SB 649 adds amendment sweeteners but still a harsh pill
Adebatable bill, Senate Bill 649, is working through the California Legislature that aims to streamline permitting for where small cell equipment is placed on public property.
SB 649, sponsored by Sen. Ben Hueso (D-40th), passed by a vote of 32 to 1, with seven abstentions on May 31. The measure moved on to an Assembly committee vote where it passed 6 to 2 and is scheduled to be considered by the Communications and Conveyance Committee. But the bill could allow telecommunications companies to leap frog over local jurisdiction, according to the Los Angeles Times.
Private companies, such as Clear Talk Wireless or Time Warner Cable, would be able to place equipment boxes as large as a small refrigerator, as well as other gear with no size or quantity limitations including: electric meters, pedestals, demarcation boxes, grounding equipment, power transfer and cutoff switches on utility poles and other public property.
Holtville Mayor Mike Goodsell was one of two votes to oppose installation by Clear Talk of a 120-foot monopole tower at the south end of Samaha Park in February.
Goodsell remarked he likes supporting Hueso on most issues and opposing SB 649 would be a tough decision. “I don’t like giving up local control on public property,” said Goodsell. “Our local governments like to have a voice as to what goes where.”
Telecoms expect to install 30,000 to 50,000 of these small cells in the next few years as the next generation of wireless networks come online.
Yet, the League of California Cities maintains that justification is misleading since 5G wireless is still in development. So the bill’s true intention appears to be deregulation of the telecom industry.
Imperial County District 1 Supervisor John Renison remarked less local control in principle is not a good thing.
“It would be more apropos that local government and elected officials have more of a say so,” pointed out Renison. “SB 649 is like a mandate.
Something like this, local government should be taken into account.”
Currently, local governments can authorize where such equipment is installed.
Also, local government has charged $3,000 or more annually for each transmitter or getting in-kind services such as connecting the library to wireless service. But under SB 649, that would not be allowed, as the maximum per year lease will be $250.
Telecoms maintain current permitting is too lengthy and lease fees are extreme.
Yet, because of opposition to the bill, SB 649 has already seen several amendments to enable it to pass.
The League of California Cities who strongly opposes SB 649 tracked several amendments.
The latest version allows equipment boxes up to 35 cubic feet instead of 21. It also reduced the cap on city lease fees from $850 to $250.
Another amendment eliminates oversight for micro-wireless facilities that can be three feet long and dangle between utility poles and obstruct traffic sight distance. And the bill is no longer limited to small cells, but applies to gear from micro-wireless to macro-towers.
The latest version bans city/county regulation of placement of communication facilities by extending local preemption of regulation to any provider authorized by state law to operate in the rights of way and includes communication facilities installed for gas, electric and water, which leaves cities and counties with limited oversight, over small cells only.
Tougher amendments to SB 649 were avoided by making verbal agreements to amend the bill, only to claim to have addressed opponents’ concerns, hours and sometimes minutes before a vote was taken.
The night the Senate passed the bill, several Democrats and one Republican indicated they will oppose it. But by 9 p.m., a deal was announced and SB 649 passed overwhelmingly, according to Best, Best & Krieger LLP, a lobbying coalition opposing the bill.
Those following the process closely indicate Gov. Jerry Brown would veto the bill, given the governor’s history of favoring local government control over central power centers such as Sacramento or Washington D.C.
Though, the governor has proven himself unpredictable in the past.