Directories
Quick Searches
Find a Job
Quick Search
For Employers
Yahoo! HotJobs Local Search
EDITORIAL: Area code change is still a bad idea
OUR VIEW: Tradition, logic, economics favor keeping 760 with North County
By North County Times Opinion staff | ∞
North County should keep the 760 telephone area code it has built its identity around.
As we first noted in 2007, enough is enough; it is time for North County alone to retain its number and let someone else deal with the costs of adjusting to a new area code and future area code changes.
But Thursday, the Public Utilities Commission will consider a proposal to do the opposite: Give North County and a chunk of western Imperial County a new "442" area code and leave alone the vast outland that is the rest of 760.
Those supporting the 442 code for North County have some arguments in their favor.
Those of us opposed, however, have tradition on our side as well as good arguments.
Decades ago, most of Southern California from the Mexican border to the northernmost parts of Death Valley National Park was covered with the 714 area code. As the region and technology exploded, the then "core" of 714 in Orange County retained that number and the rest of the region was given 619.
In 1997, again driven by population and gadget growth, state regulators deemed it time to split 619. Again, the "core" of 619 in San Diego retained that number and the rest of us were given 760. In 1999, the 858 area code was carved out of the southwesternmost portions of 760.
Proponents cite North County's growth as the "cause" of increasing demand for phone numbers.
They fail to note North County's growth has also been part of the economic engine in Southern California.
Now, when the economy is in trouble, the state is poised to saddle this dynamic core of the 760 area code with an unnecessary financial business expense (a tax) of about $500 to $10,000 to alter promotional materials, letterhead, invoices, business cards, etc.
Moreover, the current proposal still sets up North County for another split within another two decades.
As we wrote in January 2007, we have a better idea, which has the added benefit of common sense: Let North County alone keep 760, and make the less densely populated areas adjust to new numbers.
It is time we tell our regulators they've got the wrong number with 442.
On the Web:
Doing the (area code) split
Editorial: Sorry, wrong number
The California Public Utilities Commission hearing on the proposed area code split will begin at 10 a.m. Thursday in San Francisco. It is Item 58 on the agenda: A07-06-018 - North American Numbering Plan.
Webcast: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/Webcasts/
E-mail: public.advisor@cpuc.ca.gov
Phone: (866) 849-8390 or (415) 703-2074
More Stories
Advertisement
Agree wrote on Apr 8, 2008 8:34 PM:This is a horrid idea for a highly populated area. Let the relatively unpopulated areas change their stationery, labels, checks, etc. We are struggling enough with the high cost of living here. It only seems fair to have them change their area code for a change. We have already done it at least twice!
Let's all get together and hate the phone company. wrote on Apr 9, 2008 8:16 AM: That does it - I am tired of being pushed around. I like the number 760. The number 442 does not role off your tongue like 760, and 442 is a clumsy number as is 619. I will not be pushed around and trod upon anymore. AT&T be heedful of this next: If you change my area code number to that awful number 442 I will go out of business and give up my telephone altogether.
mark wrote on Apr 9, 2008 2:47 PM:It's not AT&T (nee SBC, nee Pacific Bell) who wants to change your area code. It's your state government's Public Utility Commission who wants northern San Diego County and western Imperial County to change from 760 to 442. AT&T prefers to do the overlay, as was done in part of Los Angeles two years ago (310/424), and by telcos elsewhere all over the US and Canada. And as for changing the area code of the less populated parts of 760 "for a change", they too changed from 714 to 619 in 1982/83, and from 619 to 760 in 1997, just the same as the "Oceanside" region did!
Liz wrote on Apr 28, 2008 4:09 PM:I do not think that along with the cost of living in this area, the cost of operating a business, the cost of food increase by of 5.3%, and the cost of gas increase coupled with the fact that this area is regularly required to change their area code that it is right to continue to be subject to this form of targeting. It only makes sense that the less populated areas be required to change their area code, this time. Just the time, expense of reprinting brochures and stationary, and the loss of business as customers are confussed should be taken into consideration. Has the Public Utility Commissioned offered us some kind of a rebate to offset the expense their decision is going to cost businesses? Have they offered any kind of assistance for the small business owner? Any kind of a discount for those that make the changes within a certain time frame? That would only seem a bit appropriate. 3 Area code changes in 25 years; works out to a change every 8.3 years. There is something wrong with this picture. Move to the less populated areas and spread the responsibility around a bit more.
Advertisement