The Southern California Joint Pole Committee: Another Workaround for Wireless Providers 5

Dissatisfaction with rising DWP rates and salaries, and frustration with the inability to identify decisionmakers approving wireless installations on existing utility poles marked Saturday’s Los Angeles Neighborhood Council Coalition meeting.

Unacceptable DWP rate and salary increases were topics of resentment at the 9 a.m. DWP commitee meeting, with Los Angeles city council members under union influence called out as a big part of the problem. During public comment at the 10 a.m. main meeting, Bob Gelfand reiterated concerns and called on neighborhoods to demand leadership: “The kind of leadership we want to see is the city council saying ‘no’ to DWP…put these people on the spot…if they routinely vote yes to every request, that’s not leadership.”

Department of Water and Power superintendent Dennis Walls was on the agenda later to explain how the Southern California Joint Pole Committee processes wireless industry requests for space on existing poles. Coalition members were hoping to get answers or at least the name of the person approving such placements. The DWP took no responsibility for installations, though. Walls said he was unable to answer several questions, and deferred them to the Los Angeles city attorney.

What residents learned:

The Southern California Joint Pole Committee, an association of power and communication utilities created in 1906 to share poles and lines, arranges for lease and ownership agreements, and uses California Public Utilities Code General Orders 128, 165, and 95 (within which Rule 94 – 2008 – refers to pole-mounted antennas) to assign space to conductors, equipment, and antennas. The City of Glendale is among the 31 members of the committee through its Department of Water and Power; LA DWP has been a member since 1918.

Not all old support or “guy” poles in Los Angeles are owned by DWP, so some of the replacement pole installations in the city are not only not regulated, they don’t even go through DWP for any reason because the old pole might have “belonged” to another service provider (like Verizon, which was one example from Pacific Palisades).

In a few instances involving replacement poles (when an old DWP pole was presumably involved), protests from neighbors caused the new installation to be removed. Specific instances and their circumstances weren’t presented.

DWP does not keep records of replacement pole cell site installations in Los Angeles.


Although DWP is charged with safety and aesthetic concerns, Walls had little specifics on these considerations besides vertical equipment clearances on poles. Pole heights can exceed 100 feet.

The DWP’s role in regulating or approving these installations, according to Walls, is almost nill. A wireless provider will contact DWP when they need a power source. Arranging for hookups and metering takes from 2 months to over a year, depending on the installation. All questions related to the rights of wireless providers to use existing utility poles, and the lack of notification to nearby residents, were referred to the Los Angeles city attorney, who is currently studying the matter after a proposed motion for a wireless facility ordinance was presented by council members Rosendahl and Hahn.

DWP’s understanding is that telecommunications companies have the right to put up a new pole right next to an existing one in the utility right-of-way, without specific permission from anyone. When challenged as to the legal basis for this assertion, Walls deferred to the city attorney.


DWP’s understanding is also that wireless installations on existing utility poles are not subject to regulation other than the technical specifications of CPUC General Orders, and that SCJPC Joint Pole Agreement’s purpose is to facilitate leasing and co-ownership agreements, not regulate installations or notify the public.

According to Pacific Palisades Residents’ Association member Chris Spitz, “LANCC is going to be considering a motion calling for action in the near future; I think it’s obvious to everyone that new regulations and new approaches are needed to deal with the proliferation problem.”