I can't speak for Arkansas.?ÿ In Oklahoma all public, or quasi-public utility companies operate under state rules (tariffs and statutes) and governed by our Corporation Commission.?ÿ These tariffs dictate service areas and, in essence, provide specific companies a monopoly on providing their product to the public.?ÿ But in doing so they have agreed to provide service to anyone in their area.?ÿ
So let's say someone wants electric service to their new build site.?ÿ And maybe the only solution to get them service is to cross private property.?ÿ In the infancy of rural electric co-ops this was the driving force of obtaining blanket easements.?ÿ When you agreed to sign up for electricity you simply signed a contract that said you would allow the co-op a blanket easement.?ÿ Those fared well through the sixties when most providers started attempting to clean up their recorded easements.?ÿ Most long-standing power lines that aren't technically within a recorded easement are accepted to be within either an easement by prescription or an easement by implication.
As it stands today there are thousands of miles of power lines that occupy property where there is no record easement per-se, but merely and old service agreement allowing the power company "to be there".?ÿ Plenty of these have been legally challenged when a provider 'upgrades' a line.?ÿ In Oklahoma an upgrade of service is considered necessary because of the public's increased need for electricity.?ÿ Usually in such a case the utility formalizes a described easement and pays the property owner a fair market consideration, sometimes as indicated by the courts.?ÿ And dollar-wise they are NOT usually grand amounts.
But let's say there is no blanket easement on the private property that needs to be crossed by the new line.?ÿ The co-op is forced to either obtain easement or proceed with condemnation.?ÿ This places the utility company in a unique position.?ÿ There is a law requiring them to provide service.?ÿ And there is a private owner that is stopping them from pursuing that legal goal.?ÿ For this reason the courts in Oklahoma historically side with the utility simply because the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.?ÿ Nobody gets rich selling easements to utility companies.
Damages that occur during construction or maintenance are almost always the responsibility of the utility co.?ÿ But the property owner is almost always burdened to provide the proof of such damages (photos and repair receipts).?ÿ I have seen a few law suits where a property owner claims (punitive) damages simply because they didn't like the way the power company did their work or didn't like the way it looked.?ÿ I've never seen one prevail.
I do remember one grumpy old wheat farmer that owned around 6000 acres and thought he was King of everything he could see.?ÿ Most of the section line roads through his property had no utilities at all.?ÿ The power company came in and ran about three miles of new feeder across his land, but within statutory R/W.?ÿ The old man howled and bitched and hired lawyers and eventually lost his case.?ÿ The distribution engineer needed to place a switching array (a number of poles with unsightly equipment) somewhere on the line.?ÿ The old man had put such a bad taste in the engineer's mouth the switching equipment was placed right smack dab in front of the farmer's house.
Moral of the story: you may impede a public utility company's progress, but you will never stop it.
Posted : March 23, 2020 3:29 pm