Tropical Storm Isaias was not an act of God

On Aug. 27 at the General Assembly’s Energy and Technology committee forum in Hartford, Eversource CEO Jim Judd proclaimed that storm Isaias was an act of God.

Hamden Alliance for Trees begs to differ. This storm was not an act of God. This storm was a result of human failure to heed the call of scientists who have warned for decades that fossil fuels contribute to climate change and thus everincreasing violent storms, flooding, drought, wildfires, heat waves and more.

The comments by Eversource officials defending their performance and blaming “trees, trees, trees” for the destruction that resulted on Aug. 4 continues their refusal to acknowledge the true cause of these storms and the role the utilities play in keeping us tied to fossil fuel electric power through their vegetation management plans and their infrastructure replacement projects throughout Connecticut.

Their determination to blame the victims, our trees, is consistent with their goal of removing every tree that might possibly fall on their electric lines to lower their operating expenses and increase their revenue due to an increase in use of air conditioning. One of the most important services trees provide is natural cooling.

There was also much discussion of why so many trees came down. Both companies pointed to the recent droughts and the diseased and pest-infested trees in their service areas. One would think that it would have been a top priority of these companies to remove these trees, but no, dead and diseased trees were routinely left standing in Hamden, a UI service area, while healthy trees were routinely removed. At one point Hamden had a list of more than 200 trees that were reported to UI for removal but were ignored.

According to PURA Docket 16-12-37, in 2016, of 11,043 trees removed, only 703 trees were classified as hazardous.

According to the UI VM Plan Exhibit H, in 2018, of 6,789 trees removed; only 2,267 were classified as hazardous. This means that in 2016 and 2018 a total of 14,862 nonhazardous trees were removed.

This weakens the tree system contributing to the demise of trees in violent weather. The utility companies should be required to replace every tree removed with two healthy trees.

When considering the health of a tree, UI testimony on page 33-34 of Docket 19-0125 speaks volumes. PURA Commissioner Michael Caron asked UI Vegetation Management Manager, David Goodson: “So does that mean that you could check off a number of factors why you should take the tree down, but health may not be one of them?” Goodson: “The industry does not generally use the term ‘health.’ They’re called hazards or risk factors. So there’s not one one that says healthy.”

HAT challenges UI and Eversource to name any living thing that has no risk factors.

Instead of Eversource and UI looking up at the trees to blame, they need to look down at their feet for the obvious solution — undergrounding!

Legislators, local town leaders and residents were also outraged by the poor communication they received after the storm. Historically, these two companies have been completely uninterested in the views of their customers and good communication has not been a priority to either company.

In Docket 19-01-25, when Commissioner Caron asked, “Is there any customer service follow-up to see how the customer’s experience went, post-work … were customers surveyed?” Both companies answered no.

This lack of concern for customer satisfaction is unacceptable and is indicative of the disdain these two companies have for their customers and the towns they

“serve.”

HAT has raised the issue of UI’s poor customer communications with PURA and the Legislature in the past. In 2019, HB 5312 addressed this problem. It was passed in the House, but not considered by the Senate.

HAT has urged PURA repeatedly to require a tear-off satisfaction survey as part of the utility door hanger notification. This would be returned directly to PURA and should result in higher-quality tree work and honor the type of work the property owner requests and has been agreed to by the utility company. Perhaps now it will be seriously considered.

Providing quality customer service includes both recognizing and committing to the protection of our natural world and providing excellent communication with utility customers. This must become an important legislative and PURA consideration when reviewing the performance of the utilities for the sake of our future and survival of our planet.