In his letter to the editor, “Stop the Inaccurate Information on Underground Utilities” (June 5), the picayune details that Mr. Aaron Cook is presenting as ‘outlandish’ once again obscure the main issue: it is about PAYING (an outlandish amount) for aesthetic undergrounding, rather than arguing the minutiae and specific pros and cons of undergrounding in this area.
However, in response to some of Mr. Cook’s points.
1. Regarding the location of transformers. We have formally asked the City Attorney’s office, the Public Works Department, and Edison for clarification on this question. Apparently, there are competing claims that are eventually negotiated or litigated. Edison’s position is that underground transformers are less safe.
2. Cost of assessments. The estimates are just that, and have been changed in different presentations. It doesn’t matter if the cost is $15,000 or $35,000. It is simply unfair to charge people this amount of money for aesthetics – especially if they don’t want or need it.
3. Rule 20C. After a thorough reading of the actual applicable laws, and in discussions with City officials, the Deputy Public Works Director agreed that Rule 20C can absolutely apply in this situation. It is infrequently used because the organizational and knowledge skills are not usually found among a group of neighbors. The only area in District 118 that has more than 3-5 contiguous homes that are NOT noundergounding.com supporters are homes along lower Santa Ana Ave. and La Jolla Drive. If you want to organize your neighbors and use Rule 20C, we have calculated that it would cost you as little as approximately $47,000 per parcel (26 poles, 36 parcels, ~$65,000 per pole). No disruptive neighborhood campaign or waste of City resources needed.
4. Noundergrounding.com proponents have never claimed that returning a petition postcard will obligate anyone to anything. The correct claim has always been that if pro-undergrounding proponents are successful at gathering postcard signatures for 60 percent of the District, that’s when the City obligations start. Do you have 60 percent after nearly five months of effort and a City Sponsored mailing?
5. Foreclosure wording. That’s the City wording included in the formal petition, and meant to be read and understood by all homeowners signing your petition postcard.
Two other suggestions. Spend some time trying to generate names on your own list. We have confidence in each and every signature that has been submitted to us. As far as accurate and factual information by the City, many legitimate questions have been repeatedly ignored or unanswered by City officials, some as recently as two weeks ago by the City Attorney’s office and the Public Works department.
Portia Weiss
Newport Heights
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_cO2MtusIQ&feature=youtu.be
This video will refute much of your claims as it is direct from the City, contractors and realtors. It is not just aesthetics, there will be no above ground transformers, the list goes on. Our area is converting to a 12kv system. Bigger poles mean more EMF’s from the bigger system. Why don’t google EMF’s and see if they concern you.
Next bigger poles are a huge concern with home values. Listen to the Realtor, ‘if you are not moving forward, you are moving back’. I believe your side is only concerned about the money- I get it. There is a bond option or complete deferment. Therefore, it must be the connection costs which will range from zero to $2500 average (again on the video). Yes some might have more costs if they are an original cottage from the 40’s with not one electrical upgrade since that time.
Why don’t we work together as a community to help anyone out that would not be able to afford those costs?
As a community, I really think we need to look at the ‘bigger picture’ and think long term. I am sure with the intelligent people on both sides, we can figure out a way to make it work out to benefit our community as a whole.