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 --