Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPRR2615 Marx Emails1 From:Jan Marx < Sent:Thursday, February 19, 2026 10:31 AM To:Chip Visci Subject:Re: Following up ... Thanks for your message. Yes, I plan to aƩend the recepƟon. I hope that the wood from the old oak tree can be used on site in public art or furniture, memorializing it somehow. Best Jan Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 19, 2026, at 10:10 AM, Chip Visci < wrote: > > Hi Jan, > Meant to send this to you a few days ago. Got distracted. Trump does that to me. > > Just wanted you to know that SLO REP responded (aƩached) to Mr. DePaoli’s email, which I know he also sent to Council. > > In the meanƟme, hope to see you at SLO REP’s March 15 donor recepƟon and/or at the garage grand opening. It’s a gorgeous building! > > Good things are happening in SLO, if not in the rest of our country. > > And again, thank you for supporƟng SLO REP and the arts. > > Chip > > <DePaoli Reply as emailed - Feb 14-2026.pdf> 1 From:Jan Marx < Sent:Friday, February 27, 2026 8:22 PM To:Elaine Genasci Subject:Re: Tree at the parking garage So sad and frankly pissed off about the sacrifice of that tree. I don’t think therr is much hope, but I am trying to see if s last minute reprieve might be possible Thanks for reaching out Jan Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 27, 2026, at 3:00 PM, Elaine Genasci < wrote: > > Hey Jan > What can be done to save the oak tree at the new parking garage? > > Thanks, > Elaine > > > Sent from my iPhone 1 From:Jan Marx < Sent:Monday, March 2, 2026 1:09 PM To:Chip Visci Subject:Oak Tree questions Hi Chip Council is geƫng emails about the oak tree, as well as me personally. Is the tree included in the SLO Rep lease? Will your team have control over the tree aŌer you sign the lease? Who will have to pay for the tree being taken out? If there is the slightest chance that SLO Rep could decide to try to save the tree, it would make your team heros, not villai ns. Even if the tree eventually could not survive construcƟon of the theater, SLO Rep would have done all it could to say : “Woodsman, spare that tree”Thanks for geƫng back to me on this Jan Sent from my iPhone 1 From:Jan Marx < Sent:Monday, March 2, 2026 7:16 PM To:Chip Visci Subject:Re: Oak Tree questions Thanks Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 2, 2026, at 3:57 PM, Chip Visci < wrote: > > Here’s a video I took the other day. > My narraƟon is purely my opinion. > Also, ignore the word “period.” I thought I was dictaƟng to Siri and was trying to end my sentences. 덵덱덲덳덴덶 > > <Video.mov> > > >> On Mar 2, 2026, at 3:20 PM, Jan Marx < wrote: >> >> I will go look at the tree. Thanks for your message. >> Jan >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>>> On Mar 2, 2026, at 3:04 PM, Chip Visci < wrote: >>> >>> Jan, >>> Here’s what I know to be true, and Bob Hill is a walking encyclopedia of the facts so you might want to contact him. >>> >>> The tree was included in the Exclusive NegoƟaƟng Agreement. It was not included in the Lease Agreement. I do not know why. >>> We (City and SLO REP) have signed the lease. It’s the operaƟng document. >>> >>> We have not argued that the lease “releases” us from any responsibility for the tree preferring instead to say what is true: We had always intended to do all that was reasonable to preserve the tree, which we have done. >>> >>> SLO REP pays for the tree removal once the City gives us “possession.” As I understand it - and Bob knows for sure - we won’t receive possession unƟl we get a building permit. >>> >>> If you haven’t already walked the site around the tree, I encourage you to take a look. It surprised me how obvious it is that tree roots were severed during excavaƟon for the garage foundaƟon and/or the drain vault. A couple of severed roots are visible. Most likely a considerable porƟon of the lateral roots were also severed when you consider how much excavaƟon was done for the garage foundaƟon. If you then look at the tree’s proximity to the new sidewalk, you would think, YEOW! Clearly tree roo ts had to be impacted just as the staff report said. But I’m not an arborist. But I can see severed roots, and I know what happens when sidewalks and tree roots collide. >>> >>> I hear you on sparing the tree. Please let me know if you’d like to discuss further. >>> >>> Chip >>> >>> >>> 2 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>> On Mar 2, 2026, at 1:09 PM, Jan Marx < wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Chip >>>> Council is geƫng emails about the oak tree, as well as me personally. Is the tree included in the SLO Rep lease? Will your team have control over the tree aŌer you sign the lease? Who will have to pay for the tree being taken out? >>>> If there is the slightest chance that SLO Rep could decide to try to save the tree, it would make your team heros, not v illains. Even if the tree eventually could not survive construcƟon of the theater, SLO Rep would have done all it could to say : “Woodsman, spare that tree”Thanks for geƫng back to me on this >>>> >>>> Jan >>>> >>>> Sent from my iPhone >>> 1 From:Jan Marx < Sent:Monday, March 2, 2026 3:21 PM To:Chip Visci Subject:Re: Oak Tree questions I will go look at the tree. Thanks for your message. Jan Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 2, 2026, at 3:04 PM, Chip Visci < wrote: > > Jan, > Here’s what I know to be true, and Bob Hill is a walking encyclopedia of the facts so you might want to contact him. > > The tree was included in the Exclusive NegoƟaƟng Agreement. It was not included in the Lease Agreement. I do not know why. > We (City and SLO REP) have signed the lease. It’s the operaƟng document. > > We have not argued that the lease “releases” us from any responsibility for the tree preferring instead to say what is true: We had always intended to do all that was reasonable to preserve the tree, which we have done. > > SLO REP pays for the tree removal once the City gives us “possession.” As I understand it - and Bob knows for sure - we won’t receive possession unƟl we get a building permit. > > If you haven’t already walked the site around the tree, I encourage you to take a look. It surprised me how obvious it is that tree roots were severed during excavaƟon for the garage foundaƟon and/or the drain vault. A couple of severed roots are visible. Most likely a considerable porƟon of the lateral roots were also severed when you consider how much excavaƟon was done for the garage foundaƟon. If you then look at the tree’s proximity to the new sidewalk, you would think, YEOW! Clearly tree roo ts had to be impacted just as the staff report said. But I’m not an arborist. But I can see severed roots, and I know what happens when sidewalks and tree roots collide. > > I hear you on sparing the tree. Please let me know if you’d like to discuss further. > > Chip > > > > > > > > > >> On Mar 2, 2026, at 1:09 PM, Jan Marx < wrote: >> >> Hi Chip >> Council is geƫng emails about the oak tree, as well as me personally. Is the tree included in the SLO Rep lease? Will yo ur team have control over the tree aŌer you sign the lease? Who will have to pay for the tree being taken out? >> If there is the slightest chance that SLO Rep could decide to try to save the tree, it would make your team heros, not villains. Even if the tree eventually could not survive construcƟon of the theater, SLO Rep would have done all it could to say : “Woodsman, spare that tree”Thanks for geƫng back to me on this >> 2 >> Jan >> >> Sent from my iPhone > 1 From:Chip Visci < Sent:Monday, March 2, 2026 3:04 PM To:Jan Marx Subject:Re: Oak Tree questions Jan, Here’s what I know to be true, and Bob Hill is a walking encyclopedia of the facts so you might want to contact him. The tree was included in the Exclusive NegoƟaƟng Agreement. It was not included in the Lease Agreement. I do not know why. We (City and SLO REP) have signed the lease. It’s the operaƟng document. We have not argued that the lease “releases” us from any responsibility for the tree preferring instead to say what is true: We had always intended to do all that was reasonable to preserve the tree, which we have done. SLO REP pays for the tree removal once the City gives us “possession.” As I understand it - and Bob knows for sure - we won’t receive possession unƟl we get a building permit. If you haven’t already walked the site around the tree, I encourage you to take a look. It surprised me how obvious it is that tree roots were severed during excavaƟon for the garage foundaƟon and/or the drain vault. A couple of severed roots are visible. Most likely a considerable porƟon of the lateral roots were also severed when you consider how much excavaƟon was done for the garage foundaƟon. If you then look at the tree’s proximity to the new sidewalk, you would think, YEOW! Clearly tree roo ts had to be impacted just as the staff report said. But I’m not an arborist. But I can see severed roots, and I know what happens when sidewalks and tree roots collide. I hear you on sparing the tree. Please let me know if you’d like to discuss further. Chip On Mar 2, 2026, at 1:09 PM, Jan Marx < wrote: > > Hi Chip > Council is geƫng emails about the oak tree, as well as me personally. Is the tree included in the SLO Rep lease? Will your team have control over the tree aŌer you sign the lease? Who will have to pay for the tree being taken out? > If there is the slightest chance that SLO Rep could decide to try to save the tree, it would make your team heros, not villains. Even if the tree eventually could not survive construcƟon of the theater, SLO Rep would have done all it could to say : “Woodsman, spare that tree”Thanks for geƫng back to me on this > > Jan > > Sent from my iPhone 1 From:Chip Visci < Sent:Monday, March 2, 2026 3:56 PM To:Jan Marx Subject:Re: Oak Tree questions Attachments:Video.mov Here’s a video I took the other day. My narration is purely my opinion. Also, ignore the word “period.” I thought I was dictating to Siri and was trying to end my sentences. 덵덱덲덳덴덶 > On Mar 2, 2026, at 3:20 PM, Jan Marx < wrote: > > I will go look at the tree. Thanks for your message. > Jan > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Mar 2, 2026, at 3:04 PM, Chip Visci < wrote: >> >> Jan, >> Here’s what I know to be true, and Bob Hill is a walking encyclopedia of the facts so you might want to contact him. >> >> The tree was included in the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement. It was not included in the Lease Agreement. I do not know why. >> We (City and SLO REP) have signed the lease. It’s the operating document. >> >> We have not argued that the lease “releases” us from any responsibility for the tree preferring instead to say what is true: We had always intended to do all that was reasonable to preserve the tree, which we have done. >> >> SLO REP pays for the tree removal once the City gives us “possession.” As I understand it - and Bob knows for sure - we won’t receive possession until we get a building permit. >> >> If you haven’t already walked the site around the tree, I encourage you to take a look. It surprised me how obvious it is that tree roots were severed during excavation for the garage foundation and/or the drain vault. A couple of severed roots are visible. Most likely a considerable portion of the lateral roots were also severed when you consider how much excavation was done for the garage foundation. If you then look at the tree’s proximity to the new sidewalk, you would think, YEOW! Clearly tree roots had to be impacted just as the staff report said. But I’m not an arborist. But I can see severed roots, and I know what happens when sidewalks and tree roots collide. >> >> I hear you on sparing the tree. Please let me know if you’d like to discuss further. >> >> Chip >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 2 >> >>>> On Mar 2, 2026, at 1:09 PM, Jan Marx < wrote: >>> >>> Hi Chip >>> Council is getting emails about the oak tree, as well as me personally. Is the tree included in the SLO Rep lease? Will your team have control over the tree after you sign the lease? Who will have to pay for the tree being taken out? >>> If there is the slightest chance that SLO Rep could decide to try to save the tree, it would make your team heros, not villains. Even if the tree eventually could not survive construction of the theater, SLO Rep would have done all it could to say : “Woodsman, spare that tree”Thanks for getting back to me on this >>> >>> Jan >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >> 1 From:Jan Marx < Sent:Tuesday, March 3, 2026 10:41 AM To:Chip Visci Subject:Re: Oak Tree questions Thank you. If the tree is not part of SLO Rep's leased land, why does the City think it should pay for its demolition? J On Mon, Mar 2, 2026 at 3:57 PM Chip Visci < wrote: Here’s a video I took the other day. My narration is purely my opinion. Also, ignore the word “period.” I thought I was dictating to Siri and was trying to end my sentences. 덵덱덲덳덴덶 > On Mar 2, 2026, at 3:20 PM, Jan Marx < wrote: > > I will go look at the tree. Thanks for your message. > Jan > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Mar 2, 2026, at 3:04 PM, Chip Visci < wrote: >> >> Jan, >> Here’s what I know to be true, and Bob Hill is a walking encyclopedia of the facts so you might want to contact him. >> >> The tree was included in the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement. It was not included in the Lease Agreement. I do not know why. >> We (City and SLO REP) have signed the lease. It’s the operating document. >> >> We have not argued that the lease “releases” us from any responsibility for the tree preferring instead to say what is true: We had always intended to do all that was reasonable to preserve the tree, which we have done. >> >> SLO REP pays for the tree removal once the City gives us “possession.” As I understand it - and Bob knows for sure - we won’t receive possession until we get a building permit. >> >> If you haven’t already walked the site around the tree, I encourage you to take a look. It surprised me how obvious it is that tree roots were severed during excavation for the garage foundation and/or the drain vault. A couple of severed roots are visible. Most likely a considerable portion of the lateral roots were also severed when you consider how much excavation was done for the garage foundation. If you then look at the tree’s proximity to the new sidewalk, you would think, YEOW! Clearly tree roots had to be impacted just as the staff report said. But I’m not an arborist. But I can see severed roots, and I know what happens when sidewalks and tree roots collide. >> >> I hear you on sparing the tree. Please let me know if you’d like to discuss further. 2 >> >> Chip >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> On Mar 2, 2026, at 1:09 PM, Jan Marx < wrote: >>> >>> Hi Chip >>> Council is getting emails about the oak tree, as well as me personally. Is the tree included in the SLO Rep lease? Will your team have control over the tree after you sign the lease? Who will have to pay for the tree being taken out? >>> If there is the slightest chance that SLO Rep could decide to try to save the tree, it would make your team heros, not villains. Even if the tree eventually could not survive construction of the theater, SLO Rep would have done all it could to say : “Woodsman, spare that tree”Thanks for getting back to me on this >>> >>> Jan >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >> 1 From:Chip Visci < Sent:Tuesday, March 3, 2026 10:51 AM To:Jan Marx Subject:Re: Oak Tree questions Hi Jan, If I understand your question below …. As I understand it, The tree is on the site that the city has agreed to lease to us. SLO REP will be paying the costs for all site preparation including tree removal. The fact that the lease is silent about the tree does not absolve us for paying for site preparation work. And We still need permission for all site plans. Does this answer your question? On Mar 3, 2026, at 10:41 AM, Jan Marx < wrote: Thank you. If the tree is not part of SLO Rep's leased land, why does the City think it should pay for its demolition? J On Mon, Mar 2, 2026 at 3:57 PM Chip Visci < wrote: Here’s a video I took the other day. My narration is purely my opinion. Also, ignore the word “period.” I thought I was dictating to Siri and was trying to end my sentences. 덵덱덲덳덴덶 > On Mar 2, 2026, at 3:20 PM, Jan Marx < wrote: > > I will go look at the tree. Thanks for your message. > Jan > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Mar 2, 2026, at 3:04 PM, Chip Visci < wrote: >> >> Jan, >> Here’s what I know to be true, and Bob Hill is a walking encyclopedia of the facts so you might want to contact him. >> >> The tree was included in the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement. It was not included in the Lease 2 Agreement. I do not know why. >> We (City and SLO REP) have signed the lease. It’s the operating document. >> >> We have not argued that the lease “releases” us from any responsibility for the tree preferring instead to say what is true: We had always intended to do all that was reasonable to preserve the tree, which we have done. >> >> SLO REP pays for the tree removal once the City gives us “possession.” As I understand it - and Bob knows for sure - we won’t receive possession until we get a building permit. >> >> If you haven’t already walked the site around the tree, I encourage you to take a look. It surprised me how obvious it is that tree roots were severed during excavation for the garage foundation and/or the drain vault. A couple of severed roots are visible. Most likely a considerable portion of the lateral roots were also severed when you consider how much excavation was done for the garage foundation. If you then look at the tree’s proximity to the new sidewalk, you would think, YEOW! Clearly tree roots had to be impacted just as the staff report said. But I’m not an arborist. But I can see severed roots, and I know what happens when sidewalks and tree roots collide. >> >> I hear you on sparing the tree. Please let me know if you’d like to discuss further. >> >> Chip >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> On Mar 2, 2026, at 1:09 PM, Jan Marx < wrote: >>> >>> Hi Chip >>> Council is getting emails about the oak tree, as well as me personally. Is the tree included in the SLO Rep lease? Will your team have control over the tree after you sign the lease? Who will have to pay for the tree being taken out? >>> If there is the slightest chance that SLO Rep could decide to try to save the tree, it would make your team heros, not villains. Even if the tree eventually could not survive construction of the theater, SLO Rep would have done all it could to say : “Woodsman, spare that tree”Thanks for getting back to me on this >>> >>> Jan >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >> 1 From:Jan Marx < Sent:Thursday, April 16, 2026 10:46 AM To:Richard Schmidt Subject:Public Records Request? Any chance you (or someone you know) might want to make a public records request, asking for all and any documents mentioning saving the oak tree including but not limited to the dates during the demolition of the two houses, construction of the parking garage and the construction of the SLO Rep theatre? This would daylight the long history of preserving that oak and would have those documents posted on the city website as public information. Since I might have to vote on this issue, I think this request would best come from a city resident. As a Council member, I do not want to make this request myself, due to conflict of interest and Brown Act provisions. Thanks for considering, Jan 1 From:Jan Marx < Sent:Friday, April 17, 2026 11:39 AM To:Richard Schmidt Subject:Re: Public Records Request? Well, that question raises a very important point, namely decades of policy decisions to save the oak. I have served 20 years on council (total, not consecutive) and think I have voted to save that tree several times. The history of this community vision needs to be daylighted. Thank you for taking this on. Jan Sent from my iPhone On Apr 17, 2026, at 11:33 AM, Richard Schmidt < wrote: Thanks for the suggestion. I'm working on it. I wonder how far back it should go? On Thursday, April 16, 2026 at 10:45:51 AM PDT, Jan Marx <janmarx@stanfordalumni.org> wrote: Any chance you (or someone you know) might want to make a public records request, asking for all and any documents mentioning saving the oak tree including but not limited to the dates during the demolition of the two houses, construction of the parking garage and the construction of the SLO Rep theatre? This would daylight the long history of preserving that oak and would have those documents posted on the city website as public information. Since I might have to vote on this issue, I think this request would best come from a city resident. As a Council member, I do not want to make this request myself, due to conflict of interest and Brown Act provisions. Thanks for considering, Jan 1 From:Richard Schmidt < Sent:Friday, April 17, 2026 11:33 AM To:Jan Marx Subject:Re: Public Records Request? Thanks for the suggestion. I'm working on it. I wonder how far back it should go? On Thursday, April 16, 2026 at 10:45:51 AM PDT, Jan Marx <janmarx@stanfordalumni.org> wrote: Any chance you (or someone you know) might want to make a public records request, asking for all and any documents mentioning saving the oak tree including but not limited to the dates during the demolition of the two houses, construction of the parking garage and the construction of the SLO Rep theatre? This would daylight the long history of preserving that oak and would have those documents posted on the city website as public information. Since I might have to vote on this issue, I think this request would best come from a city resident. As a Council member, I do not want to make this request myself, due to conflict of interest and Brown Act provisions. Thanks for considering, Jan