Tree Owners Seek Attorney General's Opinion

(posted Dec 30)

Jerry and Cindy Baker of the Traders Point area are gathering signatures to accompany their letter to the Attorney General's Office concerning the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission's tariffs that regulate utilities' tree trimming practices. Jerry Baker said Senator Mike Delph will carry the letter to the Attorney General's office.

The letter is requesting the Attorney General give a legal opinion of the tariffs that allow IPL and other utilities to engage in tree trimming practices. The Bakers claim the tariff is unconstitutional since it overrides property rights by permitting trespassing onto private property to trim or remove trees, and does not compensate for the loss of trees.

The Bakers and their neighbors have complained to their state legislators and to IPL about their perceived abuses of tree trimming practices in the right-of-way that seep into private property.

The issue has already grabbed state legislators' attention. A public hearing was conducted on October 9 by the General Assembly's Regulatory Flexibility Committee. Jerry Baker said that Senators James Merritt Jr. and Jean D. Breaux have shown an interest and are considering the issue during the legislative session.

Delph is expected to meet the Traders Point Association of Neighborhoods to discuss the issue on December 30.

Although the Bakers and other residents can lobby their state legislators for change in the tree trimming policies, Jerry Baker contends a legal opinion would be more effective in encouraging legislators to act. They realize an opinion agreeing with the current tariff's language would be a disaster for their cause, but it is a risk they are willing to take.

He thinks the legal opinion would also help with legislation to adopt a uniform practice state-wide. He said not all utilities fall within the jurisdiction of the IURC, and cannot attest to other utilities' tree trimming practices.

Baker contends that tariffs E-16 and 15.2 give IPL carte blanch to do what ever the company feels it needs to do to insure reliability of service. He claims IPL hides behind federal rules of assessing fines to utilities for failing to keep tree limbs away from high voltage power lines in the grid system by expanding the interpretation to trees growing by distribution lines.

He wants to see reform of utility pole placements that permit poles to be placed next to a property line, effectively giving the utility removal rights on private property. "The placement further restricts the use of private property from future planting of any tall growing species, including evergreens." He wants the landowner to be compensated for "the taking."

Baker wants to educate the public on a landowner's loss due to the tariff. "Their cutting policy calls for clearance distances depending upon line voltage, and then additional distance for three years growth and potentially more in order to satisfy ANSI 300 standards for property pruning techniques to protect the health of the tree." Baker contends that is a huge loss for a property owner who wants a tree canopy to conserve energy and help the environment or "provide a privacy screen."