City Of Portland Franchise Agreements

Utility companies say that, without distinction between government and property, municipalities will have the means to crowd out public services under the guise of “public necessity.” This is a wrong point of view, because municipalities must act constitutionally, in the laws in force and in the framework of their statutes and regulations. Municipalities must also respect the contractual obligations of their franchises. B. Where a franchise is granted to a distribution undertaking or telecommunications undertaking which is otherwise subject to the provisions of the Utility Privilege Tax Law, the distribution undertaking or telecommunications undertaking must submit to Bureau, within ten days of the entry into force of the exemption, a report indicating the gross receipts for the proportional period of the quarter preceding the exemption. That court acknowledged that in the absence of a language to the contrary, “there is an implicit obligation for the fellow to move his facilities at his own expense when a use of the road by the State makes relocation necessary”. Highway Com. V. Clackamas W. Dist., a.a.O., 247 Or. at 221, 428 P.2d 395 (footnote omitted).

What the law implies is expressly stated in the revocable authorization of GNP in section 7 and in the franchise of PP&L in sections 3 and 5. The exemption granted to NNG and, for the purposes of the present case, PGE`s franchise remain silent as regards the move and are therefore subject to the abovementioned tacit obligation. Portland Municipal Law,[10] passed in 1903, established the city`s authority over the use of roads. Chapter 1, Section 3 of that Charter provided for a general empowerment: at the time of these franchises, there was no state or municipal by-law governing the cost of offshoring utilities, but in 1823 the courts recognized that municipalities were not liable for damage to adjacent landowners caused by changes in road quality. Callender v Marsh, 18 mass. 418, 434-35 (1823); see also Hovey v. Mayo, 43 me. 322 (1857); Radcliff`s Executors v. Mayor of Brooklyn, above; 2 Dillon, The Law of Municipal Corporations 646-47, § 543 (2nd edition 1873). A similar analysis was applied to utility companies in order to refuse compensation when relocation was necessary due to improved roads.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.