BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY, UTILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS
Senator Ben Hueso, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: AB 1119 Hearing Date: 6/16/2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Rendon |
|-----------+-----------------------------------------------------|
|Version: |5/11/2015 As Amended |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
|Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |No |
------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant:|Nidia Bautista |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: Public utilities: municipal corporations: rights of
way
DIGEST: This bill would provide that a county has the right
to require an agreement on the terms and conditions for a
proposed utility infrastructure project that is owned,
constructed and operated by a municipal corporation within
unincorporated county territory.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
1)Grants to every municipal corporation the right to construct,
operate, and maintain utility infrastructure (including water
and gas pipes, mains conduits, electric light and power lines,
telephone and telegraph lines, sewers and sewer mains) across,
along, in, under, over, or upon any road street alley avenue,
or highway, and across, under, or over any railway, canal
ditch, or flume which the route of the works intersect crosses
or runs along. (Public Utilities Code §10101)
2)Requires municipal corporations exercising their rights under
§10101 to restore the street, alley, avenue, highway, etc. to
its former useful state and shall locate its use to interfere
as little as possible with other existing uses. (Public
Utilities Code §10102)
3)Requires a municipal corporation, before using a street,
highway, etc., within any other municipal corporation to first
request an agreement on the location of the use and terms and
AB 1119 (Rendon) Page 2 of ?
conditions. (Public Utilities Code §10103)
4)Provides that if the two municipal corporations are unable to
agree on the terms and conditions and location within three
months after a proposal, the municipal corporation proposing
the project may bring action in the superior court of the
county of the proposed project. (Public Utilities Code §10104)
5)Provides that a grant of authority is not necessary when the
proposed works is in unincorporated territory and is a
necessary and convenient part of the route of the project.
(Public Utilities Code §10105)
This bill:
1)Requires that a county has the same rights to require an
agreement should a municipal corporation propose a utility
infrastructure project that is owned, constructed and operated
within county territory.
2)Provides that if an agreement hasn't been reached within three
months, the municipal corporation can bring action in superior
court to define the terms and conditions of an agreement.
3)Repeals language that stipulated a municipal corporation did
not need authority or an agreement from a county for a project
located in unincorporated county territory.
Background
Under the existing Public Utilities Code, a county is not
afforded the same rights as a municipal corporation in relation
to the siting of utility infrastructure projects in neighboring
territory. Specifically, there are current statutes in the
Public Utilities Code that date back to the early 20th Century
which stipulate that municipal corporations do not need
authority or an agreement from a county when the municipal
corporation proposes a utility infrastructure project within the
county territory.
The distinctions between county and city rights became apparent
in a legal case between the City of Los Angeles and County of
Los Angeles related to the siting of a sewer line in
unincorporated county territory. The City of LA selected a
route for the project that would require construction within the
AB 1119 (Rendon) Page 3 of ?
unincorporated areas of the county affecting the community of
Marina Del Rey. LA County brought legal suit in superior court
to challenge the City's decision. However, the appeals court
sided with the City of LA stating that the statute expressly
excuses a party from obtaining an agreement for a project that
extends into unincorporated county territory.
This bill proposes to change the law in order to affect future
decisions related to proposed utility projects. This bill will
not affect the outcome of the specific legal case noted above.
Double referral. Should this bill be approved by the committee,
it will be re-referred to the Senate Committee on Governance and
Finance for its consideration.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.: No Local: No
ASSEMBLY VOTES:
Assembly Floor (77-0)
Assembly Local Government Committee(9-0)
Assembly Utilities and Commerce Committee(14-0)
SUPPORT:
County of Los Angeles (Source)
California State Association of Counties
Urban Counties Caucus
OPPOSITION:
None received
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: In proposing this legislation, Los
Angeles County seeks parity with the City of Los Angeles and
other municipal corporations to require an agreement on the
terms and conditions for a proposed utility project within
county territory. The Los Angeles County Department of Public
Works indicates that this bill would "balance the interests of
local public entities to build utility projects using streets
and highways, including those located within other
jurisdictions, with the interests of residents and businesses
that may be impacted by projects initiated by officials in
AB 1119 (Rendon) Page 4 of ?
another jurisdiction who do not represent them."
-- END --