SR-512-002 (3)
GS:SES:MJM:ct. S/Z-002
CouncIl MeetIng. September 10, 1985
santtlaonlca, Callfornla
~-.s
IEP 1 . ,....
TO:
i"IAYOR AND Clry S"rAFF
FROM:
CITY SrAFF
SUBJECT: RBCOMMBNDArION 1'0 DIRECT CITY ArTORNEY TO PREPARE
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND ORDI~ANCE NuMBER 773 (CCS)
RE: UNDERGROONDING OF uTILITIES
INTRUDUCTION
Thls report recommends that CIty Councll d1rect the CIty Attorney
to prepare an ord Inance to amend Ord lnance Number 77 j (CCS) to
provlde a more effective means of enforcIng tne reqUIrements of
property owners related to the undergroundlng of utllltlesv
BACKGROUND
There are 300,000 m11es of aer 1a1 ut111 ty poles throughout the
state of Callfornla wnlch SInce the turn of the century have come
to be conSIdered a topographIcal nUlsance.
The purpose of
underground1ng ut1lIt1es is to elIm1nate safety hazards, 1mprove
the aesthet1c appearance of an area and to enhance the value of
property.
On September 19, 1967 the CalIfornIa PublIC UtIlItIes CommISSIon
(CPUC) ruled tnat begInnIng WIth calendar year 1968, the electrIC
utIlItIes must submIt separate annual budgets to the CPUC
deSIgned to achIeve, at utIlity expense, a sIgn1f1cant converS10n
of eXIst lng over head Wlr 1ng to underground fac 111 t1es 1n all of
the c I tIes and countIes WI thIn the Ir respec tl ve ser v Ice areas
(DeCISIon 73078, Case 82u9).
The deCISIon requIred tnat the
utIlItIes budget 2% of theIr
gross revenues for converSIon
each (,.s
SEP 1 0 1985
- 1 -
GS:SES:MSM:ct .
Council MeetIng September lU, 1985
santtlaonlca, CalIfornIa
year and that such converSIon funds be allocated in the clt1es
and countIes In proportIon to the number of electrIc customers In
each CIty and county. In Santa MonIca, utIlIty converSIon funds,
1n the apprOXImate amount of $350,000 annually, are elIg1ble for
expendIture at the dIrectIon of the CIty counCIl, providIng
cer taIn cr Iter la are met, and are sUbJ ect to accumulatIon for a
reasonable perIod of tIme. (Such funds are held In trust by the
utIlIty and are at no tIme under the dIrect control of the CIty.)
Resources
allocated
to
cities
not
haVing
an
actIve
undergrounding program are subJect to reallocation to other
CItIes.
The CI ty of Santa MonIca cur rently nas a very active
program and snaIl contInue to receIve funds annually to achIeve a
s1gnIflcant converSIon of Its overnead utIlItIes.
The CIty has
already advanced funds from Its annual allocatIon for the next
two years.
In accordance WI th the CPUC rullng the
electrlc utIlItIes are
required to prOVIde the fIrst 100 feet of serVIce cable (WIre) at
their expense and the property owner 15 to pay for any bUIldIng
alteratIons or reWlrln9 that may be reqUIred. ThIS Includes the
undergroundlng of condUIt from tne pOlnt that serVIce enters the
dwellIng to the connectlng stub out WhiCh tne utilIty companIes
have placed underground at the edge of the proper ty lIne. The
est llnated aver age cost to property owners IS $1,500.00 and may
vary from $500.00 to $3,OOO~OO.
- 2 -
GS:SES:MSM:ct .
CouncIl MeetIng. September 101 1985
sant~onIcal CalIfornIa
ENFORCEMENr ISSUES
The current undergroundlng ordInance adopted by Council does not
provIde an effectIve means of enforCIng complIance by property
ownersw Currently the remedIes for noncomplIance on the part of
owners are set forth
In Sectlon 79ll of the Santa Monlca
MunlClpal Code as follows:
"punishment by a floe not to exceed ($500wOO) fIve
hundred dollars, by Imprlsonment not exceedIng SIX
(6) months or by both such flne or Imprlsonment~1I
Sectlon 7908 of the Santa MonIca Munlclpal Code further prOVIdes
that:
"If a homeowner refuses to cooperate In 'undergroundlng/1
dIsconnectlon and removal of any and all overhead serVIce
WIres SupplYIng utIlIty serVIce to the property (can be
conSIdered}."
Wnlle the above referenced penaltIes prOVIde for crImInal
prosecutIon of owner S In noncomplIance, they nonetheless prove
IneffectIve
In meetIng
the
ObJectIve of
constructIng
the
underground connectIon In a tImely manner.
For example, WIthIn the PaCIfIC Coast HIghway Underground
DIstr ICt, the follOWIng problems have made an admendment of the
eXIstIng ordInance necessary:
(a) absentee owners that can not
be reached~
(b)
propertIes held In trust;
(c) property
foreclosures and other transfers, and Cd) reSIstant owners.
In reference to the above stated problems efforts have been made
for more than two years to contact owners and/or galn theIr
- 3 -
,GS:SES:MSM:ct
CouncIl MeetIng: ~,ember 10, 1985
Santa M~a, CalIfornIa
complIance.
However, Ir. each of these cases there is no
I nc entl ve for owner s to campI y as they are not conc erned about
ach ievl ng the underground conr..ect Ion
Current remedIes are
IneffectIve In these cases and an enablIng ordInance to allow the
work to be done by the City (with due process and notificatlor..)
I sneed ed to complete the underground I ng WI thl n the prescr I bed
perIod of tIme.
Of the more than 100 parcel s of Improved
property, withIn the PaCIfIC Coast Highway Underground DIstrIct,
only four property owners have not complIed.
CITY ATTORNEY'S OPINION
By way of memorandum an opInIon was solICIted from the CIty
Attorney regardIng means of enforceme~t agaInst property owners
who have refused to underground theIr utIlI tIes as requIred by
ordInance.
In response to such solIcItatIon Memorandum OpInIon
Number 85-66, dated July 1, 1985, was rendered.
The
Nemorandum
OpH.ion
cOIicluded
that,
"
The
present
I und er ground 111g lord I Dance does not prov Ide effect 1 ve means of
enforcemel1t.
ThIS (the CIty Attorney's] offIce recommends that
the
'ur,derground I ng'
ordInance
be
amer.ded
to
permIt
the
Department of General ServI ces to per form the I underground 109'
work ar.d to place a lIen agaInst the property.
ThIS remedy
should be In addItIon to the present enforcement provlslons
contained in the undergroundlcg ordInance."
- 4 -
GS:SES:HSM:ct
Counc 11 Meet.1l"lg: et ember 10, 1985
Santa M~ca, CalIfornIa
BUDGET/FISCAL IMPACT
AddItIonal approprIatIon of funds wIll not be reqUIred to enfo.ce
the remedIes of an amended underground ordInance. Funds are
budgeted
In
account
01-500-453-000-401
fa.
materIals
and
o 1 - 5 0 0 - 4 5 3 - 0 00 - 1 00 for 1 a bo r .
The cost to the CI ty, however,
WIll be offset by the surety of a 11 en wh 1 ch shall be pI aced
agaInst the property subsequent to the work being completed.
RECOMMENDATION
It IS recommended that the CIty CouncIl dIrect the CIty Attorney
to prepare an ord Inance amendI ng Ord Inanc e Number 773 (c cs) as
prescrIbed above.
Prepared by: Stan Scholl, DIrector of General SerVIces
Nell MIller, ASSIstant DIrector
MIchael MillIner, AdmInIstratIve Analyst
Attachments: Memorandum Opinion Numbe~ 85-66
- 5 -