Tumwater Mayor Debbie Sullivan announced that the city will remove the historic Davis-Meeker Garry Oak tree on Old Highway 99.
The mayor and city administrator informed the city council about the mayor’s plan at the city council's work session yesterday, describing it as an administrative decision, meaning that it did not need the city council’s approval.
Some council members expected that the council would discuss the issue after the city’s Historic Preservation Commission unanimously voted to recommend that the tree remain on the city’s historic register. The commission stated that delisting the tree from the register was a supposed requirement before the city would be permitted to remove the 400-year-old tree.
“After very careful consideration of all of the information received, including public comment, because of the city's duty to protect the public safety, and because of the probability of future failures, it's an administrative decision and determination that the city is required to remove the tree,” City Administrator Lisa Parks told the council.
Parks said that the city is already looking for a contractor to remove the tree, adding that the removal will likely occur at night during the weekend and that it will require the closure of Old Highway 99.
Councilmember Michael Althauser asked where funds would come from to pay for the removal. Parks said that it will likely require a budget amendment; Finance Director Troy Niemeyer concurred.
City staff will now move forward on planning how to commemorate the tree’s legacy. Parks said that they will request the Tree Board, Historic Preservation Commission, and the Parks and Recreation Commission to hold joint meetings to discuss possible strategies such as installing a commemorative sign or public art display at the site of the tree.
Parks added that acorns have already been gathered from the tree which will be used to replant it. The chosen contractor will also be obligated to remove the tree in a manner that allows the wood to be reused.
City staff will survey the public for input on where the seedlings should be planted and how the wood should be reused.
“I know it's a tough decision, and most people are not going to like the decision, but I think we can move forward on how to best honor the tree and move forward so that the legacy does not go away,” Sullivan said.
The mayor added that she has contacted Chehalis, Squaxin, Nisqually, and the Cowlitz tribes to determine the tree's significance to the tribes as the tree was part of the historic Cowlitz trail. The tribes will be included in the public engagement process as the city preserves the tree’s legacy.
Councilmember Joan Cathey strongly disapproved of the decision to remove the tree and emphasized that the city council had no input on the mayor’s decision.
“I feel like a lot went on behind the scenes, and a lot happened long before we knew anything about it. Close to nine months, you were working on this behind the scenes, and then we heard about it, and my feeling is that you already had made the decision,” Cathey said.
“We need to understand the form of government we have here, the person designated as mayor of this city can make these decisions without the council, which is what has happened here,” the council member added.
Cathay also criticized the lack of effort to preserve the tree and how city staff disregarded the Historic Preservation Commission which unanimously voted to keep the tree on the historic register.
“I'm disappointed, I'm angry, and I'm extremely sad about it, because I think it's one of the most dishonoring things we've done since I've been around,” Cathey said.
Councilmember Kelly Von Holtz also voiced her concerns regarding the insufficient transparency surrounding the mayor’s decision.
“Nine months went by, several windstorms went by, and yet the council was never given an opportunity to even know that there was an issue, a suspected issue with this tree, or that a branch had even fallen, putting constituents at risk,” Von Holtz said.
“I just hope that this is a lesson learned in managing expectations and transparency, and I hope that this is not something that we will repeat again,” she continued.
The possible removal of the tree was first raised to the city council on March 11 after the city’s consultant arborist, Kevin McFarland of Sound Urban Forestry, conducted a risk assessment of the tree. The city requested McFarland to evaluate the tree after an 18-inch diameter branch fell from the tree in June 2023. McFarland’s report found that the tree posed a high-risk rating due to structural decay in the tree.
McFarland considered preserving the tree through retrenchment pruning, which involves reducing the height of the tree’s canopy but found that the tree would still pose a high-risk rating even with the technique.
Arborist Beowulf Brower, who works for but does not represent the State Parks and Recreation Commission, provided the Tumwater Historic Preservation Commission with a report disagreeing with McFarland's conclusions.
Another arborist, Scott D. Baker, wrote a piece that appeared in The JOLT on April 29 in which he stated "it would be terrible – but sadly typical – to see a decision to remove the tree made by the Mayor or City Administrator based on flawed information or fear of liability." See related stories.
14 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
RondaLarsonKramer
Perhaps the council does have options that have not yet been explored. In Tumwater’s form of government, the council serves as legislative body. As such, the council is empowered to pass an ordinance, e.g., to change the process of evaluating potentially hazardous trees that are also historic landmarks. The mayor does not have veto power over council actions other than as a tiebreaker vote.
Thursday, May 16 Report this
52237123abc
What is the real reason this tree is coming down? Road work….widening the lanes? There is more to this decision.
Very strange the signage in front of the tree, explaining what is going to happen, is facing in a direction that cannot be seen.
Why get expert opinions if the mayor is going to rule against their advice. Her own experience is better? Why not listen to her city council and constituent’s.
Something smells very rotten here….and it isn’t our beautiful tree.
Thursday, May 16 Report this
2theroots
In Response to 52237123abc: yes something is fishy and rotten hear and I will tell you what it is. That tree and "historic hanger" is the only thing in the way of the Port expanding the runway which will then allow them to accept bigger planes and increase air traffic at our tiny little airport. It was hugely unpopular in the county to potentially site an airport in our county because of the noise and air pollution issues associated with doing so. So now the Mayor is unilaterally deciding to extend the airport - but it is being passed off as cutting down a diseased tree - that two arborists said could be saved. The one who did not is on the payroll of the city.
I appreciate that CM Cathey and CM Von Holtz at least are objecting and as Ms. Kramer suggested below, they need to find other ways to assert their power. It is outrageous that their opinions are all swept aside and as where the publics.
Thursday, May 16 Report this
BevBassett
There's someone in Olympia who has watched the Airport and the Port Commission for many years and here's what that person thinks: (I hope she'll forgive me for copying and pasting her opinion here without her permission, but I am so sure she's correct that I'm doing it for the sake of maybe saving that precious tree.)
"There are lots of trees in Thurston County. Many are located adjacent to roads. During storms tree limbs fall. Henderson Blvd through Watershed Park is often covered with tree limbs - many very large - after storms. The limbs are gathered up and hauled away when the storms are over. Rarely are the trees from which the limbs fell cut down. Several years ago a huge section of a very old tree near my home fell during a storm. The fallen limbs were later removed. The tree still stands.
So - why has the Meeker Oak been singled out for destruction? Is liability due to a fallen limb from that tree any greater than liability from countless other trees near roadways in Thurston County?
Some may find it far-fetched to think that the plan to cut down the Meeker Oak is associated with plans for growth of infrastructure and operations at the Olympia Airport.
Having spent significant time over several decades reviewing many thousands of pages of Olympia Airport planning documents -- I believe it's far-fetched to NOT think that the proposal to cut down the Meeker Oak is associated with plans for expansion of operations at the Olympia Airport.
Over the years I've seen many documents that have identified both the historical hanger near Hwy 99 (occupied by the Washington State Patrol) and the nearby historical oak tree as "obstructions" that, among other things, limit time that the main airport runway is available for Instrument Landing approaches from the north.
The Meeker Oak isn't the only airport-expansion-limiting thing that have been at the forefront lately.
Federally listed species that have always inhabited airport land have also been hindering plans for airport growth. As most know by now, a plan (HCP) is being designed to deal with that 'problem'. (Never mind that the plan will legalize killing, maiming of many of those creatures and relocation of others to lands with soil conditions less favored by those creatures).
And then there's the Capitol Little League lease issue. That lease will soon be a thing of the past. Because that land has been earmarked for future commercial (passenger and cargo) aviation development.
All of this is happening at a time when:
the governor has called for consideration of expansion of general aviation airports in Western Washington to help accommodate projected future SeaTac overflow of 400,000 annual operations;
a (recently disbanded) Commission Identified the Olympia Airport as capable of handling both passenger and cargo aircraft;
a Master Plan Update for the Olympia Airport is being prepared. The plan will include a Commercial Aviation Feasibility Study as well as plans for a new Commercial Aviation passenger terminal, a deicing facility, 400 parking spaces and room for more, and future fire station on airport property (required for airport that provide commercial air service on aircraft 30 passengers or more)
Does anyone think that it's just coincidence that all of these things are occurring simultaneously?
(I, for one, do not)There are lots of trees in Thurston County. Many are located adjacent to roads. During storms tree limbs fall. Henderson Blvd through Watershed Park is often covered with tree limbs - many very large - after storms. The limbs are gathered up and hauled away when the storms are over. Rarely are the trees from which the limbs fell cut down. Several years ago a huge section of a very old tree near my home fell during a storm. The fallen limbs were later removed. The tree still stands.
So - why has the Meeker Oak been singled out for destruction? Is liability due to a fallen limb from that tree any greater than liability from countless other trees near roadways in Thurston County?
Some may find it far-fetched to think that the plan to cut down the Meeker Oak is associated with plans for growth of infrastructure and operations at the Olympia Airport.
Having spent significant time over several decades reviewing many thousands of pages of Olympia Airport planning documents -- I believe it's far-fetched to NOT think that the proposal to cut down the Meeker Oak is associated with plans for expansion of operations at the Olympia Airport.
Over the years I've seen many documents that have identified both the historical hanger near Hwy 99 (occupied by the Washington State Patrol) and the nearby historical oak tree as "obstructions" that, among other things, limit time that the main airport runway is available for Instrument Landing approaches from the north.
The Meeker Oak isn't the only airport-expansion-limiting thing that have been at the forefront lately.
Federally listed species that have always inhabited airport land have also been hindering plans for airport growth. As most know by now, a plan (HCP) is being designed to deal with that 'problem'. (Never mind that the plan will legalize killing, maiming of many of those creatures and relocation of others to lands with soil conditions less favored by those creatures).
And then there's the Capitol Little League lease issue. That lease will soon be a thing of the past. Because that land has been earmarked for future commercial (passenger and cargo) aviation development.
All of this is happening at a time when:
the governor has called for consideration of expansion of general aviation airports in Western Washington to help accommodate projected future SeaTac overflow of 400,000 annual operations;
a (recently disbanded) Commission Identified the Olympia Airport as capable of handling both passenger and cargo aircraft;
a Master Plan Update for the Olympia Airport is being prepared. The plan will include a Commercial Aviation Feasibility Study as well as plans for a new Commercial Aviation passenger terminal, a deicing facility, 400 parking spaces and room for more, and future fire station on airport property (required for airport that provide commercial air service on aircraft 30 passengers or more)
Does anyone think that it's just coincidence that all of these things are occurring simultaneously?
(I, for one, do not)"
Thursday, May 16 Report this
FirstOtter
No, Bev Bennet, I do not think these things are just so happening to be coincidental. Nope, not at all.
We've already told Tumwater the vast majority of people living in Thurston County do NOT want the airport expanded. Is it coincidental that Amazon built a big warehouse (currently UNUSED) within a few miles of an airport for their cargo planes? Nope.
No, the Meeker Oak is merely a target, a convenient, oh, it's Not Safe! Oh, now that it's gone, let's go ahead with our plan to ram this airport expansion down our throats...or more likely, up our rear ends. Tumwater's Mayor doesn't give a darn what we want. There's money to be made, and if the local populace suffers, so what. AS the
senior aviation analyst who was the spokesman for CACC, the plan to put an international airport in thurston county said, "someone has to pull the short straw." I told him, that's only fair if EVERYONE has to pull a straw rather than two sites in Pierce and one in Thurston County. That man now lives in Yakima.
I've been saying for years that the Olympia airport has done nothing for Thurston county in general. It is the playground for a few wealthy private aircraft owners, a private facility paid for by the public.
It needs to be decommissioned and the land returned to Thurston County as a place for people..to recreate. The hangers can be used by businesses. The land itself can be used for things like running tracks, a skate park for kids, an off leash park for dog owners, an arena for horse shows, soccer fields, softball fields, etc. THe land to the one end of the airport was used to establish Mazama pocket gophers, again, paid for by us taxpayers, but the Mayor and the airport don't care.
I also say the old hanger should be preserved, The air evac helicopters can use that part of the airport.
Instead of cutting down the Meeker oak, let's reroute Hwy 99 around it...on the airport's side of the fence.
How much do you want to bet that Mayor will say, oh, maybe I'll think about having it cut down, I'll let yo know by the end of the month, but one dark night, and then Somehow, Just SOMEHOW, in the middle of a night, it comes down? Oh darn, she'll say, I have no idea who did this, II swear I'll find out who vandalised that tree.
I say: Save the Tree. Cut down the Mayor.
Thursday, May 16 Report this
BevBassett
Yes, First Otter, I agree we should cut down the Mayor first--before the tree.
This airport and the property around is owned by the people. It is public land. Why is it that the public has no say in how the land is used?! Who benefits from airport expansion??? Who benefits from the airport as it is now?
I am sick and tired of seeing publicly owned land used to benefit special interests while the true owners--the people--are screwed-over. And I am sick and tired of seeing corrupt politicians act to enrich special interests rather than listening to the people.
We don't need a bigger airport that burns jet fuel. We need improved rail. But instead of the rail we need, we're being railroaded one more time again.
Friday, May 17 Report this
GinnyAnn
Follow the money. What's behind the mayor's unilateral decision to ignore the advice of her constituents and her counsel members? Expansion of the airport has long been pushed for by big business but rejected by the citizens of Thurston County. The mayor knew this when she was elected and chose to ignore the will of the citizens. Who has she been talking to behind closed doors? Who benefits? She's not making the citizens happy. Once our tree is gone, it's gone forever. Acorns are no substitute.
Friday, May 17 Report this
longtimeresident
And that mayor will be nowhere to be seen when it comes time for her to retire or she is no longer re-elected as mayor. She'll disappear over to eastern WA or even out of state. So unhappy with her decision and also, whether she did it for some special interests. The truth will come out eventually.
Friday, May 17 Report this
HappyOlympian
booooooo! Killing the tree awful, but if this is done to support airport expansion that makes it a particularly bad decision. Thurston County does not need a larger airport.
Friday, May 17 Report this
TheGreatAnon
Grow the fck tree huggers. Had this very old and cool oak tree died out of sight of people this would not be a thing. All living things die. That's how it works. Collect some of the tree's acorns and propagate its offspring.
Anthropomorphism is a sin.
Friday, May 17 Report this
CliffordCaudwell
It is a tree. A single tree. If it is deemed a hazard you knock the bloody thing down. The you plant 100 trees in honor of it. Form a drum circle and praise it's glory. Tell your grandchildren stories about it. Create a poem in it's name. Take off 3 months from work for the emotional trama.
Or focus on a thousand other ways to help our community, our nation and or world. Donate time and resources at a food bank. Pick up trash along the road. Adopt a puppy. Just let it go oh yea hippies of Tumwater. Let it go...
Saturday, May 18 Report this
LauratheBruce
So, the tree is an icon and has as much right to life as anything. If it needs a trim - do it. If it's diseased then it's life may be at an end. So many are passionate about it and perhaps they could form an on-sight protest to save it. Julia Butterfly Hill sat in a giant redwood for 2 years to save its life. The tree is important for itself and for the morale of the people, apparently.
What is more important is the agenda. What is the actual plan? I live close to the airport and the noise it makes can be annoying, esp when helicopters fly over and over your house for hours just above the tree-tops. To make the airport bigger and add more commercial traffic will destroy the beauty of this area. There is already too much noise and air pollution stressing the flora and fauna. When will the People finally say enough is enough and stand down those who will continue to steal your lives and freedom bit by bit until there is nothing left to live for? The choices we make today create all of our tomorrows.
Sunday, May 19 Report this
52237123abc
Everyone should attend the City Council meeting Tuesday at 7:00!
Monday, May 20 Report this
jwiley
I contacted Tumwater as soon as I heard about this, which was the same time that the council members heard about it. I called, I emailed and tried to become engaged. There was this effort to convince me by the mayor's office that the tree was completely rotten. A photo of the tree was sent to me, with an edited hand drawn broad stroked rot line shown as if the whole tree had rotted 100 years before it's time. This type of photo edited does not convince me of anything, especially when other arborists stepped in to contradict this account. Concurrently I have been active against any airport expansion that would cause noise, lead or potential jet fuel pollution. I am watching flight school training ramping up. They say they are bringing in unleaded fuel this year, but without a mandate to use it, it feels like bogus window dressing. The citizens do not want an expansion, and have been vocal about it for years. It appears that now they are implementing it behind the scenes.. Hearing that the tree and the hanger were designated as obstacles is insane, because concurrently, as of two days ago, I was told by several decision makers that there are "no plans for expansion." Lies from the mayor and lies from the Olympia airport management, and lies from the Port of Olympia. I call withholding information is a lie. I am grateful that some Tumwater council members are calling them out on lack of legal process. I can only hope that they find a legal way to turn this situation around. Know that small planes emit lead, and that it accumulates on the ground in the water ways, poisoning everything for all time. I believe that soil samples to show what we already are dealing with around and on the airport property are in order.
Tuesday, May 21 Report this