A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Gaithersburg staff propose repealing and replacing tree ordinance to align with state law; council holds record open

May 04, 2026 | Gaithersburg City, Montgomery County, Maryland


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Gaithersburg staff propose repealing and replacing tree ordinance to align with state law; council holds record open
City staff recommended repealing and replacing Chapter 22 of Gaithersburg’s city code — the city’s tree and forest conservation ordinance — to align with changes in Maryland’s State Forest Conservation Act and to clarify local definitions and mitigation rules.

Environmental Services Chief Nancy Sham and Planning Director Greg Man told the council the draft ordinance includes several changes required by state updates: standardizing the specimen tree threshold (staff proposes aligning code with policy manual size definitions), updating reforestation ratios, and adding the state’s new priority urban forest mapping to the list of factors for retention and mitigation. Staff said the updates also clarify treatment for solar fields, linear projects and priority funding areas (which can create competing policy aims when reconciling affordable‑housing priorities with canopy retention).

During public comment, a remote speaker, Tyler Mondres, urged the city to study a municipal free tree program to help reach the city’s 40% canopy goal, noting local canopy estimates in staff and committee records fell from about 37% (2015) to 34% in 2025. Sham said the proposed code changes respond to state minimums and that the city may opt to adopt stricter local standards later; the proposed city tree manual will be updated after code adoption.

Staff recommended holding the public record open until 5 p.m. May 21 with a planned policy discussion on June 1. The council voted to hold the record open (motion passed 5‑0). City staff noted that the state sets minimum standards and that the city can choose to adopt more stringent measures in follow‑up climate action work.

Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!

Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.

Get instant access to full meeting videos
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee