Bill Sponsors
Finkelman, Baginski, DeSimone, and Noret
Committee
House Corporations
Summary
Select
This legislation changes the financial rules regarding the relocation of utility poles, wires, and other facilities during state highway construction projects that receive federal funding. Currently, state law limits how much the state will reimburse utility companies for these moves, often capping it at 50% for certain costs and denying payment if specific deadlines are missed or if the move improves the utility's equipment ("betterment"). This bill removes those caps and restrictions, mandating that the state pay the full cost of the relocation as part of the highway project's total expense.
Sponsor
Analysis
Pros for Progressives
- Facilitates faster completion of public infrastructure projects by removing financial disputes between the state and utility companies that often delay highway improvements.
- Encourages the modernization of utility infrastructure during construction projects, potentially increasing reliability for communities served by these lines.
- Supports union labor and construction workers by streamlining the funding process for complex highway projects, ensuring work continues without administrative stoppages.
Cons for Progressives
- Transfers the financial burden of doing business from private, profitable utility corporations onto the taxpayers and public funds.
- Removes the statutory requirement that utilities must meet target dates to get paid, potentially reducing accountability and allowing corporations to delay public projects without penalty.
- Redirects limited public transportation funds toward corporate reimbursements rather than public transit improvements, bike lanes, or social services.
Pros for Conservatives
- Protects private property rights by ensuring that private companies are not forced to pay for government-mandated construction projects.
- Reduces regulatory burdens and complex government formulas that businesses must navigate to receive fair compensation for their work.
- Clarifies the financial obligations of the state, preventing the government from arbitrarily shifting project costs onto the private sector.
Cons for Conservatives
- Increases government spending by mandating full state coverage of costs that were previously shared, potentially leading to higher taxes or debt.
- Removes performance-based incentives (deadlines) for utility companies, potentially rewarding inefficiency with taxpayer dollars.
- Effectively provides a government bailout for operational costs that private companies should account for in their own business models.
Constitutional Concerns
None Likely
Impact Overview
Groups Affected
- Utility companies (private and public)
- State taxpayers
- Department of Transportation
- Highway construction contractors
- Commuters
Towns Affected
All
Cost to Taxpayers
Amount unknown
Revenue Generated
None
BillBuddy Impact Ratings
Importance
Measures population affected and overall level of impact.
Freedom Impact
Level of individual freedom impacted by the bill.
Public Services
How much the bill is likely to impact one or more public services.
Regulatory
Estimated regulatory burden imposed on the subject(s) of the bill.
Clarity of Bill Language
How clear the language of the bill is. Higher ambiguity equals a lower score.
Enforcement Provisions
Measures enforcement provisions and penalties for non-compliance (if applicable).
Environmental Impact
Impact the bill will have on the environment, positive or negative.
Privacy Impact
Impact the bill is likely to have on the privacy of individuals.
Bill Status
Current Status
Held
Comm Passed
Floor Passed
Law
History
• 02/27/2026 Introduced, referred to House Corporations
• 04/03/2026 Scheduled for hearing and/or consideration (04/07/2026)
• 04/07/2026 Committee recommended measure be held for further study
• 04/03/2026 Scheduled for hearing and/or consideration (04/07/2026)
• 04/07/2026 Committee recommended measure be held for further study
Bill Text
SECTION 1. Section 24-8.1-2 of the General Laws in Chapter 24-8.1 entitled "Relocation of Utility Services" is hereby amended to read as follows:
24-8.1-2. Relocation of utility facilities necessitated by highway construction.
Notwithstanding any provision of law or of any charter or statute, general or special, to the contrary, whenever state-initiated relocation of utility facilities in the state, owned by private corporations, private companies, municipalities, political subdivisions, authorities, or agencies of the state, whether within or without the limits of public ways, shall become necessary in connection with a highway project on the federal aid primary or secondary systems or on the national system of interstate and defense highways, including extensions thereof, for which the state shall be entitled under any law of the United States to reimbursement from federal funds for any portion of the cost of the project, then the state may order the relocation of the utility facilities, and the private corporation, private company, municipality, political subdivision, agencies of the state, or authority owning or operating the facilities shall promptly relocate the facilities in accordance with the order and the state shall pay the cost of the relocation to the utility as part of the cost of the federally aided highway projectreimburse the owner of the utility or utility facility for the cost of relocation subject to the following limitations and in accordance with the following formula: for any utility facility that is to be reimbursed federally, in whole or in part, and for any utility facility that does not qualify for federal reimbursement, the division shall reimburse the owner fifty percent (50%) of the costs of relocating the utility facility; in no case shall a utility be reimbursed for any type of betterment; reimbursement is for relocation costs only; the state shall pay the cost of the relocation to the utility as part of the cost of the federally aided highway project. A utility relocation shall be eligible for reimbursement pursuant to this section only if it is completed to the satisfaction of the state within target dates established by the state and in accordance with design criteria set forth by the state for the relocation in a manner that facilitates the timely completion of the affected project. The state shall pay a reasonable amount to private corporations and private companies for the relocation of utilities commencing with highway projects that are authorized for construction after March 1, 1976.
SECTION 2. This act shall take effect upon passage.
24-8.1-2. Relocation of utility facilities necessitated by highway construction.
Notwithstanding any provision of law or of any charter or statute, general or special, to the contrary, whenever state-initiated relocation of utility facilities in the state, owned by private corporations, private companies, municipalities, political subdivisions, authorities, or agencies of the state, whether within or without the limits of public ways, shall become necessary in connection with a highway project on the federal aid primary or secondary systems or on the national system of interstate and defense highways, including extensions thereof, for which the state shall be entitled under any law of the United States to reimbursement from federal funds for any portion of the cost of the project, then the state may order the relocation of the utility facilities, and the private corporation, private company, municipality, political subdivision, agencies of the state, or authority owning or operating the facilities shall promptly relocate the facilities in accordance with the order and the state shall pay the cost of the relocation to the utility as part of the cost of the federally aided highway project
SECTION 2. This act shall take effect upon passage.