The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) may grant a franchise to a utility to place its facilities in or on WSDOT right-of-way if the WSDOT deems it in the public interest. The utility facility must be made subject to removal when necessary for the construction, alteration, repair, or improvement of the highway at the expense of the franchise holder, except that the state is required to pay the share of the cost of removal the state is entitled to receive in the form of reimbursement from the federal government.
The WSDOT is required to adopt and maintain an agency policy that requires the WSDOT to proactively provide broadband facility owners with information about planned state highway projects to enable collaboration between broadband facility owners and the WSDOT to identify opportunities for the installation of broadband facilities during the appropriate phase of projects when possible.
"Broadband infrastructure" is defined as networks of deployed telecommunications equipment and technologies necessary to provide high-speed internet access and other advanced telecommunications services to end users.
The WSDOT is required to adopt and maintain an agency policy to proactively provide utility owners with information about planned state highway projects to enable collaboration between utility owners and the WSDOT to identify opportunities for the installation of utilities during the appropriate phase of projects when possible. When feasible, this information must be provided for planned state fish barrier removal projects with at least one year's advance notice.
When the WSDOT requests available federal funding for fish barrier removal projects, it is required to include utility relocation costs within the request if the costs are an eligible use under federal rules and regulations.
The WSDOT must report to the transportation committees of the Legislature and the Office of Financial Management by December 15, 2026, with the following:
The amended bill clarifies that utility relocation costs are to be included in WSDOT requests for federal funding for fish barrier removal projects when requests for federal funding for these projects are made.
(In support) This bill is about government efficiency and collaboration. While a project is underway, work on utility facilities can be done at the same time. This can benefit local utilities and rate payers. The cost of doing this work later is tremendous and cannot be borne by ratepayers. The WSDOT has changed its schedule many times for a single project. This lack of coordination comes with monetary penalties for utilities.
When a utility needs to be relocated, it is the utility that has to pay the cost of the relocation. The bill is a modest proposal. If a ditch is open, utilities should be informed. Only one-year advance notice is required. For smaller utilities, notification is important. For a small utility, the impact of several relocation projects can be in the millions of dollars, which can result in significant impacts to a rate payer base that is comprised only of hundreds of rate payers. This amount is cost prohibitive for customers of small utilities and can have significant resource impacts on a utility when projects occur without any notice. Small utilities at times have to delay important work for multiple years because of these costs.
The federal decision requiring the WSDOT to remove culverts that are fish barriers is a multi-year, multi-billion dollar problem. Costs related to utilities are borne entirely by ratepayers. Some limited support has been made available from the state's capital budget. Providing this assistance is not an unconstitutional gift of state funds or this support would not have been provided. The WSDOT being required to comply with this bill would have a negligible impact on the WSDOT's bottom line.
The bill also asks the WSDOT to try to secure federal dollars for utility relocation. Federal funding of $200 million is available for fish culvert project utility relocations, but only states can apply. Efforts are underway at the federal level to modify the federal program so that public utility districts can apply directly for these federal funds.
(Opposed) None.
(Other) The language in the bill as written is concerning. The section of law being modified was enacted as a dig once initiative with the intent of broadband being installed to expand it to more communities. In its current form, the bill would require 10 new WSDOT positions to respond to utility owners interested in installing new infrastructure. This language should be removed from Section 1 of the bill.
The state constitution restricts the use of Motor Vehicle Account funds for utility relocation and includes federal grant funds that the stay may receive.
(In support) Senator Drew MacEwen, prime sponsor; Scott Hazlegrove, WA Association of Sewer and Water Districts; Bill Clarke, WA PUD Association; Kristin Masteller, Mason PUD No. 1; and George Sidhu, Skagit PUD.