[Trees-executive] text version of Bloom/Norm points

[j-beauch at ux1.cso.uiuc.edu]

llinois Power Customers United to Save Our Trees -- Bloomington-Normal Chapter

Background Notes for Municipalities Meeting (3-26-01)
	Ed Jelks, Mary Lapham, Debbie Polzin

The cities have been developing their countertariff for several weeks
without us. The countertariff will probably have a strong local-control
component which reasserts private property rights, including the sanctity
of easements. Tree management may be carried out by pruning contractors
hired by the cities, and any appeals on tree management would go before an
independent authority, not IP. John MacMahon fears that the cities will be
too accommodating to IP, and he sees our role as making sure they are not.

IP wants to expedite the tariff process. Save Our Trees is still excluded
from the Rutherford meetings. The Normal hearings scheduled for April 11
have NOT been postponed at this date. According to the IP site, the first
reply to IP's statement of withdraw o between IP's statement of withdraw
and the actual withdrawal of the tariff, and where our input fits in.

Illinois Power's bond rating has been BBB since the mid1990s. So has Comm.
Ed. The other power companies are rated A.

Talking Points for the Municipalities Meeting

1. How exactly are trees to be pruned?  Which Shigo book is used by IP or 
   by its contractors (there are many titles)?  

2. Citizens worry about trees which are pruned all along one side, as 
   sometimes the unequally weighted tree then becomes a danger to the 
   homeowner (is vulnerable to wind and storms). Leaving a sturdy limb 
   which extends 10 ft. or so into the airspace above the conductor (means 
   "powerlines" or "wire") is both acceptable pruning practice and safe. 
   The decision to leave the tree limb on the conductor side would depend 
   on the tree species, the length of the limb, its health, and the 
   diameter of the limb.

3. When conifers are pruned by IP, they often die because the leader is 
   so drastically cut. We suggest leaving the leader on conifers whenever 
   possible. If power line clearance requires more drastic tree 
   management, the conifer should be removed.

4. Customers frequently complain about the lack of notification from IP 
   before trimming, although state law requires certain time periods. 
   Put a notification schedule in the tariff along with a penalty to IP or 
   the contractor (a hefty fine or customer rebate) for noncompliance.  
   We suggest a 60-day written notice sent to the homeowner and the city 
   arborist. The "hang-tag" method has not been working well.

5. IP should make a point of offering homeowners the option of burying 
   low-voltage lines which cross the property owner's land to the house.  
   Many people do not realize they have this option. This should be made 
   known to them with the 60-day written notice along with a reasonable 
   estimate of the price. IP should offer customers a rebate or cost 
   reduction as a further incentive as burying the lines permanently 
   reduces that portion of their vegetation management budget and improves 
   safety and reliability. IP should in addition create a trust fund for 
   customers in low-income neighborhoods to subsidize burying the powerlines.

6. Whenever new powerlines are to be put up, especially in but not limited 
   to residential areas, the low- and medium-voltage lines should be buried 
   underground.

7. When the present old powerlines are replaced, which will happen 
   increasingly through the next few years, all low- and medium-voltage 
   lines should be buried underground. In IP 1999 Reliability Report to 
   the ICC, weather, equipment failure, animals, and trees were listed as 
   the top four obstacles to liability -- and in that prioritized order.  
   Underground powerlines would drastically reduce power outages due to 
   weather, animals, and trees. Underground powerlines are far more durable 
   than the overheard variety. All of these measures would permanently 
   reduce municipality and IP's vegetation management budgets.

8. The tariff should include a "heritage tree clause" which protects trees 
   identified by various organizations and ordinances as noteworthy and 
   unique from vegetation management practices. These include the National 
   Register of Big Trees, the Illinois Big Tree program, Chicagoland's 
   Tremendous Trees program, American Forests' Famous & Historic Trees 
   project, a state register for historic trees, the Champion Tree Project, 
   and heritage tree ordinances at the local levels.

9. The tariff should include a meaningful grievance process which provides 
   citizen input (and city arborist input) before trimming -- and after 
   vegetation management.  This should be a straight-forward method that 
   does not requiring going to the ICC, but resolves the issue at the 
   lowest level of local authority. Mistakes are made from time to time, 
   so homeowners should be fairly compensated when their tree or trees were 
   not managed properly.

10. Illinois Power should reimburse homeowners to remove stumps of trees 
    that were cut down as a result of vegetation management.

11. When herbicide is used as part of vegetation management, homeowners 
    should be warned ten days in advance. The fastest-activing, least 
    toxic biodegradeable herbicide should be chosen to minimize herbicide 
    drift and harm to human and animal health. Customers who prefer not 
    to have herbicides used on their property should be given a 
    nonchemical option.

12. Homeowners and municipalities should be consulted when new poles are 
    placed on their properties. Illinois Power should attempt to place 
    poles (when underground lines are not possible, such as with high-
    transmission lines) to cause the least harm to the homeowner and city 
    property.

13. Illinois Power should achieve a four-year tree-trimming cycle and 
    keep accurate records for at least two complete cycles for cities and 
    customers to view. The records would include beginning and ending work 
    dates, descriptions of the kind of work (e.g. scheduled work, storm 
    work, rework after a failed inspection ), disputes with property owners 
    that document properowners' names, the nature of the disputes, and 
    IP's final actions. The cities should conduct random inspections of at 
    least 10% of tree trimming work performed by each contract crew within 
    60 days after the work is completed.

14. Neighborhoods should be informed annually of their option to pay for 
    the burying of medium and low-voltage wires. This would again 
    permanently reduce IP's vegetation management budget. The trust fund 
    described in #5 would apply here as well.


  
 ~v