"THE MAYOR" PHOTO VIA CITY OF ORLANDO SIGNIFICANT TREES WEBSITE
Florida’s Department of Government Efficiency (Website) recently criticized the City of Orlando for spending $460,000 on a tree inventory program, labeling it as an example of municipal waste. The agency, which launched audits of several local governments over alleged “excessive spending,” included the city’s tree count among other items it deemed frivolous, such as wellness programs and cultural funding.
Orlando officials, however, argue that the investment (which is funded in part by the state) is critical to understanding and improving the city’s tree canopy. The $460,000 expense covers several years of work to map, measure, and assess the city’s trees, data that underpins how Orlando manages its urban forest, plans new plantings, and identifies areas most in need of environmental investment. And guess what, none of that was paid for with property taxes.
“Not a single taxpayer dollar was used. It’s all tree fund money, plus some state grant dollars that were mandated to go toward the inventory. The tree fund is funded by developers when they get tree permits and are charged mitigation fees. All of that goes into the fund, and we use it for the management of our urban forest.”
– TARA RUSSAKOV, MARKETING AND COMMUNICATIONS SUPERVISOR, CITY OF ORLANDO FAMILIES, PARKS AND RECREATION
The idea of counting trees may sound like bureaucratic tree-hugging, but it’s a foundational tool for equity and climate resilience (not that any of those words will help convince the current administration). Without accurate data, city planners can’t know which blocks lack shade, which species are at risk, or where maintenance funds should be prioritized. In practice, a comprehensive inventory helps prevent wasteful replanting, reduces storm-related tree failures, and guides new canopy expansion where it’s needed most. Without an inventory, it would be like trying to make cookies without knowing if you have all of the ingredients in the pantry.
“We maintain trees from the time they go in the ground until we take them down. or Mother Nature will. We manage the whole lifespan. You can’t maintain a tree if you don’t know where it is and what kind of tree it is. We look at diameter, height, condition, all of that data feeds into an urban forestry management plan that helps us prioritize and plan for the next 10, 20, 30 years. From the inventory so far, we’ve already removed 43 trees. Between us and Mother Nature, we’ve removed about 4,000 Laurel Oaks since the first inventory. We’ve definitely shifted our street tree planting palette because of climate change.”
– BRAD RADECKI, INVENTORY COORDINATOR, FAMILY, PARKS AND RECREATION, CITY OF ORLANDO
City Hall has previously stated its goal is to raise its citywide tree canopy from roughly 27 percent to 40 percent by 2040, yet the gaps between neighborhoods are striking. Wealthier districts often exceed that 40 percent mark, while poorer areas, many of them historically redlined, have sparse tree cover, exacerbated by years of zoning policies that made it easier to site hard-paved industrial uses there than public amenities, but city staff is trying to fix that.
“Our biggest areas lacking canopy are downtown, industrial parks, and shopping centers, which are the hardest places to plant.”
– BRAD RADECKI, INVENTORY COORDINATOR, FAMILY, PARKS AND RECREATION, CITY OF ORLANDO
Those same areas tend to experience higher heat exposure, poorer air quality, and worse health outcomes. Tree canopy isn’t just an environmental amenity; it’s public health infrastructure. Trees lower temperatures, filter pollutants, and reduce flooding, all of which matter most in neighborhoods already under environmental stress. Radecki shared that the total annual monetary benefit of Orlando’s tree canopy is estimated at roughly $1,244,277, and growing, through the removal of carbon and CO2, diverting stormwater runoff, and more.
In 2021, the nonprofit American Forests (Website), completed a Tree Equity Score map for cities across the country, and Orlando won out with a Moderate score. Check out their heat map below.
Ultimately, the Sweet Tea is not only that Orlando’s tree count shouldn’t be dismissed as government waste. It’s essential. It’s a data-driven foundation for environmental justice and climate adaptation. Understanding the canopy is essential to bridging the city’s green divide, using trees not only to beautify but to cool, clean, and connect communities. If the audit confirms that the spending has tangible outcomes and equitable goals, then the city’s investment isn’t frivolous; it’s an essential part of building a fairer, more resilient Orlando. And the State helped pay for it.
“It’s saving us money and helping us to plan our work for the next 10 to 20 years. TreePlotter [the program the City uses to track tree data] gives us real-time data on every tree, when one comes down, it becomes a stump, and then a new planting gets scheduled. It’s a live map of the city’s forest. Also, FEMA requires GPS locations for reimbursement when we remove storm-damaged trees. Now we can just pull up the map, and it’s all there. TreePlotter also helps settle property-line disputes, whether a tree is a city tree or a private one. That data matters, and we’re not the only ones using this system, it’s international. This is about managing a living, changing public infrastructure.”
– JODY BUYAS, INTERIM PARKS DIVISION MANAGER, FAMILY, PARKS AND RECREATION, CITY OF ORLANDO
