Any public utility, or the Department of Transportation, that maintains a right-of-way through a municipality shall offer a no-spray agreement, with reasonable provisions, for the municipality to consider if it desires. Any agreement negotiated may include, but is not limited to, the responsibilities of the parties, the allocation of costs and the rights and remedies of the parties in the event of default and may apply to all or any part of the right-of-way within the municipality. Any agreement reached under this section must be negotiated in good faith, written and signed by all parties. As part of the no-spray agreement, the municipality may either perform the vegetation control work to standards as provided in the agreement or contract with the public utility or the Department of Transportation to conduct the work. [PL 2005, c. 620, §24 (AMD).]

If a reasonable no-spray agreement is offered to a municipality and an agreement is not reached within 90 days after the date of the offer, the public utility or the Department of Transportation at its own option may apply pesticides in its right-of-way or use other methods to control the vegetation. If the municipality agrees to perform vegetation control work but does not perform it by the agreed-upon date, the public utility or the Department of Transportation, after 90 days’ written notice to the municipality, at its own option may apply pesticides in its right-of-way or use other methods to control the vegetation. [PL 2005, c. 620, §24 (AMD).]

It is the intent of the Legislature that this section make available to municipalities an alternative to right-of-way maintenance procedures that use pesticides. This section does not affect municipal authority to enact ordinances nor the authority of public utilities or the Department of Transportation to maintain its right-of-way clear of unwanted vegetation in the absence of an agreement. [PL 2005, c. 620, §24 (AMD).]