HomeMy WebLinkAboutPW AB 162 LA Resolution, etc.. . . . . . .. .
I I
The Honorable Katcho Achadjian
Chair, Assembly Local Government Committee
1020 N Street, Room 157
Sacramento, CA 95814
1400 K Street, Suite 400 * Sacramento, California 95814
Phone: 916.658.8200 Fax: 916.658-8240
www,cacities.org
RE: AB 162 (Holden). Wireless Telecommunications Facilities. (as amended Match 21, 2013)
Notice of OPPOSITION
Dear Assembly Member Achadjian:
The League of California Cities opposes AB 162 (Holden), which would unnecessarily and significantly
impact a cities' authority to regulate the placement of certain wireless facilities. In addition, the
timeframes included in AB 162 would limit the ability of a city to notice and hold the proper public
meetings.
Unreasonable Timeframes. In 2009, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted rules
that require local governments to review and act on applications for the establishment of wireless
communications structures. Under that ruling, cities have 90 days to review collocation applications, and
150 days for other siting applications. If cities do not act in this timeframe, an applicant can bring action
in court.
AB 162 would cut these timeframes in half and would deem applications granted at the end of the 45
days. During the rulemaking, CTIA — The Wireless Association requested that the FCC adopt the
timeframes and automatic adoption included in your bill. However, the FCC rightly refused, stating the
timeframes "may be insufficiently flexible for general applicability." In addition, the FCC ruled that the
state or local government should have the opportunity to rebut the presumption of reasonableness in court
if they do not act on an application within the timeframe. The League is unaware of any evidence that the
timeframes set by the FCC are not appropriate for California.
Problems with Definition of "Substantially Change." AB 162 requires that a local government
approve any request to modify an existing wireless telecommunications facility that does not
"substantially change" the physical dimensions, as defined, of the wireless telecommunications facility.
The definitions of AB 162 go far beyond what was included in the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job
Creation Act of 2012. In addition, the definition of "substantially change" would allow significant
changes in some cases.
Need to Account for More Than Size. AB 162 talks about the size of facilities, but does not take into
account other factors such as weight or location. Some existing wireless facilities are located on the side
or top of buildings. And the addition of 20 feet of equipment would be substantial. In addition, AB 162
does not take in account that new equipment may weigh more than existing equipment and could impact
the integrity of the building. In other cases, existing facilities are mounted to utility poles or streetlights.
Modifications to the equipment could cause sidewalks and ADA ramps to be completely blocked.
The Public Record Should Be Complete. AB 162 prohibits local governments from requiring proof of
gap in coverage as part of the approval of an eligible facilities request. Again, this varies from the FCC
ruling which prohibited local governments from denying an application based solely on this information.
Requesting the information from an applicant is simply part of the public process, and there is no
documented need to completely exclude the information from the public record.
Pending Supreme Court Decision. AB 162 formalizes in state law several issues that are currently
pending before the Supreme Court in City of Arlington, Texas v. Federal Communications Commission.
It is imprudent for the state to take any action on these items before the case receives a ruling, and the
League encourages you to hold your bill until the case is decided and can be implemented.
While we appreciate the author's willingness to discuss and try to address our concerns, we must oppose
AB 162. If you have any questions regarding the League's position on this bill, please do not hesitate to
contact me at (916) 658-8249.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Whiting
Legislative Representative
cc: Assembly Member Chris Holden
Members, Assembly Local Government Committee
Debbie Michel, Assembly Local Government Committee
William Weber, Assembly Republican Caucus