Bill
H 3500
Gives MA towns authority to enforce removal of duplicate utility poles after 12 months and to fine pole owners up to $2,500 per violation, reducing clutter and safety risks.
Status and key dates
- Bill number: H 3500 (House Docket No. 3652)
- Sponsor: Rep. Richard M. Haggerty (30th Middlesex) (co-petitioner: Rep. Jonathan D. Zlotnik)
- Prefiled: 12/05/2024; Introduced/read first time: 01/14/2025
- Referred: Committee on Ways and Means (01/14/2025); then to Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy (02/27/2025)
- Hearing scheduled: 06/04/2025; reporting date extended to 12/03/2025
- Related: HD 3652 (listed as replacing this filing)
Note on document contents
- The supplied packet also included unrelated South Carolina draft language about an income‑tax deduction for certain retirement-plan contributions. That South Carolina language is not part of this Massachusetts bill and appears to be included in error. The summary below covers the Massachusetts legislation.
Purpose and intent
- Grant Massachusetts cities and towns express local enforcement authority to eliminate "double poles" (duplicate utility poles) that remain in place beyond the state’s 12‑month allowance. The aim is to reduce redundant utility poles for safety, aesthetic, and right‑of‑way management reasons by giving municipalities a tool to compel removal.
Key provisions
- Amends Section 34B of Chapter 164 of the Massachusetts General Laws by adding a sentence that:
- Permits a city or town to enforce Section 34B via a local ordinance or bylaw that prohibits double poles that remain beyond 12 months (the period authorized by the section).
- Authorizes municipalities to impose fines on the owner of such double poles for violations, with penalties not to exceed $2,500 per occurrence.
Who is affected
- Utility companies and other owners of poles (electric, telecommunications, cable providers) who install and maintain poles in public rights‑of‑way.
- Municipal governments, which gain explicit authority to adopt local ordinances/bylaws and levy fines for double‑pole violations.
- Residents and businesses may see improved street appearance and reduced infrastructure clutter; utilities may incur costs to remove or consolidate poles and to coordinate replacements.
Practical and procedural implications
- Municipalities choosing to enforce will need to adopt local ordinances/bylaws specifying violations, enforcement procedures, and fine schedules (up to the $2,500 cap).
- Enforcement could create administrative workload at the municipal level and trigger coordination or disputes between utilities and municipalities over responsibility and timing of pole removals.
- The per‑occurrence fine structure could be applied pole-by-pole or by distinct violation events depending on local ordinance language and enforcement practice.
Next steps
- The bill will be considered in committee (Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy) with the scheduled hearing on 06/04/2025 and may be reported out to Ways and Means before further floor action.
Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.
Sign in to ask a question.
