Here’s your answer: A shift in strategy for PG&E in their battle against wildfires. After four years and $2 billion in money spent, the company says it’s moving away from its enhanced vegetation management program….

Well I’m sorry to take this subject on and then not be able to put my full attention into it. I have wanted to write a letter to the paper to get more people into this conversation, but wanted to do more research. I found this article, from The Utility Reform Network (August), that tells us the real reason PG&E is years behind in their program to remove hazards from their lines. They’ve essentially gone back on promises to firesafe their lines in old neighborhoods.

https://www.turn.org/turn-newsroom/concerns-raised-as-pge-cuts-tree-trimming-program-for-wildfire-prevention

A shift in strategy for PG&E in their battle against wildfires. After four years and $2 billion in money spent, the company says it’s moving away from its enhanced vegetation management program….

The announcement is unwelcome news to many who worry it could lead to more unnecessary wildfires.

Instead of the vegetation management program, PG&E plans on relying on other fire prevention tools [like burying power lines….

“That is going to cost billions and billions of dollars and take well over a decade,” said Mark Toney, of The Utility Reform Network.

This statement answers one question – they are backlogged on vegetation removal because they aren’t going to do it anymore.

But I don’t get it. They are obviously not undergrounding lines in old neighborhoods, just new subdivisions. Why would that cost PG&E billions and billions? In California, the developer pays to underground the distribution and service lines for a new residential subdivision. Under California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) Electric Rule 15 (Distribution Line Extensions) and Rule 16 (Service Line Extensions), underground lines are mandatory for all new residential subdivisions – not old neighborhoods. In fact, when they put a tiny new subdivision in my neighbor’s back yard, they only undergrounded the lines for those seven houses, hooking them up to the pole on our street with a regular above-ground wire.

The only lines I know of that they are undergrounding at their “own” expense are the lines in Paradise – that’s part of the fire settlement. And as you know, they get their money from the ratepayers. Say MOO-OOO!

Here’s what I think – if you live in a neighborhood more than 60 years old, you are on the bottom of the dogpile when it comes to city services. In 1967, the CPUC made that ruling about undergrounding in new subdivisions. So even if developers are paying for it, it takes up a lot of the PG&E labor force. For every new subdivision – drive around town. Bottom Dog.

So vegetation management takes a back seat. So does road maintenance, drainage, sidewalks, etc. I don’t even know if the Americans with Disabilities Act applies to old neighborhoods. I do know, the property owners are responsible for the sidewalks and the drainage, and that can run thousands, even 10’s of thousands of dollars.

So yeah, that just sucks. Since I wrote that last post, our next door neighbors hired a tree company to cut trees that had been marked at least three times over the past few years by various PG&E consultants.

I’m not sure there’s a letter to the editor here, cause Wolcott won’t print “sucks” in his catbox liner.