4 Comments
User's avatar
Ana's avatar

There are two issues I wish Ms. Barnett would investigate and, afterwards, propose solutions.

1. The poor management of SDCI. I don't trust anything that comes out of a department that has such a poor reputation, ethical concerns, and questionable data integrity. This department is a mess. Why is Nathan Torgelson still there? Perhaps a more trustworthy department in charge of trees would encourage more public trust? See this summary: https://publicola.com/2023/12/06/audit-reveals-widespread-ethical-concerns-about-the-city-department-that-oversees-construction-permitting-and-landlord-tenant-law/

2. I would accept the removal of large trees if I knew the replacements would thrive. There is no guarantee that anyone is caring for these trees, even on the public lands. It takes five years for a young tree to establish itself. So many young trees are just dead for lack of watering. How can anyone say the new plantings will replace the mature trees when they are dying from lack of care? I don't see how this "maths" out.

Expand full comment
Victoria Martinez's avatar

Yet another reason I am sorry I voted for Saka. I won't be making that mistake again. He is incredibly short-sighted.

Expand full comment
David's avatar

More and others put restrictions on developers to discourage from building affordable housing and pay in lieu of a free.esrmarked for polticaly.connectd Unqualified non profits

Expand full comment
Mark Sollitto's avatar

Moore is completely wrong about Beacon Ave trees. Saka only cares about his neighborhood commute. They are two examples of why I’d prefer we go back to citywide elections. Under that system voters can vote for all nine Council seats, not just three.

Expand full comment