By Marc Schollett
Wednesday, November 04, 2009 at 1:00 p.m.
Read more: Local, Fact Finder
A Northern Michigan homeowner is waging a war to try and save what she says is one of the centerpieces of her backyard. It is a tree she planted decades ago but the power company says it has to go because it's growing into their power lines. The story and why the power company rejected her offer to cover the costs is the subject of this Fact Finder.
25 years ago Janice Vanittersum planted a sapling at her Manistee County house in a spot, where that little tree was dwarfed by just about everything around it. As it turns out the tree and Janice both found themselves at home. The tree grew up and Janice grew to appreciate it. Janice explains her love of the tree goes beyond the botanical, "the tree has a big sentimental value to me because of my dad. He planted it with me and he is no longer alive. It means a lot to me, obviously its one of the prettier trees that I have. All the rest are old apple trees. It shades my home it shades my deck. It's just perfect, besides the sentimental value."
But it maybe the tree's very perfection, and ability to grow, that ultimately leads to its downfall. According to Janice "In 2004 I got a letter saying they were going to trim that tree. They put in a power pole to bring power and bring power to another property. I don't think they trimmed that tree. I don't think it was in the wires at all. I think if they would have done that then, I wouldn't be in the situation I am in now."
Janice claims that the tree was never trimmed 5 years ago and back then it still hadn't reached up to the overhead power lines. Fast forward to today, and the untrimmed tree is enveloping those 14-thousand volt wires. She fears that trimming it back is no longer an option. As Janice explains it "the situation is I have talked to two different individuals at Consumers Power about perhaps just trimming my tree because when I came home one day it had a big blue x which meant they were going to cut the tree down and destroy it. So I talked with two people and asked them if there was anyway we could trim the tree. They told me no."
Janice understands that the lines and the tree can't stay like they are now. Her biggest fear is that she will come home from work one day and find it gone. That's why she has posted hand written no trespassing signs. She hoped they would buy her some time to make a deal to keep Consumer's from cutting it down. "I said I would pay to have the tree trimmed and the last gentlemen at Consumers said "ma'am, don't waste your money because I am going to come and cut your tree down anyway."
Janice called me wanted to know if legally Consumer's could do this, and why they wouldn't let her cover the costs of trimming it back. I made some phone calls and here's what Consumer's told me.
Legally, Consumer's has the right to trim the tree in this case. As it turns out, the property owner back in 1945 signed over an easement right to this property. That allows Consumers to tend their lines and make necessary modifications, like tree removal and trimming. And Consumer's does that a lot. A spokesman with the company told me this year, the company will spend 40 million dollars trimming trees that they say "were planted in the wrong place." So legally, Consumer's can do what they like with Janice's tree.
So is there any wiggle room? What about Janice paying out of her pocket to trim it back to a reasonable level? Consumers says that is not option they can endorse for a couple of reasons. First, they say not all tree trimmers are certified to work around high voltage wires, and they warn of the danger should anyone other than a Consumer's contractor decide to work a tree like this. Second, they say if a tree is what they call an "ongoing concern", in other words, continue to grow and have to be trimmed, it's cheaper for them just to deal with it once, and cut it down completely.
So what can you do if you find yourself in a similar situation? Consumers says while they usually stand by the decision of the forester when it comes to cutting versus trimming, you can appeal a decision to a field supervisor who will come review the site, but often those decision are not overruled. Janice says she it was a supervisor who told her to not waste her money.
So what do you think? Who do you side with on this one and why?
Please leave a comment below.