Grassroots Group Challenges Recent Findings In Proposed UI Project

Information from Sasco Creek Neighbors Environmental Trust, Inc.

FAIRFIELD, CT ? A grassroots citizens? organization is challenging some of the facts contained in the State Siting Council?s new ?Findings of Fact? concerning United Illuminating?s (UI) pending plan to construct 100+ giant monopoles reaching heights of up to 195 feet throughout the local area.

The document, filed on February 1, 2024, presents the Siting Council's initial conclusions regarding the public necessity of the project, its potential effects on the surrounding communities, and whether these considerations warrant rejecting UI's application. As a regulatory body, the Council is responsible for balancing the need for adequate and reliable public utility services at a reasonable cost with the need to protect the environment and ecology of the state. The Council has since signaled their reluctance to approve UI's original plan, supporting an alternative northside route for the project in a non-binding straw poll vote. The Siting Council's final decision could come as early as February 15, 2024, but no later than March 17, 2024.

Some have questioned whether public scrutiny should continue in the face of apparent movement by the Siting Council.

?The answer is absolutely yes,? according to Andrea Ozyck, co-founder of the Sasco Creek Neighbors Environmental Trust, Inc. (SCNETI), which has mounted grassroots opposition to UI?s plan. ?There is just too much at stake. The seizure of an unprecedented amount of private property and the permanent economic impact, combined with incomplete, misleading information in the 'findings of fact,' underscores the need for a transparent and well-informed decision-making process.?

SCNETI points to numerous open questions surrounding the Siting Council?s newly proposed route, particularly regarding the necessary easements, pole heights and positioning, and vegetation clearing. The group raised particular concerns in four areas:

• Inaccurate Project Positioning - The Siting Council's findings of fact bolster UI?s portrayal of their project as a mere "rebuild," failing to recognize the creation of a new corridor under UI's control, thus minimizing the project's true impact.
• Incomplete Cost Assessment - While the Siting Council acknowledged UI's inflated undergrounding estimate, they overlooked the necessity of a genuine cost assessment for informed decision-making. Accurate estimates, factoring in all options' true costs and impacts, would have significantly narrowed the cost differential between undergrounding and the overhead approach. Notably, Mr. Nguyen from the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority denied the project entirely due to the lack of a complete and accurate cost analysis.
• Inaccurate Historical Resource Impact Assessment - Despite compelling evidence of significant omissions and inaccuracies in UI's assessment of historical resources - notably the exclusion of 174 of the 195 historical resources in Southport alone - the Siting Council dismissed these critical flaws and the potential impact on their decision.
• Deceptive Community Outreach - The Council highlighted all of UI's community outreach efforts but ignored their failure to disclose crucial details that would have undoubtedly alerted the public to the consequences of their project such as the significant easements, heightened pole installations, and deforestation. By prioritizing whether UI technically met its obligations to inform the public over the accuracy and substance of their notifications, the Council provided cover for UI's deliberate attempt to mislead the community and avoid opposition. Consequently, the true nature and impact of the project were obscured from most community members due to grossly inadequate communication.

?The northside alternative put forth by the Siting Council still entails nearly the same acreage of easements as UI?s original proposal,? Ozyck points out. ?From the start, our stance has been clear: while we acknowledge and support the need to reinforce the power grid, the seizure of property rights is unacceptable. As a result, we remain steadfast in our belief that undergrounding represents the optimal solution, and we will continue to advocate for that approach.?

SCNETI said it is vital for local residents to understand that monopoles supporting transmission lines already exist on the north side of the tracks. Conversely, the southside transmission lines run over top of the railroad, requiring UI's initial southside proposal to install new poles within a new right of way. This entailed significant seizure of property rights from residents, businesses, organizations, and the town.

?Should the new northside alternative be situated within the existing corridor, maintaining current pole heights and avoiding the need for additional easements, the most concerning impacts would be mitigated,? Ozyck says. ?It should be noted that when new rights of way are established for transmission needs, they are typically buried, particularly in densely populated areas like the I-95 corridor through Fairfield and Bridgeport.?

About SCNETI and Empowering Fairfield

Empowering Fairfield is a grassroots organization spearheaded by the Sasco Creek Neighbors Environmental Trust Inc. (SCNETI), a registered 501(c)(3) non-profit organization. The organization?s mission is to preserve and protect the Fairfield/Southport community by opposing the current United Illuminating transmission line rebuild proposal and advocating for alternative solutions that better meet the needs of our community.

For more information visit EmpoweringFairfield