Woman evicted and house condemned for using solar power

Most Electric utilities charge strictly by the KW with no minimum charge so this isn't about future expense.

Did they mention anything about an unpaid prior bill that caused a disconnection?

After reading this post, it leaves a question in my mind and I am surprised that it was not answered: What exactly is required to sustain human life? I am also surprised and it should be a sign to the city that this is a good indication as to the state of things in the area, especially if she is stating: I can not afford it. They dropped the ball, and did not offer her the assistance before it was too late. Though I would say she was within her right to cut herself off of the grid, though she could turn around and say, ok, hook the Electricity back up, and then do things like unplug the fridge, turn off the heat and live very frugally, then take the city back to court to have them prove infront of a jury that she is not sustaining her life that way.

reply to post by Cabaret Voltaire


One of the more typical and tired arguments made by those that would justify draconian legislation is to declare "what about the children?". Just as surely as Janet Reno burned down the Waco complex in order to "save the children" you condemn this woman for sleeping in her vehicle after she foolishly agreed to allow a dubious administrative agency to condemn her home simply for not having "enough" power to run a refrigerator or heat. While it was no doubt imprudent of her to accept this unconstitutional act of depravity, your own callous attitude of her subsequent decision to sleep in her car is revealing and, in my humble opinion, exposes all that is wrong with expanded government and those who support it.

By what authority does any city condemn a persons private property based upon codes that are clearly designed to benefit a utilities company? Your own willingness to use the "what if children" argument only placed you in the position to then condemn her for sleeping in her car, for surely this choice would not have improved the situation of any children. But why allow logic to get into the way of smugly defending tyranny and proudly condemning an individual who has the right to life, liberty and property?

Preventing slum like conditions does not justify any sort of law that would make homeless a person who has endeavored to own their own home and live life without government assistance but instead to make due with what she could under the circumstances. She was not renting this home to others and rubbing her hands and giggling in a high pitched laugh like some Snidely Whiplash, she was doing her best to make due and your silly arguments defending this nonsense are nothing but hypothetical arguments offered because you can offer no reasonable argument that exist here in reality.

The codes that endeavored to bully this woman are not law, and are functioning under color of law, which is the crime. The victim of this crime is her. Your imagined victims don't exist and are poor justifications for defending this crime.

From the article, it appears that the greatest difficulty arose when someone tampered with her utility meter. If it weren't for that maybe the complaints from the neighbor would have been let go for awhile. She did take responsibility for it and payed the fine and back bills to bring the account up to date. That probably set her back.

The article states that she was using the solar power to run lights, and a computer or tv. I wonder if an electric blanket would be sufficient there in the winter?

It's a shame that homeowners living without minor children in the home are not permitted to elect to live under the conditions similar to which she was living. Sounds like she was getting by. There are risks associated with living in over 100 degree F or under 32 degree F weather without AC or heat, so I can understand why limits were set. Obviously she wasn't in a position to upgrade her solar set up, but I doubt too many set ups are capable of maintaining constant heating or AC. Even dorm sized refrigerators are known for a large draw on power.

And even under those conditions, living in the home beats the heck out of living in a car by any stretch of the imagination. It's good that she's back in the home now, hope she can hang on to it.

another thing that puzzles me

they say the code involved having to have a running fridge

how do they know, or how can they prove that the energy she was generating was not going towards running the fridge?


once the electricity goes into the home, how can they tell what it is used for?

so...whats the big deal? She didn't have enough electricity to live there. Get a job, make out a budget, don't eat at mcdonalds, and pay your bills. There is nothing wrong with this at all, and you ppl complaining are ignorant. I've worked in real estate and kicked out many ppl for not having there utilites turned on and i would have done the same thing to this lady. And her complaining about not being given a notice in an adequate amount of time is ridiculous. YOU DON'T HAVE YOU ELECTRICITY ON. its pretty common sense of whats going to happen

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
Your own willingness to use the "what if children" argument only placed you in the position to then condemn her for sleeping in her car, for surely this choice would not have improved the situation of any children.

Good post. Fully agree with what you said. I live in Phoenix, and this is disgusting. So is APS, those bastards LOVE to rip us off, and do everything in their power to do so, including buying off legislators in order to get themselves more power to rip us off.

If she did have children, she would likely be able to get state assistance though, so the "what if children" argument doesn't apply here, IMO.

If she had no money to buy power, how did she buy solar panels? One could cover their entire roof with solar panels and this would not be enough to run a regular sized refrigerator. Avondale seems to have some tough covenants.

Originally posted by Dramey
www.azcentral.com...

Stevens, 47, was trying to make ends meet by powering her home with solar panels and batteries for several months before Avondale code enforcement officials visited her on Dec. 10.

"We explained to her that the panels weren't enough to sustain a quality of life there," said Pam Altounian, code enforcement manager for Avondale.

Stevens said she was not given adequate notice before officials gave her 24 hours to contact Arizona Public Service Co. to reconnect electricity or her home would be condemned.

i dont know what to say about this, but i feel everyone needs to see this

i mean this is one of the most absurd things i have ever read


a woman trying to make ends meet, who cant afford the electric company prices, uses solar power and other alternative means, and is told thats not good enough, that if she doesnt purchase power from the company she loses her home?


how in the world can this be legal, how is this actually taking place today when there are all these green movements


more people need to know about this


try to go green, but be ready to lose your house

Lucky she didn't have children or the Department of "de"human- "ization" services would have taken them away, also. This is what I had posted about in another thread. It's absurdity and greed, if you don't buy into the utility companies that the government has a stake in, then they criminalize you. But yet there are Amish who don't have any utilities, why didn't she tell them it's her religion to use "Green" electricity only, she might have had a good lawsuit with that one, She could've said she was pagan and cited religious discrimination against Arizona Government officials. LOL that would have been awesome! She could have won too, beleive me. If she's native american she could have used that as well, saying she was "following the old teachings" of her tribe, to protect the environment. There are so many ways to have out smarted these A&& holes!!!! SHe just told them she was trying to save money on her monthly bills? See the minute it's about money, and the governement not getting OURS, then you've already screwed up your chance of ever being left alone by them, they will certainly charge her penalty fes and fines as well, even if she reconnects the electric, bunch of greedy m fers'!

Originally posted by Maslo

Avondale officials said Stevens was in violation of the city's building codes. The city requires homes to have enough electricity to power a refrigerator, cool a residence to no higher than 88 degrees and heat a residence to at least 68 degrees.

Seems like she has broken this law. Stupid bureaucracy IMHO.

What she should have done is supplement her energy until she had enough devices built, whether she bought them or made them herself, to meet that requirement. I believe in alternative energy, but also that we are not meant to live in homes that will make us ill and impoverished. You need to be making adequate output to go purely alternative energy.

I remember Steven Greer's more recent interview talking about the zero point energy and he said that as a doctor he couldn't afford the hundred of thousands of dollars it would take to do the solar conversion on his home, let alone a villager in China (or elsewhere). I agree, so far the solar and alternative is very expensive on purpose.

Doing it yourself however still means having to meet certain requirements. I would want more output than a fridge and heating.

reply to post by elfie


Its a shame that so many people in the U.S. think We the People need permission from the government to live how we see fit. Regardless of the dangers that may come from living under extreme weather conditions, this in no way justifies local governments to condemn a home that simply is not using standard means of power for usage. In no way did this article indicate that her use of power created a threat or danger to her neighbors. Indeed, the justifications the city used for this criminal act was that the "health and safety" violations were ones that created a threat to her and her alone, if this is even true.

As I type this post, the weather in Avondale Az is reported to be 51.1 Fahrenheit and the 5 day forecast offered by weatherunderground.com offers a low of no less than 43 degrees Fahrenheit today and Friday, warming up by to 45 degrees and by Monday to 47 degrees. Hardly freezing by any stretch of the imagination and certainly a sweater and heavy blanket will suffice.

Weather Underground

seriously WTF, I hope it will end all soon.

not that im a fatalist or something or crazy nut, but seriously? do people think this is normal? and how can companies have so much power over humans?

bs

[edit on 28-1-2010 by colloredbrothers]

I'm going to play Devil's advocate here. Note that I totally support what she is doing and I absolutely despise this kind of government bureaucracy! I'm a huge fan of Earthships (shame on you if you don't know what these are!)

Tinkering around with gas or electricity can be really unsafe and can be a serious fire hazard to both you AND your neighbors. This also goes with grey and black water systems.

If there's a short in your system the fire could burn down the entire neighborhood.

I don't know all the details and from what I read, this is another case of city code nazis ruling their little kingdom.

I'm just pointing out that there is some method to the madness.

Originally posted by Cabaret Voltaire
The thread title is misleading. She was not evicted for using solar power.

The city has codes for housing in order to prevent slum conditions. For instance, a landlord could rent a place to you with no electricity. That is not good. So the city has these codes in place. It is about maintaining a decent dwelling that is not too hot or too cold. Plus you need to be able to refrigerate certain foods so they don't spoil.

Also think about children who might be subjected to bad conditions.

If she did things according to code, then she could have solar power all she wants.

And living in a convertible Mazda Miata? What is that about? Is she mental? The photo makes her look bitter. Why wasn't she in her house?

Well said, You hit the nail right on the head. This isn't about Solar power, this is about living in conditions the community had deemed unsafe for residency. These laws are in every community and most of the time we pay them no mind because we and our neighbors are in compliance. If you don't like them become involved in your local goverment to foster change.

Now on another note I just want to say this situation does make me sad. Many people are in hard times right now. A recent walk through of a foreclosed home was a very depressing event

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


Star for you! It does seem completely absurd since she was there on her own (don't know when the roommate left). I thought this part of the country had milder winters (barring the recent and quirky storm). I can understand it applying to landlords, or homes with minor children, but an adult living on their own? Maybe the law will be revisited due to this case?

Originally posted by Helmkat

Originally posted by Cabaret Voltaire
The thread title is misleading. She was not evicted for using solar power.

The city has codes for housing in order to prevent slum conditions. For instance, a landlord could rent a place to you with no electricity. That is not good. So the city has these codes in place. It is about maintaining a decent dwelling that is not too hot or too cold. Plus you need to be able to refrigerate certain foods so they don't spoil.

Also think about children who might be subjected to bad conditions.

If she did things according to code, then she could have solar power all she wants.

And living in a convertible Mazda Miata? What is that about? Is she mental? The photo makes her look bitter. Why wasn't she in her house?

And taking away her house will suddenly make things much better for her kid, riiiight I understand, and suddenly no spoiled food cause she aint got more then she can walk around with!

yes yes I understand suddenly all problems gone, no food no kid, no house to take care of.

man your a genius

reply to post by Dramey


If I were this women I tell them to suck it, and tell them to come take me out of my home, Then call every major media outlet and every one else I could think of and belittle this assclowns... Life,liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; what a Freaking joke.

reply to post by amance


Based upon the article supplied and the quotes given by city officials the only threat that existed was one to herself and not the neighborhood at large. She was relying upon solar power and no mention was made of tinkering with gas lines, and the alleged tinkering with an electric meter happened several months before this incident, and was the direct source to her making the decision to live without electricity leased from the local utilities company and instead rely upon solar power.

If "what ifs", (and I fully understand you are only playing devils advocate), are the best arguments to justify this tyranny then I would ask; what if the people get so fed up with this tyranny that revolution is imminent? Any government has a responsibility, and in the U.S. a direct mandate to protect the rights of the individual, and in this case the City of Avondale clearly failed in that mandate, and what's worse is they acted criminally, abrogating and derogating this woman's rights.

It's never about "quality of life"... She was alive so, obviously her quality of life was just fine.. It's about a little blip on the grid where somebody isn't pulling and paying their share! And we certainly can't have neighbors realizing that this person is surviving with natural power and have the whole neighborhood start doing it! And then the whole town, city etc.. Gotta keep that power grid up and keep the sheeple paying those electric bills...

Tough time to be alive right now but, we all chose to be here right now for a reason! ... soon enough!

Its threads like these where you see the lack of compassion everywhere today. Blair you disgust me completely. So what if she was getting her electricity from someplace other than the utility company? Good for her. Economically it was a better alternative then booting her out on the street. Your a heartless person and I am ashamed people like you live in this world.

Cheers