California Record
Mountain View
Environment

Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan

Summary not yet generated for this topic.

Community sentiment

Supportive (7)

At a glance

Public comments
7
Last 30 days
0

Last discussed Jun 23, 2026.

Public comments (20)

SupportiveRobert CoxJun 23, 2026

Praised the biodiversity plan and supported removing near-native definitions in favor of true local natives.

City Council — June 23, 2026 · 1:33:24 →
SupportiveDaniel ShaneJun 23, 2026

Expressed support for expanding urban forest protections to private lands and developments.

City Council — June 23, 2026 · 1:44:53 →
SupportiveTracy FariaJun 23, 2026

Thanked staff and council for revisions clarifying native versus non-native plants.

City Council — June 23, 2026 · 1:35:01 →
SupportiveDashiell LeedsJun 23, 2026

Thanked staff and council for modifications and urged prioritizing local native plants.

City Council — June 23, 2026 · 1:36:46 →
SupportiveRonit BryantJun 23, 2026

Praised the plan and emphasized that biodiversity anchors must rely on native plants.

City Council — June 23, 2026 · 1:40:05 →
SupportiveRashmi SahaiJun 23, 2026

Supported definition changes ensuring focus on native plants for ecosystem diversity.

City Council — June 23, 2026 · 1:41:41 →
SupportiveApril WebsterJun 23, 2026

Praised staff for integrating community feedback into the final biodiversity plan.

City Council — June 23, 2026 · 1:43:22 →
SupportiveRonnie FisherApr 28, 2026

Asked the council to adopt recommendations from the Bird Alliance and Green Spaces for robust implementation and habitat restoration.

City Council — April 28, 2026 · 48:17 →
SupportiveHala AshawaniApr 28, 2026

Proposed designating Cuesta Annex as an urban forest and increasing tree planting goals to 30% by 2030.

City Council — April 28, 2026 · 49:55 →
SupportiveJesse CuppApr 28, 2026

Advocated for native tree planting and mandated shade for pedestrians and cyclists.

City Council — April 28, 2026 · 52:07 →
SupportiveSherryApr 28, 2026

Stressed the importance of protecting large, old native trees against development and utility pressures.

City Council — April 28, 2026 · 53:10 →
SupportiveRobert CoxApr 28, 2026

Suggested increasing tree canopy targets more rapidly and exploring special zoning or state law advocacy to protect creek beds from development impacts.

City Council — April 28, 2026 · 25:51 →
SupportiveShawnee KleinhausApr 28, 2026

Praised the plan on behalf of the Santa Clara Valley Bird Alliance, emphasizing native species, adaptive management, and accountability.

City Council — April 28, 2026 · 27:47 →
SupportiveDr. Tracy FariaApr 28, 2026

A biologist who urged prioritizing native plants and clear metrics, noting that non-native trees support far fewer caterpillars needed by local birds.

City Council — April 28, 2026 · 29:54 →
SupportiveApril WebsterApr 28, 2026

Spoke on behalf of local planning coalitions about closing the gap between policy and implementation through operational language and green infrastructure standards.

City Council — April 28, 2026 · 32:32 →
SupportiveJan ReckerApr 28, 2026

Thanked staff and expressed support for native plants and wildlife preservation.

City Council — April 28, 2026 · 43:04 →
SupportiveMaureen BlandoApr 28, 2026

Suggested designating Cuesta Annex as an urban forest and increasing protections for heritage trees.

City Council — April 28, 2026 · 44:13 →
ConcernedRashmiApr 28, 2026

Stressed the need to protect heritage trees and establish stronger accountability measures in the plan.

City Council — April 28, 2026 · 45:48 →
SupportiveAndrea WaldJan 21, 2026

Expressed views on the draft biodiversity and urban forest plan during public testimony.

Parks and Recreation Commission and Urban Forestry Board — January 21, 2026 · 0:00 →
SupportiveRashmiJan 21, 2026

Provided public input on the updated draft plan.

Parks and Recreation Commission and Urban Forestry Board — January 21, 2026 · 0:00 →