AgdaPkt 2014-01-13 Interview, Closed and Regular

Browse Search

7.1.E. - Page 2 stations associated with existing, large wireless facilities, which is something that most localities would not oppose since collocation is generally desirable. However, the current approach threatens local authority over the rational expansion of existing wireless facilities. The proposed language would require a state or local government to approve facilities that do not "substantially change" an existing facility. However, the meaning of "substantially change" and other parts of the rules could be read to require a locality to do the following: • Approve a 20 -foot (and perhaps greater) extension to any existing wireless facility even if the extension makes a stealth facility visible, adversely impacts a historical resource, intrudes upon a residential neighborhood, or alters an existing structure that had been approved with strict requirements limiting expansion. • Allow up to three additional large utility cabinets next to any utility pole in the right -of -way that supports a wireless facility. • Allow four utility cabinets to be added to existing wireless facilities in residential neighborhoods, whether beside utility poles along the rights of way, or on private property. The goal of the coalition would be to help the FCC find reasonable common ground by showing that proposed rules are an unwarranted response to the industry's deployment needs and instead would not only unnecessarily (and perhaps unconstitutionally limit local authority), but would have a potentially adverse impact on historical and environmentally sensitive areas. Comments are due February 3, 2014 and reply comments are due March 5, 2013. [The following is the link to the order with the proposed rules -- see page 62, Docket Number 13 -238: http: / /apps.fcc.gov /ecfs /document /view ?id = 7520945675.1 The Subcommittee finds that local interests will be best served and defended with a coordinated effort. The following jurisdictions have indicated an intent to participate and are in the process of seeking authorization from their respective bodies: San Jose and Los Angeles; Portland, Oregon; Scarsdale, New York; Arlington, Texas; Montgomery County, Maryland; and the Texas Coalition for Cities for Utility Issues which represents 110 Texas cities. Accordingly, the Subcommittee recommends that the City Council approve the City Attorney to retain Best, Best & Krieger (BB &K) to file comments on behalf of Redwood City and to consent to filing with a collation of communities even though this representation might otherwise create conflicts of joint representation (although the Subcommittee is not aware of any such conflict presently) for this single purpose representation. ALTERNATIVES 1. Do not authorize City Attorney to retain BB &K to file comments with the FCC and do not consent to filing with a collation of communities, and await outcome of FCC rulemaking.