Creates provisions relating to utility facility relocation

Plain English Breakdown

The plain English breakdown is still being put together. The official documents below are already here.

Official Summary Text

The following summaries of this bill are available:

Print All Summaries

Senate Substitute

Print

SS/SCS/SB 1065 - The act modifies and creates new provisions relating to utility facility relocation.

The State Road Fund shall be used for reimbursing for certain utility relocation costs, as described in the act.

The Department of Transportation shall reimburse non-rate-regulated providers for any labor costs associated with facility relocation that are required due to road maintenance, construction, or other right-of-way work activity. Notification requirements by the Department and response requirements by the non-rate-regulated provider are described in the act.

The Department of Transportation shall reimburse a non-rate-regulated provider for the provider's labor costs for the facility relocation not to exceed specific amounts described in the act. This provision shall expire on July 1, 2031.

A non-rate-regulated provider shall provide invoices to the Department for the provider's labor costs for the fiscal year in which such work occurs. Payment of the invoices is described in the act. If a provider's total labor costs exceed the specified amounts under the act, such payments shall be prorated.

The Department shall be required to publicly disclose on an annual basis no later than July 31st a list of facility reimbursement invoices received, as described in the act.

The act shall not require the Department to reimburse a non-rate-regulated provider for the removal or relocation of facilities placed in the public right-of-way in violation of state law or local permitting requirements.

Under the act, subject to certain exceptions, the removal and relocation of utility facilities as a result of construction projects required by the Highways and Transportation Commission shall be made at the expense of the owners unless otherwise provided by the Commission. Currently, if the owner fails to relocate the utility facilities, the cost of relocating the utility facilities shall be collected from the owner. Under the act, the cost of relocating the utility facilities shall be the responsibility of the Commission or the owner.
JULIA SHEVELEVA

Senate Committee Substitute

Print

SCS/SB 1065 - The act modifies and creates new provisions relating to utility facility relocation.

Under the act, a county, city, incorporated town, or village shall not perform any road project unless it reimburses any non-rate-regulated utility provider, as defined in the act, that incurs labor costs for facility relocation due to such maintenance or project. A county, city, incorporated town, or village shall be authorized to pay such facility relocation labor costs as part of the cost of the road project.

A county, city, incorporated town, or village shall notify non-rate-regulated utility providers that have permitted infrastructure within a planned or existing public right-of-way within 90 days after a road project is added to the project schedule that may require the provider to relocate its infrastructure for the road project. The notification shall include an estimated project schedule and timeline, including the anticipated year of construction. Within 90 days after receipt of the notification, the non-rate-regulated utility provider shall respond to the county, city, incorporated town, or village with an estimated time frame and projected labor cost for the relocation of the provider's infrastructure. The response shall include a draft relocation schedule within or adjacent to the existing or planned public right-of-way.

The act shall not require a county, city, incorporated town, or village to reimburse a non-rate-regulated utility provider for the removal or relocation of facilities placed in the public right-of way in violation of state or local permitting requirements.

Currently, video service cabinets are required to be removed or relocated at the expense of the video service provider. Under the act, the cabinets are required to be removed pursuant to the provisions of the act or current law, as applicable.

The State Road Fund shall be used for reimbursing non-rate-regulated utility providers for any labor costs associated with facility relocation due to road maintenance or construction.

The Department of Transportation shall reimburse non-rate-regulated utility providers for any labor costs associated with facility relocation that are required due to road maintenance, construction, or other right-of-way work activity. Notification requirements by the Department and response requirements by the non-rate-regulated utility provider are described in the act.

The act shall not require the Department to reimburse a non-rate-regulated utility provider for the removal or relocation of facilities placed in the public right-of-way in violation of state law or local permitting requirements.

Under the act, subject to certain exceptions, the removal and relocation of utility facilities as a result of construction projects required by the Highways and Transportation Commission shall be made at the expense of the owners unless otherwise provided by the Commission. Currently, if the owner fails to relocate the utility facilities, the cost of relocating the utility facilities shall be collected from the owner. Under the act, the cost of relocating the utility facilities shall be the responsibility of the Commission or the owner.

The act is identical to HCS/HB 2155 (2026), similar to SB 489 (2025), provisions in HCS/SB 1039 (2024), provisions in HCS/HB 2056 (2024), provisions in SCS/HCS/HB 1746 (2024), and SCS/SB 1018 (2024).
JULIA SHEVELEVA

Introduced

Print

SB 1065 - The act modifies and creates new provisions relating to utility facility relocation.

Under the act, a county shall not perform a project in the public right-of-way that requires a nonrate regulated utility provider, as defined in the act, to relocate its facilities, unless the county reimburses the nonrate regulated utility provider for the relocation costs. A county shall be authorized to pay such facility relocation costs as part of the costs of the public right-of-way project. A county shall not be required to reimburse a nonrate regulated utility provider for facility relocation costs if the facilities where installed in violation of current law.

Currently, video service cabinets are required to be removed or relocated at the expense of the video service provider. Under the act, the cabinets are required to be removed pursuant to the provisions of the act or current law, as applicable.

A city, or an incorporated town, or village, shall not perform any road maintenance or construction project (road project) unless the city, or incorporated town or village reimburses any nonrate regulated utility provider that incurs costs for facility relocation due to such road project. A city, an incorporated town, or village shall be authorized to pay such facility relocation costs as part of the costs of the road project. A city, incorporated town, or village shall not be required to reimburse a nonrate regulated utility provider for facility relocation costs if the facilities were installed in violation of current law.

The State Road Fund shall be used for reimbursing nonrate regulated utility providers for any costs associated with facility relocation due to road maintenance, construction, or other right-of-way work activity.

The Department of Transportation shall reimburse nonrate regulated utility providers for any costs associated with facility relocation that are required due to road maintenance, construction, or other right-of-way work activity. The Department shall not be required to reimburse nonrate regulated utility providers for facility relocation costs if the facilities were installed in violation of current law.

Under the act, subject to certain exceptions, the removal and relocation of utility facilities as a result of construction projects required by the Highways and Transportation Commission shall be made at the expense of the owners unless otherwise provided by the Commission. Currently, if the owner fails to relocate the utility facilities, the cost of relocating the utility facilities shall be collected from the owner. Under the act, the cost of relocating the utility facilities shall be borne by the Commission or by the owner.

The act is similar to SB 489 (2025), provisions in HCS/SB 1039 (2024), provisions in HCS/HB 2056 (2024), provisions in SCS/HCS/HB 1746 (2024), and SCS/SB 1018 (2024).
JULIA SHEVELEVA