWIDE CANOPY COVER
Analysis of aerial imagery from 2022 shows that tree canopy covers about 14%
of Petaluma; more than half of the city (52%) is covered in impervious surfaces
(roads, buildings, parking lots, sidewalks). This canopy cover is similar to some
Bay Area cities, such as Redwood City and Santa Clara, but well below others,
including Napa and Windsor. Within Petaluma, canopy cover varies widely, with
the highest concentrations along the city’s edges where remnant oak woodlands
remain, and the lowest levels in industrial areas and the urban core. Canopy
cover on public property (12%) is slightly lower than on private property (16%).
The structure and function of
Petaluma’s urban forest today
PETALUMA’S URBAN FOREST TODAY30
Citywide land cover Percent of city total Acres
Tree canopy 14.1 1,303*
Other vegetation 28.0 2,597
Bare soil 2.9 265
Water 2.7 246
Impervious surface 52.3 4,855
Total 9,267
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
33CITYWIDE CANOPY COVERPETALUMA’S URBAN FOREST TODAY32
Large scale canopy loss from Highway 101 expansion
After
Before
East Washington Boulevard by ReLeaf Petaluma
Since 2016, overall canopy cover has increased
from 12% to 14%, though this net gain reflects
losses in some areas and gains in others. Most
canopy loss is associated with development
activity, the expansion of Highway 101, and
changes in how some parcels are used. Canopy
gains have occurred primarily through the
growth of existing trees, particularly along
the city’s edges. More than 2,000 trees have
been planted in the last three years and are
expected to contribute significantly to canopy
growth over time as they mature.
To help identify where additional canopy
would be most beneficial, areas of the city
were analyzed using indicators related to
existing tree cover, exposure to heat, human
health, and insufficient investment in the
urban forest. This prioritization highlights
Midtown Petaluma and areas along East
Washington Boulevard as having some of the
greatest need for additional trees.
For more information on Petaluma’s canopy, please
see The Urban Tree Canopy Assessment, 2025.
Highest priority
High priority
Moderate priority
Lower priority
Lowest priority
District 1: 20 acre increase
District 2: 28 acre increase
District 3: 10 acre increase
District 4: 22 acre increase
District 5: 55 acre increase
District 6: 25 acre increase
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
35FUN FACTS
Percent canopy
cover, private land:
16%
Acres of tree
canopy:
1,303
Percent canopy
cover:
14%
Canopy growth
since 2016:
159 acres
Fun Facts Fun Facts
34
Percent canopy
cover, public land:
12%
Number of
park trees:
3,800
Number of
street trees:
11,700
Number of species
along streets:
78
Number of species
in parks:
125Aerial Petaluma by Scott Hess
PETALUMA’S URBAN FOREST TODAY
Street trees by Sean McCracken
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
Ecosystem service benefits of Petaluma’s canopy cover. Data sourced from i-Tree, the US Forest Service, the Arbor Day Foundation, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
37URBAN FOREST BENEFITSPETALUMA’S URBAN FOREST TODAY36
Small town Petaluma outlook hills by Andrew Gotshall (Shutterstock)
Using i-Tree modeling, the benefits
provided by Petaluma’s existing tree
canopy were estimated for a number
of ecosystem services, including
better air quality, improved
stormwater management, carbon
storage and sequestration, and
shade-related energy reductions.
Together, Petaluma’s trees are
estimated to provide approximately
$1.6 million in annual ecosystem
benefits, or about $1,250 per acre
of canopy per year. The largest
contributions come from carbon-
related benefits and air quality
improvements. In addition, the
existing canopy stores an estimated
$19 million worth of carbon,
representing long-term climate value
accumulated over decades of growth.
Because these environmental
benefits are closely tied to canopy
cover, tree size, and condition, they
are not evenly distributed across the
city. Areas with larger, healthier trees
tend to provide disproportionately
greater benefits, a pattern that helps
explain differences in environmental
conditions and comfort across
Petaluma.
URBAN FOREST BENEFITS
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
PETALUMA’S URBAN FOREST TODAY38
TREES IN PARKS AND ALONG STREETS
The previous sections presented data
on the canopy cover across Petaluma
as a whole. To provide guidance to city
urban forest managers, a further in-depth
analysis of trees on public property was
undertaken.
39TREES IN PARKS AND ALONG STREETS
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
PETALUMA’S URBAN FOREST TODAY40 41TREES IN PARKS AND ALONG STREETS
PARK TREES
All trees in City parks were
inventoried, providing a complete
picture of species composition and
condition in these spaces. Park trees
are represented by 125 species, but
the population is dominated by oaks,
which account for about one-third
of all park trees. While these trees
provide substantial ecological and
aesthetic benefits, reliance on a
small number of species can increase
vulnerability to pests, disease, and
climate-related stress.
Park trees show a generally healthy
size and age distribution, with a strong
presence of young trees that supports
long-term canopy renewal. At the
same time, the proportion of very
large, mature trees (3.4%) is high for
a city. These trees deliver significant
ecosystem services, but they also
require specialized maintenance
and can present higher long-term
management costs.
TREE DIAMETER (INCHES)
1-6 6-12 12-18 18-24 24-30 30-36 36+ 0
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
3.
4
2.
7
4.
8
7.
4
16
.
5
37
.
1
27
.
8
130 —
120 —
110 —
100 —
90 —
80 —
70 —
60 —
50 —
40 —
30 —
20 —
10 —
0 —
Di
a
m
e
t
e
r
5-
8
f
e
e
t
Di
a
m
e
t
e
r
4-
5
f
e
e
t
11
89
32
NU
M
B
E
R
O
F
O
L
D
E
S
T
T
R
E
E
S
Di
a
m
e
t
e
r
3-
4
f
e
e
t
PE
R
C
E
N
T
A
G
E
O
F
T
R
E
E
S
(
%
)
Species Number of trees Percent of total
Quercus agrifolia 569 15
Sequoia sempervirens 431 11
Quercus lobata 364 9
Platanus × hispanica 328 9
Acer rubrum 162 4
Aesculus californica 130 3
Platanus occidentalis 116 3
Lagerstroemia indica 109 3
Quercus rubra 107 3
Platanus racemosa 94 2
Quercus douglasii 70 2
Liquidambar styraciflua 68 2
Fraxinus angustifolia 119 2
Juglans californica 62 2
Quercus sp. 56 1
Pyrus calleryana 51 1
Acer saccharinum 50 1
Cercis canadensis 45 1
Pistacia chinensis 43 1
Other 810 22
TOTAL 3,836 100
Most common park tree species
Park trees by Sasha Kravchenko
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
43TREES IN PARKS AND ALONG STREETSPETALUMA’S URBAN FOREST TODAY42
STREET TREES
Street trees were assessed using
a random sample inventory, with
results extrapolated to describe
the broader tree population in the
public right-of-way. Approximately
80 species are found along Petaluma’s
streets, with a species mix that differs
substantially from that of parks. Crape
myrtles and London plane trees are
especially predominant.
Looking more closely at the most
common species highlights distinct
planting patterns over time. Crape
myrtles (Lagerstroemia indica) are
small-stature trees, and all inventoried
individuals have trunk diameters
under 12 inches. London plane trees
(Platanus × hispanica), by contrast, are
large trees that were heavily planted in
earlier decades—there are 120 trees
over 30 inches in diameter, but only 10
trees under 6 inches, indicating
limited recent planting.
Other common street trees, including
red maple (Acer rubrum) and ginkgo
(Ginkgo biloba), are currently
concentrated in smaller size classes
and will mature into medium-sized
trees over time. Callery pear (Pyrus
calleryana) is also common, reflecting
past planting practices; its declining
use in recent years is a result of its
poor long-term performance.
Species Number of trees Percent of total
Lagerstroemia indica 2,070 18
Platanus × hispanica 1,610 14
Acer rubrum 980 8
Pyrus calleryana 680 6
G inkgo biloba 580 5
Quercus sp. 560 5
Celtis sp. 530 5
Pistacia chinensis 400 3
Quercus lobata 330 3
Quercus agrifolia 300 3
Prunus cerasifera 260 2
Fraxinus angustifolia 250 2
Liriodendron tulipifera 190 2
Platanus occidentalis 180 2
Cercis canadensis 170 2
Arbutus ‘Marina’ 150 1
Cinnamomum camphora 120 1
Crataegus sp. 120 1
Quercus rubra 120 1
Triadica sebifera 120 1
Gleditsia triacanthos 110 1
Arbutus unedo 100 1
Zelkova serrata 100 1
Other 1,680 14
TOTAL 11,700 100
Most common street tree species
Street trees in the downtown by Peter Blottman Photography0
2000
1600
1400
1800
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
Ginkgo
biloba
Pyrus calleryanaAcer
rubrum
Platanus x
hispanica
Lagerstroemia
indica
ES
T
I
M
A
T
E
D
T
R
E
E
C
O
U
N
T
1-6
6-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36+
Trunk diameter
groups (inches)
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
45FUN FACTS
California live oak Crape myrtle
Red maple
London plane tree Callery pear
Valley oak London plane tree
Redwood Ginkgo
Fun Facts: Five most common park trees Fun Facts: Five most common street trees
44 PETALUMA’S URBAN FOREST TODAY
Red maple
by
M
a
r
y
T
i
l
b
u
r
y
by
G
i
u
s
e
p
p
e
L
i
p
a
r
i
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
Pruning Removal
Parks 757 110*
Streets 3,750* 560*
*Estimated from random sample inventory
Trees requiring maintenance
Condition of Petaluma’s trees
47TREES IN PARKS AND ALONG STREETSPETALUMA’S URBAN FOREST TODAY46
CONDITION AND MAINTENANCE NEEDS OF PARK AND STREET TREES
The condition or health of each tree and its maintenance needs
were captured during the inventory, offering insight into species
performance and a practical view of the work currently needed
by trees. The trees were generally healthy, with more than
80% identified as good or very good. But health differed widely
across species, with solid urban performers like crape myrtle
and the London plane tree at the top and redbud and Callery
pear as poorer performers.
For park trees, data on current maintenance needs indicates
where efforts should be targeted to improve public safety
and maximize tree survival. For street trees, the results
help illustrate the level of effort that would be required
if the City were to assume greater maintenance responsibility,
while also highlighting where timely care by property
owners is most critical to avoid hazards.
For more information on Petaluma’s park and street trees,
please see The Municipal Forest Resource Analysis, 2026.
Tree with challenging pruning needs by ReLeaf Petaluma
Condition score Park trees Street trees
Very good 7.7% 6.6%
Good 74.3% 78.9%
Fair 15.9% 10.9%
Poor 1.8% 3.1%
Dead 0.3% 0.5%
Park trees
Street trees
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
49KEY CONCERNS AND RECOMMENDATIONSKEY CONCERNS AND RECOMMENDATIONS48
Drawing on the interviews, community
engagement, canopy analysis, policy
review, and field observations described
above, this plan identifies several
recurring themes that shape the future
of Petaluma’s urban forest. The Key
Concerns and Recommendations distill
those findings and establish priorities for
the Strategic Plan that follows.
Key concerns and recommendations
Free Public Library by rogneda
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
51CONCERNSKEY CONCERNS AND RECOMMENDATIONS50
Concerns THE URBAN FOREST LACKS
A CLEAR CHAMPION.
Across the City, many people care
deeply about the urban forest, but
responsibility for trees is scattered.
Without a clear champion empowered
to speak for the urban forest every
day, decisions tend to be reactive
rather than intentional. Over time, that
makes it harder to protect trees, plan
ahead, and support the people who
care for them.
MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE
IS DIFFICULT TO NAVIGATE.
Tree-related roles and processes span
multiple departments, and policies
don’t always line up. This can be
frustrating for staff trying to do their
jobs well, confusing for residents,
and risky for trees that depend on
timely, coordinated care. When the
path forward isn’t clear, even good
intentions can stall.
TREES ARE ESSENTIAL—
BUT NOT TREATED THAT WAY.
Trees provide shade, cleaner air
and water, beauty, and relief from a
warming climate, yet they are often
compromised when space, funding,
or timelines are constrained. These
compromises might seem small today,
but their effects will be cumulative and
felt for decades to come.
THREATS TO THE URBAN
FOREST ARE GROWING.
Climate change, drought and related
regulations, pests and disease, aging
trees, and ongoing development
pressures all place increasing stress
on Petaluma’s urban forest. These
challenges interact with each other,
and their effects can compound over
time. Without a coordinated, long-
term response, the urban forest
becomes increasingly vulnerable to
sudden and widespread loss.
Street trees in declining health by ReLeaf PetalumaGirdled roots threaten tree survival Unnecessarily tiny planting spaces threaten tree health by ReLeaf Petaluma
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
53RECOMMENDATIONSKEY CONCERNS AND RECOMMENDATIONS52
Recommendations GROW THE URBAN FOREST—
THOUGHTFULLY, FOR
EVERYONE.
Petaluma should commit to growing
its tree canopy over time, paying close
attention to where shade and cooling
matter most in daily life. Planting trees
is not the only critical step; choosing
the right trees, placing them well,
and caring for them as they grow
will allow benefits to accumulate
over time. A larger, healthier canopy
is one of the most practical ways to
improve daily life while preparing
for a warmer future.
GIVE THE URBAN FOREST
A CLEAR CHAMPION.
Strong leadership turns good
intentions into consistent action.
A dedicated champion ensures
that trees are not just everyone’s
responsibility, but someone’s
priority—carrying decisions forward,
coordinating across departments,
and keeping long-term care in focus.
With clear leadership, the urban
forestry program gains continuity,
accountability, and a steady voice
in everyday choices.
CARE FOR TREES AS
ESSENTIAL PUBLIC
INFRASTRUCTURE.
Trees are valuable, living
infrastructure, yet they are rarely
managed with the same intention
as other City assets. While most
public assets are carefully tracked
and maintained, trees are more likely
to be noticed only when something
goes wrong. Unlike most built
infrastructure, however, the
value of trees increases over time
as they grow—delivering greater
shade, carbon storage, habitat,
and community benefit with each
passing year. Caring for trees as
public infrastructure means shifting
from reaction to stewardship:
supporting growth, anticipating
risks, and planning for continuity.
NURTURE THE COMMUNITY
AND THE TREES.
The urban forest brings the beauty
and peace of nature into our everyday
lives. By inviting residents to become
stewards in the care of trees, the
City can build shared knowledge
and shared responsibility. When
people feel connected to the urban
forest, they are more likely to
protect it and help it thrive.
Petaluma street by Marcel Marchon Caring for young trees by varbenov
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
55STRATEGIC PLANSTRATEGIC PLAN54
The Strategic Plan translates the findings of this
Urban Forest Management Plan into four clear goals:
Manage, Protect, Grow, and Engage. The goals define the
City’s long-term direction for its urban forest, the
strategies outline the approaches needed to achieve
each goal, and the actions identify specific steps for
implementation over time. Together, this framework
provides a practical roadmap for strengthening
stewardship, improving coordination, and growing
a healthier, more resilient urban forest—turning
Petaluma’s climate and resilience commitments
into visible, sustained action across the city.
Strategic Plan
Downtown by Peter Blottman Photography (iStock)
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
57STRATEGIC PLANSTRATEGIC PLAN56
Partnering with community groups by ReLeaf Petaluma
Engage
ENGAGE the community in
caring for Petaluma’s urban
forest to build understanding,
grow partnerships, and share
stewardship.
Tree planting event by ReLeaf Petaluma
Grow
GROW Petaluma’s urban forest to
improve the environment, reduce
heat, and share the benefits of
trees across neighborhoods and
generations.
Western Avenue by Jim VanderveenPetaluma city street by City of Petaluma
Protect
PROTECT Petaluma’s urban
forest so existing trees can
continue to provide shade,
habitat, and climate benefits
for the community.
Manage
MANAGE Petaluma’s urban
forest to protect public safety,
support climate action, and
ensure trees are cared for as
essential public infrastructure.
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
GOAL: MANAGE 5958STRATEGIC PLAN
Goal: MANAGE Manage Petaluma’s urban forest
to protect public safety, support
climate action, and ensure trees
are cared for as essential public
infrastructure.
Pedestrians walk in the historic core of downtown Petaluma by Matt Gush
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
GOAL: MANAGE 6160STRATEGIC PLAN
STRATEGY M3
Understand and monitor the
urban forest.
The City can’t manage what it doesn’t
know it has. Petaluma has started
inventorying its trees, but coverage is
incomplete and the data isn’t built into
day-to-day operations. The park tree
inventory, for example, was completed,
but there isn’t a system in place to
keep it current. This strategy finishes
the data collection, puts it to use, and
makes sure it stays up to date.
• Action 3.1: Finish the street tree
inventory. The City has already
inventoried a sample of its street
trees and most major roads.
Complete the job by surveying all
remaining street segments to CAL
FIRE standards, including
documenting what maintenance each
tree needs.
• Action M3.2: Put the tree inventory
data to work. Integrate tree data
into the City’s existing software and
workflows so it actually gets used
— for scheduling maintenance,
reviewing permits, planning capital
projects, and enforcing the Tree
Preservation Ordinance. This also
keeps the inventory current, since
staff will be updating it as part of
their regular work.
• Action M3.3: Measure the canopy
every five years. Use a citywide
canopy assessment to track how the
urban forest is changing over time
and whether the City is meeting its
goals. CAL FIRE currently offers
simplified versions of this analysis.
STRATEGY M4
Set standards, then enforce them.
Right now, the City doesn’t have clear,
written standards for how tree work
should be done. Without them, it’s
hard to hold anyone accountable —
contractors, developers, community
groups, or City staff — because the
expectations aren’t well defined in
the first place. This strategy puts
standards on paper and builds in
the oversight to make sure they’re
followed.
• Action M4.1: Establish clear
technical standards for tree work
in one place. Make the City’s Tree
Technical Manual (see Strategy P3
below) the single source for how
tree work gets done — planting,
maintenance, protection, and
mitigation. Contracts, permits, staff
procedures, and development
conditions should all point back to
the Manual instead of each setting
their own rules.
• Action M4.2: Tighten up tree care
contracts. Make sure every tree
care contract spells out exactly
what’s expected, consistent with
the Tree Technical Manual — from
planting and pruning to post-
planting care and performance
quality.
• Action M4.3: Establish inspection
procedures for tree-related work.
Create clear procedures for
verifying that tree work, whether
on public property or required by a
permit, actually meets City
standards. When it doesn’t, require
it to be fixed.
• Action M4.4: Track outcomes to
improve standards and procedures.
Track inspection results and field
observations in the inventory to
spot recurring problems, then use
what you find to update contracts,
procedures, training, and the Tree
Technical Manual.
STRATEGY M1
Unify all tree management work in one
program.
Tree-related work is currently spread
across many departments, with no
one specifically responsible for the
trees. This strategy coordinates tree
care across the city to grow the urban
forest while increasing efficiency.
• Action M1.1: Hire a full-time
urban forester. Fund a permanent
urban forester to lead the City’s
tree work and carry out this
Management Plan. This person will
be the main point of contact for all
tree-related tasks across
departments, from managing
planting and maintenance to
reviewing permitting to overseeing
trees during development projects.
Give the role steady funding and
the authority to match.
• Action M1.2: Define each
department’s role in tree
management. Spell out each
department’s tree-related
responsibilities, including Parks
and Recreation, Community
Development, and Public Works,
with the urban forester
coordinating across all three. Clear
roles mean fewer gaps, less
duplicated effort, and no tasks
falling through the cracks.
• Action M1.3: Add support staff for
the urban forester. As funding
allows, add field and administrative
support for the urban forester.
This will be especially important as
updates to the Tree Preservation
Ordinance bring in more permit
applications.
• Action M1.4: Keep urban forestry
staff trained and current. Require
continuing education so staff stay
up to date as regulations, best
practices, and conditions change.
STRATEGY M2
Build a real funding plan for urban
forestry.
The City spends money on trees across
multiple departments, but because
those costs are buried in other budget
lines, it’s hard to know exactly how
much. Tree-related revenue isn’t
tracked separately either, so there’s
not a clear connection between what
comes in and what goes out. And
without defined service levels, there’s
no way to know whether current
spending is enough. This strategy
brings the money into focus — what’s
being spent, what’s coming in, and
what it will actually take to manage
the urban forest responsibly.
• Action M2.1: Find out what the City
already spends on trees. Review
budgets across all departments to
find every dollar going to tree-
related work, whether it’s labeled
that way or not. Do the same for
revenue coming in through permits,
fines, grants, and other sources.
• Action M2.2: Create an Urban
Forestry Fund. Set up a dedicated
fund for all tree-related revenue,
including permits, fines, mitigation
payments, and in-lieu fees, and
spend it on trees. This makes the
money easier to track and ensures
tree-related revenue actually goes
back to the urban forest.
• Action M2.3: Decide what level of
tree care the City will provide, and
pay for it. Set clear standards for
how the City manages the urban
forest, including tree planting and
maintenance, permitting,
inspections, and enforcement, then
fund the work to meet those
standards. Where current funding
falls short, identify new sources.
(See Appendix I for more on
funding.)
Goal: MANAGE
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
GOAL: MANAGE 6362STRATEGIC PLAN
• Action M7.3: Identify realistic
funding options for City-managed
street tree care. Evaluate a short
list of viable funding approaches
that could support street tree
maintenance at scale, weighing
stability, equity, feasibility, and
alignment with the City’s climate
goals. (See Appendix I for more on
funding options.)
• Action M7.4: Present the City
Council with a plan for City-
managed street tree care. Based on
the cost and funding analysis,
present the City Council with a
framework that lays out what level
of street tree care the City could
take on, what it would cost, how it
would be funded, and under what
conditions to move forward.
STRATEGY M8
Plan for urban wood use.
When the City removes or prunes
trees, the wood has to go somewhere.
Right now, much of it ends up as waste.
This strategy looks for ways to put that
material to productive use — reducing
emissions and getting more value out of
every tree.
• Action M8.1: Build local
partnerships for reusing urban
wood. Connect with local mills,
woodworkers, composters, and
other partners who can put wood
from City tree work to good use.
Prioritize nearby options to keep
transportation costs and emissions
low.
• Action M8.2: Require contractors
to reuse or divert wood, not dump
it. Include clear requirements in
tree care contracts for how wood
from pruning and removals is
handled. Contractors should
prioritize milling, composting, or
other productive uses over landfill
disposal, and document what
happens to the material.
STRATEGY M9
Track progress.
You can’t improve what you don’t
measure. This strategy sets up a
simple framework for tracking how
the urban forest is doing and whether
the City’s management efforts are
working.
• Action M9.1: Choose the right
metrics for urban forest health.
Choose a focused set of measures
to track the health of the urban
forest and the performance of the
City’s management program —
things like canopy coverage,
planting and removal numbers,
maintenance activity, permit
turnaround, funding levels, and
climate benefits. With an up-to-
date inventory, these metrics are
readily available.
• Action M9.2: Publish an annual
urban forest report. Publish an
annual report on urban forest
conditions, accomplishments,
challenges, and priorities for the
year ahead. This keeps the public
and City leadership informed and
holds the program accountable.
STRATEGY M5
Deal with hazardous trees promptly.
Public safety comes first. Hazardous
trees on public property and in rights-
of-way must identified and addressed
before someone gets hurt. This
strategy sets up those systems.
• Action M5.1: Fix hazardous trees
on City property. Use the tree
inventory to identify hazardous
trees and address the risks through
pruning, removal, or other needed
work.
• Action M5.2: Address hazardous
street trees promptly. Use the
existing street tree inventory and
drive-by inspections of unsurveyed
blocks to identify hazardous trees,
then work with adjacent property
owners to make sure problems are
corrected quickly, consistent with
existing municipal requirements.
• Action M5.3: Explore expanding
the sidewalk repair program to
cover street tree care. The City
already helps property owners with
sidewalk repairs. Extending that
program to include tree
maintenance would improve care
and reduce costs that currently fall
unevenly on individual property
owners, particularly in lower-
income neighborhoods. It’s also a
practical step toward more
consistent City involvement in
street tree management.
STRATEGY M6
Move from emergency fixes to planned
maintenance.
Addressing hazards keeps people safe,
but trees on City property also need
ongoing attention to stay healthy. That
means regularly observing both the
trees and the conditions they’re
growing in, identifying problems early,
and correcting them — whether that’s
a tree that needs pruning or a site
where soil, irrigation, or other
conditions are working against the
trees. This strategy builds a
maintenance program to do all of that.
• Action M6.1: Review current
maintenance practices in City
parks. Review how park trees are
currently being maintained —
including irrigation, particularly
with reclaimed water, pruning, and
general care — and identify
practices that are actively harming
tree health. Use the results to
correct problems immediately and
inform the maintenance program
going forward.
• Action M6.2: Inspect City trees on
a regular schedule. Start with
annual drive-by assessments of
City-managed trees to identify
maintenance needs and set
priorities, track these observations
in the inventory, then expand the
inspection program as resources
allow.
• Action M6.3: Maintain City trees
on a planned schedule. Use
inspection results to plan, schedule,
and budget for routine care, rather
than waiting until something fails.
STRATEGY M7
Study what it would take for the City
to maintain street trees.
Street trees benefit everyone, but right
now their care falls mostly on whoever
lives next to them. The result is uneven
maintenance and unfair costs. Taking
over street tree care citywide would
be a major commitment, so this
strategy focuses on figuring out what
it would cost, how it could be funded,
and what it would look like in practice.
• Action M7.1: Understand the street
tree population and what it takes
to maintain it. Use the completed
street tree inventory to build a
picture of what’s out there — how
many trees, what species, their age
and condition — and use that to
estimate what a reasonable,
ongoing maintenance program
would cost.
• Action M7.2: Estimate the full cost
of caring for Petaluma’s street
trees. Estimate what it would cost,
annually and long-term, for the City
to take over street tree care at a
responsible service level, including
planting, pruning, removals,
establishment care, and sidewalk
impacts.
Goal: MANAGE
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
GOAL: PROTECT 6564STRATEGIC PLAN
Goal: PROTECT Protect Petaluma’s urban
forest so existing trees can
continue to provide shade,
habitat, and climate benefits
for the community.
Older oak trees by Jessica Warner
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
GOAL: PROTECT 6766STRATEGIC PLAN
• Action P3.2: Review tree-related
policies and codes periodically.
Regularly revisit the Tree
Preservation Ordinance, General
Plan policies, approved tree lists,
and related standards to make sure
they’re still achieving their goals
and remain clear, practical, and
appropriately protective.
STRATEGY P4
Plan ahead for threats to the urban
forest.
Trees face a growing list of challenges
— pests, drought, fire, utility conflicts,
and climate change. Rather than
reacting to each crisis as it comes, the
City needs to anticipate these threats
and manage them proactively.
• Action P4.1: Plant a wider variety of
species for resilience. Reduce the
City’s vulnerability to any single
pest or climate threat by
diversifying what gets planted.
Follow a guideline like the 10-20-30
rule, which suggests no more than
10% of one species, 20% of one
genus, or 30% of one family should
be planted across the city, or
develop a local variation and stick
to it. (See Appendix III on nonnative
species in urban areas.)
• Action P4.2: Make sure trees still
get water as conservation rules
tighten. New state regulations will
require the City to stop irrigating
nonfunctional turf as soon as this
year, which could seriously harm
trees that depend on that water.
Coordinate with Water Resources,
Parks and Recreation, and
Landscape Assessment Districts to
keep trees watered within the rules,
and help HOAs, commercial
property owners, and residents
understand how the requirements
apply to trees.
• Action P4.3: Stay ahead of
emerging pests and diseases.
Threats like those facing Petaluma’s
large oak population are real and
evolving. Monitor emerging risks,
coordinate with regional and state
partners, and develop response
plans — keeping City staff,
community partners, and property
owners informed as conditions
change.
• Action P4.4: Balance fire safety
with tree preservation. Trees are
increasingly being removed over
wildfire and defensible-space
concerns, sometimes based on
insurance pressure or guidance
that doesn’t reflect local conditions.
Work with fire officials to clarify
what’s actually required, what’s
recommended, and what’s
unnecessary — protecting public
safety without losing trees that
don’t need to come down. (See
Appendix II for more on wildfire and
urban forestry.)
• Action P4.5: Work with utilities to
reduce tree conflicts. Establish
communication protocols with
PG&E and other utilities before tree
work happens near power lines or
underground infrastructure. Push
for pruning practices that meet the
City’s Tree Technical Manual
standards, and where conflicts keep
recurring, consider species changes
that reduce long-term problems.
STRATEGY P1
Protect trees during development.
Petaluma needs new housing and
development, and it needs its trees.
The City already has rules to protect
trees during construction, but tree
impacts are often identified too late
in the design process, and the burden
of enforcement has fallen on City
staff rather than the developer’s own
professionals. This strategy gets trees
into project design earlier and puts the
responsibility for protection where it
belongs — on the development team,
with clear City oversight.
• Action P1.1: Require tree planting
plans early in project review.
Developers should submit a
preliminary planting plan —
showing proposed tree locations,
planting areas, and expected
canopy — before site plans or
tentative maps are approved.
Getting trees into the design early
means they won’t be an
afterthought squeezed in after
grading and infrastructure
decisions are already locked in.
• Action P1.2: Require a project
arborist from start to finish. When
a development project could affect
trees, require the developer to hire
a qualified arborist who stays
involved throughout, from
application through post-
construction. The project arborist
identifies impacts, specifies
protections, monitors construction,
and checks in with the City’s urban
forester at key milestones to make
sure requirements are followed.
• Action P1.3: Enforce tree
protection during construction.
Make tree protection the project
arborist’s responsibility to verify
and document, not the City’s to
chase down. Require the arborist to
inspect protections at critical
construction phases and report to
the City’s urban forester, who
reviews the documentation and
spot-checks conditions in the field.
When protections aren’t followed,
require immediate correction and
apply consequences.
STRATEGY P2
Make tree rules clear and easy to
follow — then enforce them.
The City has tree-related
requirements throughout its code —
for permits, development, mitigation,
parking lots, and more. But if the rules
are confusing or hard to navigate,
compliance suffers. And if no one
follows up to confirm requirements
were met, the rules lose their
effectiveness. This strategy addresses
both sides.
• Action P2.1: Simplify the tree
permitting process. Make it easier
to understand and comply with tree
permit requirements by reducing
paperwork, lowering or eliminating
fees, consolidating review across
departments, and making permit
information easier to find. Establish
clear follow-up procedures so
permitted work and required
mitigation actually get completed.
• Action P2.2: Verify that tree
protection requirements are met.
Using the tracking systems
established in Action M3.2, confirm
that tree-related requirements are
actually carried out — replacements
planted, mitigation completed,
parking lot shade standards met,
and new trees surviving through
their establishment period.
STRATEGY P3
Keep the rules current.
Standards and codes only work if they
reflect current best practices and
real conditions on the ground. This
strategy makes sure the City’s tree-
related policies and technical guidance
stay up to date.
• Action P3.1: Maintain a Tree
Technical Manual. Update and
adopt a comprehensive Tree
Technical Manual as the single
reference for how tree work should
be done in Petaluma. It should cover
planting, maintenance, protection,
and mitigation, and apply
consistently across City contracts,
staff procedures, permits,
development conditions, and
community planting.
Goal: PROTECT
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
GOAL: GROW 6968STRATEGIC PLAN
Goal: GROW GROW Petaluma’s urban
forest to improve the
environment, reduce heat,
and share the benefits of
trees across neighborhoods
and generations.
Planting new trees by ReLeaf Petaluma
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
GOAL: GROW 7170STRATEGIC PLAN
STRATEGY G4
Build a forest that lasts.
A healthy urban forest isn’t just about
planting more trees — it’s about
planting the right mix and planning for
what comes next as older trees reach
the end of their lives.
• Action G4.1: Broaden the species
palette. As noted in Action P4.1,
plant a wider range of species
suited to urban conditions,
including resilient nonnatives that
can handle poor soil and drought.
Use inventory data to guide species
selection so each new planting
moves the City toward a more
diverse, resilient mix. (See Appendix
III on nonnative species in urban
areas.)
• Action G4.2: Plant the next
generation before the current one
is gone. Use inventory data to
identify areas where trees are aging
or declining, and prioritize those
areas for new plantings. Getting
younger trees established before
older ones come down keeps the
canopy continuous.
STRATEGY G5
Lead by example: make trees a priority
in City projects.
The City can’t ask developers, property
owners, and community groups to
plant trees while overlooking its own
opportunities. Major capital projects
like road rebuilds, the Fairgrounds and
McNear Peninsula reenvisionings, and
infrastructure upgrades are some of
the best chances to add trees at scale.
This strategy makes sure those
opportunities don’t get missed.
• Action G5.1: Get trees into City
projects early. Consider tree
planting, canopy growth, and
preservation during the early stages
of capital improvement planning,
street redesigns, and public space
projects, before layouts are locked in.
• Action G5.2: Design public projects
so trees actually thrive. Make sure
public projects give trees what they
need to reach maturity — enough
planting space, soil volume,
irrigation, and room to grow. A tree
that’s set up to succeed is
infrastructure; one that isn’t is an
expense.
STRATEGY G1
Grow the canopy.
More trees means a cooler, healthier,
more livable Petaluma. Reaching the
goal of roughly 18% canopy coverage in
the coming decades means planting
more trees on streets, in parks, on
private property, and in the areas that
need them most.
• Action G1.1: Expand the number of
street trees by 50%. Grow the
street tree population from 12,000
to 18,000 by planting a net gain of at
least 250 street trees per year
through City staff, contractors, and
community partners. Required
mitigation plantings for removed
trees count toward this target.
• Action G1.2: Add 250 park and open
space trees per year. Plant a net
gain of at least 250 trees annually in
parks and open spaces. In natural
areas and along waterways,
prioritize native species that
support local ecosystems.
• Action G1.3: Encourage 500 trees
to be planted on private property
trees per year. Support this by
following through on development
planting requirements, enforcing
parking lot shade standards,
reaching out to commercial
property owners and homeowners,
and creating a simple online system
where residents can register new
trees to help track progress.
• Action G1.4: Plant where the need
is greatest. Use the City’s canopy
analysis and planting prioritization
framework to focus efforts in areas
with low canopy, high heat, poorer
health outcomes, and lower
incomes — so canopy growth
supports equity and climate
adaptation.
• Action G1.5: Plant big trees
wherever they’ll fit. Choose large-
canopy species whenever space and
infrastructure allow. Bigger trees
deliver far more shade, cooling,
habitat, and climate benefit over
time. Smaller species still make
sense where conditions are tight.
STRATEGY G2
Partner with the community to plant
more trees.
The City can’t do this alone.
Community organizations bring
capacity for outreach, volunteer
coordination, and hands-on planting
that the City doesn’t have. This
strategy builds on those partnerships.
• Action G2.1: Support ReLeaf
Petaluma and other community
planting partners. Community
groups can lead outreach, find
planting sites, organize volunteers,
plant trees, and provide early care.
The City supports these efforts
with technical guidance, site
preparation, departmental
coordination, and access to City
facilities and resources where
feasible.
STRATEGY G3
Make it easier to plant trees on public
property.
If the City wants more trees,
the process for planting them
shouldn’t be a barrier. This strategy
reduces unnecessary steps so that
straightforward planting projects can
move forward quickly.
• Action G3.1: Simplify permitting
for street tree planting. Publish
clear criteria for when a street tree
planting request can be approved
through a quick, routine review.
Straightforward requests get
processed fast; sites with potential
conflicts get a closer look. This
builds on the permitting
improvements in Action P2.1.
• Action G3.2: Let Parks staff
approve routine park tree planting.
Give qualified Parks and Recreation
staff the authority to approve and
carry out tree planting without
extensive review or public outreach.
Save committee and community
input for big-picture park planning,
not individual planting decisions.
Goal: GROW
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
GOAL: ENGAGE 7372STRATEGIC PLAN
Goal: ENGAGE ENGAGE the community in
caring for Petaluma’s urban
forest to build understanding,
grow partnerships, and share
stewardship.
Caring for trees by Alicia Keshishian
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
GOAL: ENGAGE 7574STRATEGIC PLAN
STRATEGY E1
Make the urban forester the go-to
person for trees.
Petaluma’s urban forester should
be someone residents know about
and know how to reach — a visible
resource for questions, guidance, and
support on anything tree-related.
• Action E1.1: Develop public
education and outreach on urban
forestry. Use City communications
and community events to share
information about tree benefits,
proper care, common pests, and
available resources. Participate in
events like Arbor Day and Future
Fest to connect with residents.
• Action E1.2: Make the urban
forester easy to reach. Make sure
residents know there is an urban
forester and how to reach them for
help with tree-related questions on
public or private property.
• Action E1.3: Provide clear guidance
on tree permits and regulations.
Communicate clearly about tree
protection requirements,
permitting, and what’s expected,
especially if the Tree Preservation
Ordinance expands to cover private
property. Getting ahead of new
requirements with proactive
outreach reduces confusion and
pushback.
STRATEGY E2
Empower community organizations to
get involved.
The City doesn’t need to do all
the outreach and education
itself. Community groups are
often better positioned to reach
residents, especially in underserved
neighborhoods.
• Action E2.1: Support community-
led planting, stewardship, and
outreach. Provide technical
guidance, training, and
coordination to organizations like
ReLeaf Petaluma, schools, and
neighborhood groups to expand
participation in tree planting and
care — particularly in
neighborhoods with fewer existing
resources.
STRATEGY E3
Build partnerships with agencies and
utilities.
Decisions made by PG&E, fire officials,
and other agencies directly affect
Petaluma’s trees. The City needs a seat
at those tables.
• Action E3.1: Build working
relationships with utilities,
agencies, and other partners. As
described in Strategy P4, work
proactively with PG&E, fire officials,
and other agencies to advocate for
tree-friendly practices, coordinate
on tree-related decisions, and make
sure Petaluma’s urban forestry
goals are part of regional planning.
Preserved downtown Victorian house with street trees by Peter Blottman Photography
Goal: ENGAGE
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
77IMPLEMENTATION PLANIMPLEMENTATION PLAN76
Implementation Plan
Shovel ready by SrdjanPav (iStock)
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 7978IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
TIMELINE RESPONSIBLE
MANAGE
Strategy M1: Unify tree management in one program.
Action M1.1: Hire a full-time urban forester.Year 1 City Manager, Administrative
Services
Action M1.2: Define each department’s role in tree
management.
Years 1-2 All relevant program leads
Action M1.3: Add support staff for the urban forester. Year 3-5 Urban forester, City Manager,
Administrative Services
Action M1.4: Keep urban forestry staff trained and current.Ongoing Urban forester
Strategy M2: Build a real funding plan for urban forestry.
Action M2.1: Find out what the City already spends on trees.Years 1-2 Urban forester, Administrative
Services, all relevant program leads
Action M2.2: Create an Urban Forestry Fund.Year 1-2 Urban forester, Administrative
Services
Action M2.3: Decide what level of tree care the City will
provide, and pay for it.
Years 3-5 Urban forester,
all relevant program leads
Strategy M3: Understand and monitor the urban forest.
Action M3.1: Finish the street tree inventory.Years 1-2 Urban forester
Action M3.2: Put the tree inventory data to work.Years 3-5 Urban forester, Public Works,
Community Development,
Parks and Recreation
TIMELINE RESPONSIBLE
MANAGE
Action M3.3: Measure the canopy every five years.Year 5+
and ongoing
Urban forester
Strategy M4: Set standards, then enforce them.
Action M4.1: Establish clear technical standards for tree
work in one place.
Years 3-5 Urban forester, Public Works,
Community Development,
Parks and Recreation,
Tree Advisory Committee
Action M4.2: Tighten up tree care contracts.Years 3-5 Urban forester, Purchasing
Action M4.3: Establish inspection procedures for tree-
related work.
Years 3-5 Urban forester, Public Works,
Community Development
Action M4.4: Track outcomes to improve standards and
procedures.
Years 5-10 Urban forester
Strategy M5: Deal with hazardous trees promptly.
Action M5.1: Fix hazardous trees on City property.Years 1-2 Urban forester, Public Works,
Parks and Recreation
Action M5.2: Address hazardous street trees promptly.Years 1-2 Urban forester, Public Works
Action M5.3: Explore expanding the sidewalk repair
program to cover street tree care.
Years 3-5 Urban forester, Public Works,
City Manager
Strategy M6: Move from emergency fixes to planned
maintenance.
Action M6.1: Review current maintenance practices in City
parks.
Years 1-2 Urban forester, Parks and Recreation
Action M6.2: Inspect City trees on a regular schedule. Years 3-5 Urban forester, Public Works,
Parks and Recreation
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 8180IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
TIMELINE RESPONSIBLE
MANAGE
Action M6.3: Maintain City trees on a planned schedule.Years 3-5 Urban forester, Public Works,
Parks and Recreation
Strategy M7: Study what it would take for the City to
maintain street trees.
Action M7.1: Understand the street tree population and
what it takes to maintain it.
Years 5-10 Urban forester, Public Works
Action M7.2: Estimate the full cost of caring for Petaluma’s
street trees.
Years 5-10 Urban forester, Public Works
Action M7.3: Identify realistic funding options for City-
managed street tree care.
Years 5-10 Urban forester, City Manager,
Public Works, Administrative
Services
Action M7.4: Present the City Council with a plan for City-
managed street tree care.
Years 5-10 Urban forester, Tree Advisory
Committee
Strategy M8: Plan for urban wood use
Action M8.1: Build local partnerships for reusing urban
wood.
Years 3-5 Urban forester, Public Works,
Parks and Recreation
Action M8.2: Require contractors to reuse or divert wood,
not dump it.
Years 3-5 Urban forester, Purchasing
Strategy M9: Track progress.
Action M9.1: Choose the right metrics for urban forest
health.
Years 3-5 Urban forester
Action M9.2: Publish an annual urban forest report. Years 3-5
and ongoing
Urban forester
TIMELINE RESPONSIBLE
PROTECT
Strategy P1: Protect trees during development.
Action P1.1: Require tree planting plans early in project
review.
Years 1-2 Urban forester, Community
Development
Action P1.2: Require a project arborist from start to finish. Years 1-2 Urban forester, Community
Development
Action P1.3: Enforce tree protection during construction.Ongoing Urban forester, Public Works
Strategy P2: Make tree rules clear and easy to follow — then
enforce them.
Action P2.1: Simplify the tree permitting process.Years 1-2 Urban forester, Community
Development, Public Works
Action P2.2: Verify that tree protection requirements are
met.
Ongoing Urban forester
Strategy P3: Keep the rules current.
Action P3.1: Maintain a Tree Technical Manual.Years 3-5 Urban forester, Tree Advisory
Committee
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 8382IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
TIMELINE RESPONSIBLE
PROTECT
Action P3.2: Review tree-related policies and codes
periodically.
Years 5-10 Urban forester
Strategy P4: Plan ahead for threats to the urban forest.
Action P4.1: Plant a wider variety of species for resilience. Years 1-2 Urban forester, Public Works,
Parks and Recreation
Action P4.2: Make sure trees still get water as conservation
rules tighten.
Years 1-2
and ongoing
Urban forester, Climate Action,
Water Conservation
Action P4.3: Stay ahead of emerging pests and diseases. Years 1-2
and ongoing
Urban forester, Climate Action,
Integrated Pest Manager
Action P4.4: Balance fire safety with tree preservation.Years 1-2
and ongoing
Urban forester, Climate Action,
Fire Bureau
Action P4.5: Work with utilities to reduce tree conflicts.Years 1-2
and ongoing
Urban forester
TIMELINE RESPONSIBLE
GROW
Strategy G1: Grow the canopy.
Action G1.1: Expand the number of street trees by 50%.Years 3-5
and ongoing
Urban forester, Public Works,
ReLeaf Petaluma
Action G1.2: Add 250 park and open space trees per year. Years 3-5
and ongoing
Urban forester, Parks and Recreation,
ReLeaf Petaluma
Action G1.3: Encourage 500 private property trees to be
planted per year.
Years 3-5
and ongoing
Urban forester, ReLeaf Petaluma
Action G1.4: Plant where the need is greatest.Years 1-2
and ongoing
Urban forester, Public Works, Parks
and Recreation, ReLeaf Petaluma
Action G1.5: Plant big trees wherever they’ll fit. Years 1-2
and ongoing
Urban forester, Public Works, Parks
and Recreation, ReLeaf Petaluma
Strategy G2: Partner with the community to plant more
trees.
Action G2.1: Support ReLeaf Petaluma and other community
planting partners.
Years 1-2 Urban forester, ReLeaf Petaluma
and community groups
Strategy G3: Make it easier to plant trees on public
property.
Action G3.1: Simplify permitting for street tree planting. Years 1-2 Urban forester, Public Works
Action G3.2: Let Parks staff approve routine park tree
planting.
Years 1-2 Urban forester, Parks and Recreation,
Tree Advisory Committee
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 8584IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
TIMELINE RESPONSIBLE
GROW
Strategy G4: Build a forest that lasts.
Action G4.1: Broaden the species palette. Years 1-2
and ongoing
Urban forester, Climate Action,
Public Works, Parks and Recreation
Action G4.2: Plant the next generation before the current
one is gone.
Years 1-2
and ongoing
Urban forester, Climate Action,
Public Works, Parks and Recreation
Strategy G5: Lead by example: make trees a priority in City
projects.
Action G5.1: Get trees into City projects early.Years 3-5 Urban forester, Community
Development
Action G5.2: Design public projects so trees actually thrive.Years 3-5 Urban forester, Community
Development
TIMELINE RESPONSIBLE
ENGAGE
Strategy E1: Make the urban forester the go-to person for
trees.
Action E1.1: Develop public education and outreach on
urban forestry.
Years 1-2
and ongoing
Urban forester, ReLeaf Petaluma
Action E1.2: Make the urban forester easy to reach.Years 1-2
and ongoing
Urban forester
Action E1.3: Provide clear guidance on tree permits and
regulations.
Years 1-2 Urban forester, Public Works,
Community Development
Strategy E2: Empower community organizations to get
involved.
Years 1-2
and ongoing
Urban forester, Climate Action,
Public Works, Parks and Recreation
Action E2.1: Support community-led planting, stewardship,
and outreach.
Years 1-2
and ongoing
Urban forester, community groups
Strategy E3: Build partnerships with agencies and utilities.
Action E3.1: Build working relationships with utilities,
agencies, and other partners.
Years 1-2 Urban forester
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
87APPENDICESAPPENDICES86
Appendices
Young maple trees by Grigorenko (iStock)
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
APPENDIX I 8988APPENDICES
Appendix I. Funding Pathways to Support
Implementation of the Urban Forest Management Plan
Implementation of this Urban Forest Management Plan (UFMP) will require
sustained funding over time. However, not all actions require significant new
revenue. Several high-impact steps—particularly unification of tree
management work under an urban forester, cross-department coordination,
establishment and enforcement of technical standards, improvements in
inspections and permitting, and policy alignment—can be advanced through
relatively modest and strategic investment.
This appendix outlines potential funding pathways for consideration. It is
intended to inform evaluation and decision-making, not to prescribe a single
approach.
I. A Strategic First Investment: An Urban Forester Position
Establishing and funding a dedicated urban forester position would
substantially increase the City’s capacity to implement the UFMP and
accomplish a cornerstone of the climate action plan. A professional lead for
urban forestry could coordinate maintenance standards, development review,
planting programs, data management, contractor oversight, grant applications,
and community partnerships.
With appropriate authority and cross-departmental coordination, a dedicated
urban forester could enable implementation of approximately two-thirds of
the UFMP’s Action items. This step represents a high-leverage investment that
strengthens accountability, improves efficiency, and reduces long-term risk.
Funding for a temporary urban forester is currently available from a US Forest
Service grant. Following this, the City should consider allocating General Fund
resources or reallocating existing departmental funds to support this role.
II. Clarify and Formalize Existing Investment
Urban forestry activities are currently supported through a combination of
departmental budgets and grant-funded expenditures. These investments
are not always organized as a unified program, which can make it difficult to
understand the City’s total level of commitment or to plan for long-term needs.
As a foundational step, the City should identify and consolidate all current
spending related to urban forestry, including maintenance, emergency
response, planting, and permitting to establish a clear baseline and evaluate
how those resources are allocated.
In many communities, a clearer understanding of existing expenditures
reveals opportunities to shift from reactive spending toward more predictable,
preventive care over time. Treating trees as public infrastructure includes
managing them with the same emphasis on long-term stewardship applied to
other public assets.
III. The Urban Forestry Fund
The Tree Preservation Ordinance currently under development establishes
an Urban Forestry Fund to receive and manage revenues associated with
tree protection, permitting, and related activities. Creating a dedicated fund
provides a transparent structure for reinvesting tree-related payments into the
long-term health and expansion of the urban forest.
• Potential revenue sources for the Urban Forestry Fund may include:
• In-lieu tree replacement fees.
• Permit application and review fees for protected trees.
• Administrative penalties or mitigation payments resulting from unauthorized
removal or non-compliance.
• Development-related impact or mitigation fees adopted pursuant to
City policy.
Allocations within City capital improvement projects where tree planting or
replacement is incorporated into project budgets.
By consolidating these revenues within a dedicated fund, the City can ensure
that tree-related payments—whether from individual property owners or
development activity—are reinvested in planting, establishment care, canopy
monitoring, and related program support.
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
APPENDIX I 9190APPENDICES
IV. Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT): Visitor-Based Contribution
Petaluma may consider establishing a new Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT)
to support urban forestry management (similar to a program implemented by
the City of San Luis Obispo). A visitor-based contribution can be framed as an
investment in sustainable and responsible travel, linking tourism activity to
climate mitigation, shade, and community resilience.
Potential applications include:
• Park and street tree maintenance and establishment.
• Canopy expansion in high-visibility or visitor-serving areas.
• Support for community stewardship and education initiatives.
Any new or increased TOT would require voter approval pursuant to state
law. Allocation of existing TOT revenue would require Council direction and
consideration of broader City funding priorities.
A TOT-based approach offers a transparent mechanism to align visitor
activity with long-term investment in public shade, climate resilience, and
neighborhood livability.
V. Grants and External Funding
State, federal, and philanthropic grants can support urban forestry initiatives,
particularly for:
• Planting and canopy expansion.
• Climate resilience projects.
• Workforce development and youth training.
• Inventory completion and canopy analysis.
Grants are often competitive and episodic. They are best viewed as
opportunities to accelerate or expand specific initiatives rather than as reliable
long-term maintenance funding. Dedicated staff capacity significantly improves
competitiveness for these resources.
VI. Voluntary Contributions
Voluntary funding mechanisms may provide supplemental revenue and
strengthen community engagement around urban forestry. These approaches
are best viewed as complementary to core City funding rather than as primary
funding sources for ongoing maintenance operations.
Potential options include:
• Optional utility bill add-ons through Community Choice Aggregation
programs, such as with Sonoma Clean Power.
• Community donation or subscription programs administered through a
nonprofit fiscal sponsor.
• Business sponsorships or block-level contributions.
These mechanisms can help build visibility and shared ownership of the urban
forest and may support targeted planting or stewardship efforts. However,
because participation levels and revenue are inherently variable, voluntary
programs should not be relied upon to fund core staffing or long-term
maintenance obligations.
VII. Long-Term Revenue Options
If baseline funding, the Urban Forestry Fund, and supplemental sources prove
insufficient to meet adopted UFMP goals—particularly with respect to long-
term street tree maintenance cycles—the City may evaluate dedicated revenue
mechanisms to provide greater stability and predictability.
Potential options could include:
• A voter-approved parcel tax dedicated to urban forestry operations and
maintenance.
• A voter-approved sales tax increment or other legally permissible general tax
measure.
• Other revenue mechanisms authorized under state law and aligned with
broader City funding priorities.
Any dedicated or special tax would require voter approval pursuant to state law
and should be evaluated in the context of community priorities, service levels,
and the City’s overall fiscal strategy.
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
APPENDIX II 9392APPENDICES
Appendix II. Wildfire Context for Urban Forest
Management
Petaluma is located within a region that has experienced significant wildfire
events in recent years. Wildfire risk influences development standards,
vegetation management practices, insurance requirements, and emergency
preparedness. This appendix provides regulatory and operational context
relevant to urban forestry management. It does not replace or supersede fire
management plans or applicable state and county regulations.
The Geographic Context
California divides land into Local Responsibility Areas (LRA) and State
Responsibility Areas (SRA), which determine primary responsibility for wildland
fire suppression. The City of Petaluma is located entirely within a Local
Responsibility Area (LRA), meaning the Petaluma Fire Department has primary
responsibility for fire response within city limits.
State Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) mapping identifies portions of the City
as Moderate Fire Hazard Severity Zone, with a small area designated as High
Fire Hazard Severity Zone. No areas within city limits are currently designated
as Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone.
CAL FIRE mapping also identifies limited areas in the southwestern corner
of Petaluma as Wildland–Urban Interface (WUI), where built development
and vegetated landscapes meet. The WUI can experience more complex fire
behavior due to the interaction between structures and surrounding vegetation,
including increased ember exposure and the potential for fire to move between
vegetated areas and built environments. As a result, building standards,
defensible space requirements, and vegetation management practices may be
more closely tied to wildfire considerations in these areas.
A portion of the Petaluma WUI is designated as a Mutual Threat Zone (County
responds to City), reflecting coordinated response arrangements across
jurisdictional boundaries.
Urban forestry planning and maintenance practices should be aware of these
designations, particularly in areas near open space, naturalized corridors, or
WUI boundaries.
The Regulatory Context
The intersection of urban tree management and wildfire risk is reflected in
several regulations.
LOCAL HAZARDOUS VEGETATION AND FIRE PREVENTION AUTHORITY
The City’s Hazardous Vegetation and Weed Abatement Ordinance authorizes
the Fire Prevention Bureau to require correction of combustible vegetation
conditions, including dead or hazardous trees, where fire risk is present. In
addition, designation of a tree as a fire hazard by the Petaluma Fire Department
or other qualified authority is grounds for approval of a Tree Removal Permit
under the pending revisions of the Tree Preservation Ordinance.
STATE DEFENSIBLE SPACE REQUIREMENTS
Under California Public Resources Code §4291, defensible space requirements
apply within all State Responsibility Areas (SRA) and within Local Responsibility
Areas (LRA) that are designated as Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones
(VHFHSZ).
As of this Plan’s adoption, no areas within the City of Petaluma’s incorporated
city limits are located in an SRA, and no areas are designated as LRA-VHFHSZ.
Accordingly, state-mandated defensible space requirements under §4291 do not
currently apply within city limits.
However, most of the land adjacent to the incorporated city limits (including
neighborhoods with Petaluma mailing addresses) is located within State
Responsibility Area and therefore subject to state defensible space
requirements. Fire hazard designations are based on jurisdictional boundaries
and official hazard maps, not postal address.
At the same time, wildfire-related vegetation management remains a statewide
policy focus, and future updates to hazard mapping could alter applicable
requirements. Urban forestry staff should remain aware of state-level changes
to Fire Hazard Severity Zone designations and related legislation.
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
APPENDIX II 9594APPENDICES
Agency Roles and Coordination
Urban forestry management intersects with multiple agencies whose responsibilities relate to
wildfire risk, vegetation management, and emergency response.
ENTITY W ILDFIRE AND URBAN FORESTRY ROLE
Petaluma Fire Department Fire response within city limits; enforcement of hazardous
vegetation and fire prevention standards; issuance of
w ritten hazard determinations where applicable.
CAL FIRE Establishes Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) maps;
primary wildland fire suppression authority in State
Responsibility Areas outside city limits; may assume
command during large regional wildfire incidents.
PG&E Conducts vegetation management and line-clearance
activities pursuant to state and federal wildfire mitigation
and electrical reliability requirements. These activities are
governed by utility regulations and may operate
independently of local tree preservation standards.
City Community Development Dept. Reviews development proposals, including projects near
W UI-designated areas where vegetation management or
fuel modification conditions may apply.
Public Works Department Oversees maintenance of street trees and public vegetation
w ithin city limits, including removal of hazardous trees and
coordination with Fire Prevention staff when wildfire-
related concerns arise.
The Insurance Context
In addition to public wildfire regulations, private homeowners’ insurance
practices increasingly influence vegetation management decisions in California.
Insurance carriers may evaluate properties for wildfire exposure using
inspections, aerial imagery, and hazard mapping, and may require vegetation
clearance, pruning, or removal of trees near structures as a condition of
continued coverage.
These determinations are made independently of City tree protection
regulations. Within the City of Petaluma, tree removal or major pruning
remains subject to applicable permitting requirements, even when insurance-
related vegetation concerns are identified. Clear documentation and early
communication with City staff can help property owners navigate situations
where insurance requirements intersect with local tree regulations.
Implications for Urban Forestry Management
Wildfire context does not alter the City’s commitment to maintaining and
growing a healthy urban canopy. However, it does shape how certain decisions
are evaluated, particularly in areas near open space or within designated WUI
boundaries.
Urban forestry staff should:
• Be aware of Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) designations when evaluating
planting, maintenance, or removal decisions.
• Coordinate with Fire Prevention staff when hazardous vegetation conditions
are identified or when properties are located near WUI-designated areas.
• Recognize that documented fire hazard determinations may influence tree
management outcomes.
• Understand that utility vegetation management activities are governed by
state and federal wildfire mitigation and reliability standards.
• Monitor updates to statewide hazard mapping and related legislation that
could affect future requirements within city limits.
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
APPENDIX III 9796APPENDICES
Appendix III. The role of nonnative plants in cities
There is a strong voice in Petaluma for the predominant or even exclusive
use of native tree species. The allure of native plants is clear–they are the best
source of habitat and food for our native fauna, they tie us to the natural history
of our city, and they would seem to be best suited to the growing conditions.
This appendix will argue that, despite these advantages, the case for relying
on the use of native species in an urban environment is short-sighted.
Urban environments are not “native” environments
Urban areas are built environments. They are hotter, drier, more polluted, and
with poorer soils than the environment that existed prior to the development
of the city. Plants that evolved to survive in the pre-existing natural
environment should not be expected to survive in the modern one.
An additional concern exists in California: about half of our native tree species
are riparian, i.e., they grow along streambeds and river banks that provide a
continuous source of water. Outside of a riparian corridor, they require heavy
irrigation and well-drained and aerated soil.
Finally, urban areas have many structural constraints that do not exist in
natural spaces. Trees planted along streets shouldn’t have shallow roots that
damage sidewalks. They shouldn’t sprawl too close to the ground and block foot
and vehicle traffic and sight lines. They can’t be too tall when planted under
powerlines. They need to be amenable to heavy pruning to keep them away
from traffic signs and trucks. They shouldn’t have messy fruit or slippery acorns
or weak branching, all of which pose hazards to pedestrians. They can’t be too
prone to pest outbreaks because many cities have banned the use of pesticides,
leaving trees unable to be treated.
A broad species palette that includes nonnative species, especially those
that have been shown to thrive under urban conditions, allows urban forest
managers to choose the right tree for the right place, even when faced by a
multitude of constraints and a challenging environment.
The threat of pests and diseases in a globalized world
New pests and diseases that threaten our wild and urban forests appear on
our shores all the time in this globalized world. Many, of course, fail to find
a foothold. But those that do can bring unimaginable destruction. To take a
prominent example, Dutch elm disease is estimated to have killed 50 to 100
million elm trees in the United States since it was introduced to this country
in 1930. In Minneapolis, the native American elm represented 95% of trees
planted along boulevards. In just one year (1977) , 190,000 of them died. This
heavy reliance on one species in many U.S. cities had a twofold impact on the
disease: it was able to spread easily from one tree to the next and, although it
had only one target, the end of all the elms meant the end of nearly all the trees.
A broader palette of species would have meant a smaller fraction of the urban
forest killed.
In California, most urban areas have a very small number of native tree species.
In Petaluma, there are about ten: Acer macrophyllum, Aesculus californica,
Arbutus menziesii, Quercus agrifolia, Quercus garryana, Quercus kelloggii,
Quercus lobata, Salix laevigata, Salix lasiandra, Umbellularia californica.
(Contrast this with East Coast cities, where the number of native tree species
will be on the order of 50 to 75.)
Of the ten native species in Petaluma, three are riparian species and require
high amounts of water, and thus are not suitable for most urban sites. Of the
remaining seven, four are oak trees, and oak trees are currently threatened by
two significant pests in Northern California: sudden oak death and the newly
arrived Mediterranean oak borer. A heavy reliance on native species means a
heavy reliance on oaks, which leaves the urban forest vulnerable to disease.
Species diversification is protection against pests and diseases.
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
9998APPENDICES
Climate change reduces the relevance of locally
adapted evolution
One key argument often made in favor of native plants is that they have evolved
over the centuries to their regional climate. But as we have so recently seen
with years of drought followed by winters of record-breaking rainfall, the
climate of California is changing quickly and dramatically. The plants adapted to
the climate of the 20th century are unlikely to be the plants of the 21st century.
Because we cannot reliably predict the effects of climate change, planting a
diversity of species is the best hedge against disaster.
A city’s forest reflects the city’s people
It is reasonable to assume that native plant advocates are motivated by goodwill
and a sincere desire to conserve nature as they see best. But the history of the
native plants movement is not without its problematic side, which has long been
tied to concerns about “impurity” and the “inferiority” of other cultures.
The desire for “pure” nature in wildland areas might be a reasonable
philosophical approach, but cities are a cultural construct, and the trees in
them reflect the cultures of all of those who have come before us. Waves of
immigrants from around the world have brought their plants with them—for
comfort, for sustenance, so that they would feel less alien in their new home.
Petaluma’s plant palette should reflect the diversity of the people who call this
city home.
This page intentionally left blank.
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596
URBAN FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN
PETALUMA
Docusign Envelope ID: 9400E630-5134-434A-A104-56587BF7A596