Harbor Carriers, Inc. v. City of Sausalito

Opinion

DRAPER, P. J.

Appellant city treats the judgment as one requiring issuance of a use permit for a specific terminal site. But, fairly construed, the judgment merely directs the city to make a “downtown” site available for use as a ferry terminal.

The certificate of public convenience and necessity issued by the state Public Utilities Commission authorizes respondent to conduct a common carrier service, by ferry, between San Francisco and Sausalito.

The Legislature has plenary right to confer power and jurisdiction upon the Public Utilities Commission (Cal. Const., art. XII, § 23). The

[775]

power of a city to “make and enforce within its limits all local, police, sanitary, and other ordinances and regulations” is specifically limited to such as are “not in conflict with general laws.” (Cal. Const., art. XI, § 7.)

It follows that in any conflict between action by a municipality and a lawful order of the commission, the latter prevails.

(Bay Cities Transit Co.

v.

Los Angeles,

16 Cal.2d 772 [108 P.2d 435];

People

v.

Willert,

37 Cal.App.2d Supp. 729 [93 P.2d 872]; 44 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 117.) “[T]he commission has been held to have paramount jurisdiction in cases where it has exercised its authority, and its authority is pitted against that of a local government involving a matter of statewide concern.”

(Orange County Air Pollution Control Dist.

v.

Public Util. Com., 4

Cal.3d 945, 950-951 [95 Cal.Rptr. 17, 484 P.2d 1361].) Operation of interurban streetcars “is not a matter solely of local concern and is not, therefore, a municipal affair.”