Annapolis Committees Joint Meeting on Forest Conservation Ordinance 016-26 - July 9, 2026
Annapolis Environment Matters and Rules Committees Joint Meeting on Forest Conservation Ordinance 016-26 - July 9, 2026
The Environment Matters Committee and the Rules and City Government Committee of the Annapolis City Council held a joint meeting on July 9, 2026, beginning at 4:36 PM, to discuss and take legislative action on Ordinance 016-26, which amends the city's forest conservation program to conform with recent changes in Maryland state law (Senate Bill 526). The meeting featured a presentation by City Forester Brian Adams, detailed deliberation on proposed amendments, and votes recommending approval of several amendments.
Discussion Items
- Presentation by City Forester Brian Adams: Mr. Adams explained that the state law, enacted in 2023, shifts Maryland's forest policy from a "no-net-loss" to a "net gain" of forest canopy, measured every four years. Key changes include new definitions, exemptions (e.g., tree farms, federal facilities with 2,500+ employees, solar facilities, transit-oriented development, multifamily housing of 25+ units with reduced mitigation rates), a mandatory 1:1 replacement ratio (already practiced in Annapolis), classification of urban areas as priority retention and protection areas, requirements to reforest unforested riparian buffers, new notification and public comment requirements for clearing priority retention areas, written justification by the Department of Planning and Zoning, and expanded mitigation options (e.g., restoring degraded forests, planting green infrastructure, street trees). The city already uses street trees for mitigation credits and has a five-year maintenance agreement for forest conservation projects and a two-year landscape bond for development projects.
- Amendment 2 (Stream Buffer Definition): Adds criteria for the director to expand stream buffers when slopes exceed 15% or highly erodible soils are present, aligning with existing code. No questions raised.
- Amendment 3 (Annual Report Due Date): Changes the annual report submission deadline from March 1 to August 31 to align with the fiscal year (July 1–June 30), as required by state law. Approved.
- Amendment 4 (Appeal Process): Establishes a distinct appealable decision point for forest conservation plan approvals, responding to a Maryland Supreme Court case (Chesapeake Bay Foundation v. developer) and the state law's explicit right to judicial review. Under the amendment, appeals of planning commission-track plans go directly to circuit court, while appeals of department-approved plans go to the Board of Appeals. The amendment also clarifies that no forest clearing may occur during a 30-day appeal window and that filing an appeal stays clearing until resolved. Alderman Howard expressed concern about the automatic 30-day stay after permit issuance, preferring a stay only if an appeal is actually filed; the committee agreed to revisit the stay language later.
- Amendment 5 (Notice of Plan Approval): Proposed by Alderman Savage to require the applicant to publish notice in a newspaper upon approval of a forest conservation plan, to alert the broader public. Alderman Thorpe suggested requiring direct mailed notice to adjacent property owners instead, noting that the state already requires 20-day prior notification to abutting owners by mail. Alderman Huntley argued that newspaper notification is outdated and that the burden should be on the public to check the city website, while Alderman Savage defended newspapers as a legal record. The committee did not vote on Amendment 5; it was postponed to the next meeting.
- Amendment 6 (Retroactivity Clause): Ensures that Ordinance 016-26 applies to any application that does not yet have final approval, even if submitted during the interim between the state law's effective date (July 1, 2026) and the city's adoption. The clause includes a reference to the Maryland Housing Certainty Act's vesting provisions; the city attorney noted the need to ensure the ordinance still applies to projects vesting under that Act. The committee agreed to refine the language.
- Stay Provisions: Discussion revealed that the current legislation (page 7, line 13) includes a 30-day stay on forest clearing after permit issuance, which Alderman Howard found burdensome. He suggested the stay should only apply if an appeal is actually filed. The committee agreed to work on adjustments.
Key Outcomes
- Environment Matters Committee Vote: The committee made a motion to recommend Ordinance 016-26 with Amendments 2, 3, 4, and 6, and the motion carried unanimously. This recommendation will be forwarded to the full City Council.
- Rules Committee Vote (earlier): The Rules Committee had separately voted to recommend only Amendments 2, 3, and 6, but the final action in the joint meeting (Environment Matters) incorporated Amendment 4 as well.
- Amendment 5 Postponed: Amendment 5 (newspaper notification) and further refinement of Amendment 4's stay language will be addressed at the next Rules Committee meeting on July 23, 2026. Staff (city forester, law office) are not required to attend unless specific questions arise.
- Next Steps: The full City Council meeting is scheduled for July 27, 2026, where the ordinance is expected to be considered for final passage. The committees aim to finalize all amendments by July 23 to meet that deadline.
Meeting Transcript
Good afternoon again, everybody for the second environment matters committee meeting for July 9th. So for the record, um, you do roll call. We have Alderman Huntley. Present. All right, and we did our other business at the last meeting. So for this one, uh, just to open up the business, which is going to be legislative action on 016 26. And then so that item is open, and now I'm going to adjourn and allow um rules and city government to adjourn. To open, I'm sorry. I call this meeting to order July 9th, 4 36 p.m. This is the rules and city government committee. I'll start off with roll call. As Alderman Frank Thorpe present. Present. All right. And we have Alderman Shannemeyer. All right. And myself, Alderman Smith Brown chair. Uh, we are going to move forward with the approval of the minutes. Uh agenda first, actually. Is there a motion to approve of the agenda? So moved. All right. There's a second here. All in favor of that. All right. Thank you. Now is there approval of the minutes from our meeting on June the 4th, 2026. Uh, Mr. Chairman, uh, I will make a motion to approve in a second, but I think there does need to be some cleaning up of the notes. There's some unbolded stuff that Frank did this and Keanu did that. Um, so uh, but I I move to approve the minutes uh after the cleaning up. All right, so we have a motion on the floor to uh just need to postponing it. Okay, we'll postpone if there's a match. That's a motion to postpone if there's no um all in favor here. Um we have that. Thank you. Next we have on the agenda a legislation 01626 forest conservation program amendments to conform with state law from our sponsor Alderman Savage. So let's begin with this legislation. If you don't mind Alderman Savage sharing with us just an overview of this, where it came from, why is it so pressing? Uh, then we can dive into the uh detail and amendments. Yeah, so to open up, just ask Mr. Adams to join us to the table here. Could you give us a just an update presentation on where this is coming from? This legislation. Um, City Forester Brian Adams, and uh, so overall, this isn't a big change to our current law. Uh, be fairly easy to implement into our current process. Uh Forest Conservation Act has been around since 1991, and it was enacted to try to stem the loss of forests in the state of Maryland on properties 40,000 square feet or bigger, and it requires you to inventory the site, identify sensitive areas, try to work around them, and if you have to remove stuff, you have to replant remove trees, you have to replant them. Um, and as the years went by, the state continued to lose forest, even with the law in place. So there's long been a push to um make the policy make the law more restrictive, which brings us to the past couple years. There was a Senate bill and a house bill that were passed in 2023.
openpublica.com