Press "Enter" to skip to content

Tumwater Hides Critical Evidence on the State of the Davis Meeker Oak Tree

The Davis Meeker Oak in Winter Light. Photo by Ronelle Funk, Jan.12, 2019

A lawsuit filed by local open government and environmental activist Arthur West on February 4 claims the City of Tumwater violated the public records act by failing to disclose a Root Crown inspection Report, ultrasound images, pictures of the tree’s root system and related records and reports from Todd Praeger and Associates, who was hired as a third party consultant to evaluate the condition of the tree.

The Complaint states that  “the City of Tumwater has acted in a scandalous and outrageous manner by concealing material evidence as to the health and condition of the tree while battles rage on in the Trial and Appellate Courts over the Citys monomaniacal vendetta seeking to destroy this cherished and beloved historic and cultural resource.

The suit quotes from  Dr, Seuss’s The Lorax and an Amicus Brief submitted by the State of Washington in Save the Davis Meeker Gary Oak v. Sullivan, in COA Division II No. 58881-1-II:

Sometimes a tree is more than just a tree. Trees are part of the cultural heritage of Washington State, for Tribal and non-Tribal people alike. Since time immemorial humans have placed special significance on trees. Whether they held a religious or spiritual function, served as way markers to help our ancestors move from place to place, or simply provided shelter and building materials, humans and trees have long held a symbiotic relationship.

Citing to the 2008 landmark deliberative process case in Washington, West v. Port of Olympia146 Wn. App. 108 (2008) Plaintiff West points out that the deliberative process exemption claimed by the city does not apply to factual material such as a picture or a report, and that any claim of deliberative process expires when a decision on the matter has been made by the agency.

If these records supported the city’s position, they would not be hiding them West stated. For the city to  assert such a baseless exemption indicates that there is something in these records they really don’t want to disclose. It is disturbing that despite the fact that the dispute about the tree is now pending in the Court of Appeals, the city is suppressing material evidence as to its condition.

The new PRA case has been assigned to Thurston County Superior Court Judge Anne Eggler, the same Trial Court Judge who ruled on the Save the Davis Meeker 

Gary Oak v. Sullivan case last year. A preliminary hearing has been set for March 7.

2 Comments

  1. Ronda Larson Kramer March 1, 2025

    Mayor Debbie Sullivan settled this case recently for thousands of dollars, once again causing unnecessary costs to the City of Tumwater in her multi-year effort to try to cut down the Davis Meeker oak. After the lawsuit was filed, the city released the second risk assessment report. It showed what those in the Save the Davis Meeker Garry Oak citizen activist group knew all along: the tree is healthy. To know why the tree was targeted in the first place, one must understand that it is tall, and tall things next to airports interfere with airport expansion. The Port has been working on expansion plans since 2021, and they are set to be approved (unless Port Commissioners can be persuaded to do otherwise) on March 24, 2025, after a 5:30 pm public hearing. To help persuade commissioners to vote to pause the airport master plan and take time to identify and remove the extensive amount of pork, please plan to attend the hearing. And if you live in Tumwater, please reach out to city councilmembers, as they have veto power over critical parts of the master plan but may not realize it as of this writing. More info can be found here: https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/stop-olympia-airport-growth.

  2. WIP staff March 6, 2025

    WIP staff has since learned that Tumwater released the requested records a week after this case was filed and reached a settlement of $5,000. As expected, the results of the tree investigation by Praeger Associates did not support the City’s position that the tree was unhealthy and should be removed.

Comments are closed.

Next:
We reported on the historic success by Standing for Washington…