PACE REVIEW

– The Edison Fight –
Where We’ve Been and Where We Stand…..

The Final Environmental Report on Edison’s San Joaquin Cross Valley Loop project will be released in Feb. 2010. That doesn’t end our citizen-powered involvement. In fact, it’s when the ‘rubber hits the road’ and we really get to work: to compliment if the right route is chosen and to comment if we think the final report is headed in the wrong direction.

The following report gives the history of what we’ve done throughout the lengthy process. We sincerely hope it has not been in vain!

Our long and intense struggle to stop Southern California Edison’s plan to put a high voltage transmission line through our rich agricultural lands and communities is now at a stand-still.

We have done all we can do – and we’ve done it very well. We can only hope the Public Utilities Commission’s environmental team “gets it” when they write the final EIR.

We were never opposed to the concept of the project to improve electrical utility service in this area. Instead, we have advocated a route alternative that is just plain good common sense.

Route 3-A, as conceived by our engineers and transmission line consultants and our PACE team, is a win-win solution, but Edison just does not get it!

Edison would win with cost savings; elimination of potential lawsuits; property condemnation hassles and scheduling delays. And it will salvage its badly battered public image from the trash pile.

The residents of eastern Tulare County would win, too. If placed on 3-A, Edison’s would go through cattle grazing land with little impact to more intensive agricultural lands. It would avoid environmental impacts to the Stone Corral Ecological Reserve, and, by using the existing Big Creek-Rector line, it will provide needed improvements and upgrades to the 100-year old line.

Edison’s attorneys, engineers and wordsmiths remain arrogant and unyielding in their uncompromising advocacy of their favored plan.

They continue to insist that
their preferred choice is
19-mile Alternative 1 from
Lemon Cove to Visalia.

It crosses scenic Hwy 198 twice; visibly parallels the highway for many miles; destroys wells, pipelines and other infrastructure in productive farmland; upsets the gateway entrances to Exeter and Farmersville; absolutely ruins Farmersville’s proposed commercial center and destroys many acres of walnuts because their branches must be trimmed below their productive limb structure.

That’s where we are now on Oct. 3.
Following is a memory-refreshing
review of how we got here. 

Nov. 15, ‘06 -  The schmoozing began. Edison officials held an open house at Freedom Elementary School in Farmersville. Folks got angry and an ad-hoc group formed to oppose it. Only Routes 1 and 2 were on the map.

Nov. 30, ‘06 – SCE Region Manager Bill Delain met at the Quaker meeting house with about 100 upset residents. Immediately, vivid black, red and white posters of opposition went up everywhere.

Jan. 18, ‘07 – A year passed and the second schmooze was directed at the Woodlake, Elderwood folks with a meeting at the Woodlake Memorial Building. Nobody there liked that either.

July 18, ‘07 – We were lulled into thinking all’s well. Mr. DeLain was quoted in a Valley Voice article – “We are looking at what appear to be viable options outside of the original study area to the north.”  This was baloney, but opponents eased off. As someone put it later, “we went to sleep!” Nearly another year went by, then in …

March, ‘08 – Edison’s 8-page “Community Update” booklet was made available to selected individuals as their public relations push gathered steam. It showed a revised Alternative 1 - the one still being challenged – as the company’s first choice.
Rte 2 (Elderwood) remained the same, but there was hope – an Edison-proposed Alternative 3 was on the map. It’s the one we call the Stokes Mountain route.

Apr. 7, 08 – Enraged, a large crowd gathered at the Exeter Memorial Building for a meeting called by District 1 Supervisor Allen Ishida. The following week a Steering Committee was named and George McEwen assumed the Chairman’s position.

In successive weeks:

PACE was selected for our name:
Protect Agriculture Communities and the Environment
and the Mission Statement  was adopted:

PACE is a diverse and growing coalition of citizens organized to convince the California Public Utilities Commission to direct the location of Southern California Edison’s San Joaquin Cross Valley Loop project of high voltage transmission lines and towers to its proposed rural northern Route 3, instead of Route 1 that cuts an economically damaging path along the scenic Hwy 198 corridor. We will educate, motivate and activate the public, as well as state and local officials, about the many negative impacts Route 1 holds for People, Agriculture, our Scenic Corridor, Communities, the Environment and the Economy of central Tulare County.

May 30, 08 -  Remember that fateful day?
SCE’s signs popped up on properties all along the proposed Route 1!
It was their official notice that it, on that date, had filed a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to Construct  (CPCN) its San Joaquin Cross Valley Loop with the California Public Utilities Commission.
It was assigned Docket Number: A.08-05-039.

AND WE GOT
TO WORK!

PACE conducted informational meetings and a membership drive. More than 600 paid their $5 membership fee and joined immediately.

We had great press coverage all along the way for each meeting, event and activity – helped along by PACE’s well-planned series of
news events, press releases, press conferences and paid advertisements.

We communicated with our members and others with newsletters and electronic messages via e-mail.

Letters – We wrote letters of protest!  - and the PUC was overwhelmed.
They had to put on extra staff to sort through them, make copies and distribute them to PUC staff.
Many signed on as “Parties” to the dispute or as “Parties for Information.” They are notified of all legal actions.

SCE discounted our communications as just form letters.

In response to protests, Edison said, “…nearly all of them are identical photocopied forms or following formula outlines raising similar issues…. Less than 0.1 percent of Important Farmland in Tulare County would be converted to non-agricultural use during operation of the project …none of the Project impacts are significant under CEQA.”  In an arrogant boiler-plate fashion, Edison marginalized our legitimate concerns to “less than significant.”

Intervenor: Respected energy and water consultant, Lon House, PhD, was accepted by the PUC to be the PACE Intervenor to represent the organization throughout the legal process.

Balloons Fly Sky High!

Edison’s proposed SJXVL will have poles and lattice towers 120 to 160-feet tall. Since that is hard to visualize, PACE flew helium-filled balloons tethered to 150 foot strings, while members waved posters of protest. We did this twice – at the Exeter line crossing Hwy 65 and the Farmersville location.

August 11 and 12, ‘08 – Due to the public outcry against the project and, realizing its significance to Tulare County citizens, the PUC Environmental Team scheduled Informational Workshops in Farmersville and Woodlake to explain procedures for public participation. They explained there were two processes taking place under the Public Utilities Commission:

1. the CEQA process involving the Environmental Team that will write the Environmental Impact Report, and
2. the Administrative Process that will be conducted by the assigned Administrative Law Judge, The Honorable Hallie Yacknin.

Sept. 11 and 12, ’08 – The PUC Environmental Team held Scoping Sessions in Farmersville and Woodlake, to hear from the public what environmental concerns should be assessed in the EIR on Alternative Routes 1, 2 and 3. Again, huge crowds attended and many concerned individuals spoke. Letters were accepted until 9/22/08.

October, ’08 – Tulare County Farm Bureau and the California Farm Bureau Federation denounced Edison’s impact on productive farm lands. CFBF Attorney Karen N. Mills was given a tour of the proposed routes.

Nov. 19, ’08 – ALJ Hallie Yacknin held an afternoon meeting of the Parties at the Visalia Convention Center.

In the evening she took public comments from concerned citizens. It was a standing-room-only crowd with speaker after speaker telling her the Proposed Project was destructive to Tulare County. A better plan would be to go to Route 3.

Feb. 6, ’09 – Routes 5 and 6 added! Parties learned of the Environmental Team’s addition of Routes 5 and 6 for consideration in a Data Request letter from Jensen Uchida, the CPUC’s CEQA Project Manager, to Susan Nelson, SCE Project Manager. Rte 5 leaves the Rector line near Cutler park and joins existing Route 1 just below Cottage Post Office Road and near Hwy 245, affecting even more agricultural land.  Further north, Route 6 would tie into existing Route 2. It, too, would cut eastward through valuable farmland. These two additions created even more outrage from the agricultural community and existing opponents.

Mar. 3, ’09 – PACE advocates Route 3 alternative: Dr. House, along with engineering consultant Hank Zaininger and a PACE Land Committee representative, visited with the PUC’s environmental team in San Francisco. They provided them with solid data that environmental impacts of SCE’s Route 3 can be dramatically reduced by a PACE alternative..

May 23, ’09 - Stumped? PACE Rally is held at the Ritchie Barn. This well-attended event brought in even more letters of protest from residents on Routes 5 and 6 and helped raise money to continue the battle.

June 16, ’09 – Draft Environmental Impact Report released for a 45-day review. Sadly, there was no mention of PACE’s Alternative 3. The Elderwood route (Alternative 2) was selected as the Environmentally Preferred Route and Alternative 5 was dropped from consideration.

June 17, ’09 – Administrative Law Judge Hallie Yacknin held a phone conference call with parties to set dates for testimony, rebuttal testimony and evidentiary hearings.

June 23, ’09 – The Assigned Commissioner’s Scoping Memo and Ruling (Dian M. Grueneich) to parties defined dates: testimony must be served by July 20; rebuttal testimony by Aug. 7 – such testimony would be submitted in writing and electronically to all parties. An evidentiary hearing will be held in the PUC Building, San Francisco on Monday, Aug. 31, 2009, with parties present.

July 23, ’09 – Public Hearing on the DEIR. The Visalia Convention Center was packed. The meeting room had to be expanded and an additional 500 chairs were set up. It is estimated that over 700 attended. The speakers, to a man and woman, declared the DEIR woefully deficient since it didn’t recognize PACE’s Alternative 3-A and it failed to describe all harmful impacts the line would create for agriculture communities and the environment.
July 31, ’09 was the last day to submit comments via mail or e-mail on the DEIR. The team must review and respond to every comment submitted in its final EIR. This public testimony can be viewed at:

http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/Environment/info/esa/sjxvl/d_coms_rcvd.html

Aug. 31, ’09 ­– PACE and California Farm Bureau Federation representatives appeared before ALJ Yacknin on one side of the room, while the battery of lawyers, secretaries and experts from the Southern California Edison Company took up the remaining seats for the Evidentiary Hearing in San Francisco.

Seventeen people from PACE leadership and affected landowners attended the legal proceeding as observers. Unfortunately, our consultants could not discuss Alternative 3-A’s costs and feasibility with the judge because she considers it a CEQA (environmental) issue and not within her jurisdiction. Judge Yacknin assured the parties, however, that if 3-A is identified in the Final EIR, she will re-open hearings to take testimony concerning it.

The Edison legal team continues to advocate for
Alternative 1 as their Preferred Route!

The PUC expects to release the final EIR in early to mid-November, 2009.

EVERYBODY WAITS!