Telecommunications on SCE Poles: Why We Don’t Always Bury the Entire Pole
By Contributor · Sat Jul 18 2026
By Haylynn Conrad, Malibu City Councilmember
Understanding pole ownership, regulation, safety concerns, and the path toward total undergrounding in Malibu
I hear a lot of questions and frustration about why Malibu may still have utility poles and overhead wires after Southern California Edison, or SCE, undergrounds its electric lines.
Many residents, myself included, want to see the entire system undergrounded, not just the electric lines. I would love to see every unnecessary utility pole disappear. But this issue involves public safety, wildfire resilience, infrastructure, cost, regulation, and the authority of agencies outside the City.
SCE’s electric distribution lines are highly energized and present the greatest wildfire ignition risk. That is why many California undergrounding programs focus first on placing electric facilities below ground.
Telecommunications companies, often called telcos, provide internet, cable television, and telephone service. These include Frontier, Spectrum, AT&T, Verizon, and others. Their lines generally do not carry the same voltage as electric distribution lines, but the remaining poles are not harmless.
Vehicles can strike them, they can fall during severe weather or earthquakes, and they can block emergency access. During the Palisades Fire, a fallen utility pole blocked firefighters from accessing Big Rock. More recently, another vehicle struck a utility pole on Pacific Coast Highway, closing the highway for hours.
My goal is to explain why the process is more complicated than it appears, what I have learned, what I am still researching, and where local government’s authority begins and ends.
New information seems to emerge almost every week. Rather than pretend to have every answer, I want to share what I know so far and continue updating the community as I learn more.
Who Owns What on the Pole?
Pole ownership is more complicated than simply identifying which company has equipment attached to it.
In many parts of Malibu, SCE owns the electric facilities at the top of a joint-use pole. Telecommunications companies attach their equipment lower on the pole through agreements with the owner.
When SCE undergrounds its electric facilities, the upper electric lines are removed. Telecommunications equipment may remain, which is one reason the entire pole cannot always be removed immediately.
Simply attaching equipment does not automatically make a telecommunications company a joint owner. In many cases, the company is a tenant with permission to use space on the pole but no ownership interest in the pole itself.
A telecommunications company becomes a joint owner only if it formally acquires an interest through the Southern California Joint Pole Committee process.
Where joint ownership exists, SCE cannot unilaterally remove or dispose of the pole. Even where a telecommunications company is only a tenant, its equipment generally must be removed, transferred, relocated, or otherwise addressed before the pole can be retired.
In other words, attaching equipment does not create ownership, but the equipment can still affect how and when a pole is removed.
Street lights, wireless facilities, easements, and other infrastructure may also affect the future of an individual pole.
Why Don’t the Telecom Lines Go Underground Too?
SCE and telecommunications companies operate under different regulatory frameworks.
The California Public Utilities Commission has authority over electric utilities and certain telecommunications services, but its oversight is not the same for both. Questions remain about whether the CPUC can encourage or require telecommunications undergrounding alongside electric undergrounding projects.
Los Angeles County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath has asked the CPUC to consider possible funding opportunities and paths forward.
Telecommunications lines also do not present the same high-voltage wildfire ignition risk as electric lines. For that reason, state programs have generally focused first on undergrounding electric infrastructure.
At the Malibu City Council meeting on Monday, July 13, I also learned more about Rule 20. Rule 20 is a CPUC program that provides a framework for undergrounding certain overhead electric facilities under specific eligibility and funding requirements.
The Council also approved a letter asking the Governor to support undergrounding all utility lines rather than leaving telecommunications facilities overhead after electric lines are removed.
Whether the Governor agrees with the City’s request or identifies another path remains to be seen. The Council can advocate, ask questions, build partnerships, and pursue policy changes, but many final decisions rest with utilities, regulators, Caltrans, and the State.
I intend to learn whether Malibu has previously participated in Rule 20, whether funding or work credits remain available, and whether the program could help with future undergrounding.
The Dangers Remain
Even after electric lines are undergrounded, remaining poles can still create safety and reliability concerns.
They remain fixed roadside hazards, can fall during disasters, block emergency access, require maintenance, and eventually need replacement. They can also be damaged during wildfires and slow recovery efforts.
Undergrounding electric lines is an important step toward reducing wildfire ignition risk. But when telecommunications equipment, street lights, or wireless facilities remain overhead, many concerns associated with utility poles remain.
I continue to support complete undergrounding wherever it is legally, technically, and financially possible.
The City’s Role
The City can advocate for stronger policies, coordinate with utilities and other agencies, pursue funding, and support legislative changes.
However, Malibu operates under a Council Manager form of government. The City Council sets policy and provides direction through the City Manager, but it cannot compel utilities, telecommunications companies, the CPUC, Caltrans, the Governor, or other outside agencies to act.
Understanding those limits does not mean we stop pushing. It helps us focus on advocacy, collaboration, funding, and legislative change.
My support for long-term undergrounding does not predetermine how I will vote on any individual permit, application, appeal, contract, or project that may come before the Council. Each matter must be considered on its facts, the applicable law, and the evidence in the public record.
Questions I Am Still Researching
• If residents wanted to pay to underground their neighborhood completely, would every telecommunications company participate? What would it cost, and what happens if some residents cannot afford their share?
• Who is responsible for moving telecommunications equipment before a pole can be removed, and who pays for that work?
• What authority does the CPUC have to require telecommunications undergrounding in high wildfire risk areas?
• Are grants, assessment districts, utility programs, or partnerships available to cover the additional cost?
• Have other communities successfully removed their poles entirely, and what did they do differently?
• How does Rule 20 apply to Malibu? Does the City have funding or work credits available, and can the program help with telecommunications equipment or only electric facilities?
• What happens to street lighting along Pacific Coast Highway if the poles are removed? Would separate light poles be required, and what role would Caltrans play?
• The City is currently reviewing applications for new 5G wireless equipment on existing poles. What happens to that equipment if the poles are later removed? Can parts of the system be placed underground, or would new above-ground poles, antennas, or cabinets be required?
• If one pole supports telecommunications equipment, a street light, and a wireless facility, who decides its future, and could disagreements delay removal?
These are some of the questions I am working on. Every week, another piece of the puzzle seems to emerge, and I will continue sharing what I learn.
I would like to thank members of the Southern California Edison team for answering my questions and explaining the engineering, regulatory, and technical aspects of shared utility infrastructure. Any remaining questions, conclusions, or opinions are my own.
Please feel free to email me at hconrad@malibucity.org. I read my emails personally and would especially appreciate hearing from anyone with experience in Rule 20, undergrounding, street lighting, or telecommunications infrastructure.
We all share the same goal: a safer, better, and more resilient Malibu. Understanding the system is the first step. Working together is how we make progress.