BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE
Senator Robert M. Hertzberg, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
------------------------------------------------------------------
|Bill No: |AB 1119 |Hearing |7/8/15 |
| | |Date: | |
|----------+---------------------------------+-----------+---------|
|Author: |Rendon |Tax Levy: |No |
|----------+---------------------------------+-----------+---------|
|Version: |5/11/15 |Fiscal: |No |
------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant|Favorini-Csorba |
|: | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PUBLIC UTILITIES: MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS: RIGHTS OF WAY
Repeals cities' ability of cities to locate utilities in public
rights of way in unincorporated territory without the affected
county's agreement.
Background and Existing Law
The Public Utilities Code allows cities to construct, operate,
and maintain utility infrastructure, such as pipes, power lines,
and telephone lines, through streets, highways, and other public
rights of way outside of its territory. In doing so, cities
must locate this infrastructure so as to interfere as little as
possible with other existing uses, and must restore the right of
way to its former condition. If the utility infrastructure
would go through territory that belongs to another city, the
city proposing the project must request an agreement with the
affected city that describes the location of the project and any
terms and conditions of the use of the right of way. If they
cannot agree, the city proposing the project can ask a court to
set the location of the project and the terms of the agreement.
A county is not afforded the same rights as a city under this
section of the Public Utilities Code. Specifically, the code
states that a city does not need an agreement from a county when
a "necessary and convenient" route takes a utility
infrastructure project through a public right of way in
AB 1119 (Rendon) 5/11/15 Page 2
of ?
territory that is unincorporated at the time the project is
constructed.
This provision of law was tested in January 2010, when the City
of Los Angeles approved the installation of a sewer line under
several streets in unincorporated territory within the County of
Los Angeles. Prior to the City's decision, the County expressed
concern that the proposed route would disrupt residents in the
unincorporated area and potentially affect work on an ongoing
county redevelopment project. The County filed suit to halt the
project in February 2010. Although the trial court ruled in 2011
that the City required permission from the County, in 2013 an
appeals court overturned that ruling and held that the plain
language of the Public Utilities Code expressly excuses a city
from obtaining an agreement for a project that extends into
unincorporated areas. The County did not appeal the decision.
These sections of the Public Utilities Code have rarely been
used as the basis to resolve disputes between local governments
over the siting of utility infrastructure. According to
available court opinions, prior to the 2010 case, these sections
had only been used once, in 1939, to address challenges between
the City of Los Angeles and the Cities of Huntington Park and
South Gate. Nonetheless, some county officials want to require
that a county agree before a city can construct utility
infrastructure in public rights of way in unincorporated
territory.
Proposed Law
Assembly Bill 1119 gives counties the ability to protest the use
of rights of way within their territory. Specifically, AB 1119
repeals the ability of cities to site utilities in public rights
of way in unincorporated territory without an agreement with the
affected county. The bill also requires a city to request an
agreement with the affected county that describes the location
of the project and any terms and conditions of the use of the
right of way. If the city and the county cannot agree, the city
proposing the project can ask a court to set the location of the
project and the terms of the agreement.
State Revenue Impact
AB 1119 (Rendon) 5/11/15 Page 3
of ?
No estimate.
Comments
1. Purpose of the bill . Under current law, cities may construct
utility infrastructure such as sewer lines along streets and
highways in unincorporated territory without requiring the
agreement of the affected counties. As a result, residents that
may be impacted by construction have no opportunity to weigh in
on the proposed route of the project. This inability to affect
utility siting decisions persists, even though for some projects
the number of impacted county residents is greater than the
number of city residents who avoid being inconvenienced by the
choice to route these projects through unincorporated territory.
AB 1119 addresses this problem by providing counties with some
measure of parity to cities and ensures that cities must
negotiate with counties to reach a mutually agreeable solution,
while preserving the right of cities to ask a court to determine
an equitable route.
2. Legitimate preference for cities . Current law represents a
careful balancing act by the Legislature to ensure that cities
have access to necessary utility services, such as water, sewer,
gas, and electricity. Cities, by their very nature, are often
islands of incorporated territory surrounded by larger swaths of
unincorporated areas. As such, cities inevitably need to cross
unincorporated territory that is controlled by county
governments. In order to preserve the ability of cities to
negotiate the siting of utility projects with counties on even
footing, existing law provides cities with the authority to
proceed without agreement as a last resort. AB 1119 shifts the
balance in favor of counties.
3. Incoming! The Senate Energy, Utilities, and Commerce
Committee approved AB 1119 by a vote of 10-0 on June 16, 2015.
Assembly Actions
Assembly Utilities and Commerce Committee 14-0
Assembly Local Government Committee 9-0
Assembly Floor 77-0
AB 1119 (Rendon) 5/11/15 Page 4
of ?
Support and
Opposition (7/2/15)
Support : County of Los Angeles; California State Association of
Counties.
Opposition : Unknown.
-- END --