2 States Press Ahead on 5G Bills After FCC Order

Michigan small-cells bills go next to the House floor, but the package isn’t expected to get a vote until after the November elections due to the body’s calendar. In March, the state Senate voted 33-3 for SB-637 and 34-2 for SB-894. SB-894 was needed to ensure the zoning code reflects SB-637’s provisions because one can’t amend the zoning code by reference in Michigan.

The proposed Michigan law will control for things not addressed by the FCC declaratory rule, said the Michigan panel’s Minority Vice Chair Donna Lasinski (D). The FCC was “silent in a number of areas that we have spoken to in this legislation, particularly in areas of removal of obsolete equipment within 45 days, in terms of the insurance that’s required there,” and assurances that localities may recover “reasonable, nondiscriminatory costs to ensure the safety and deployment of this technology,” she said. Such provisions “are some of the most important areas to our local government to ensure that they have the ability ... to ensure that this deployment meets local zoning requirements and meets what is expected in the communities,” she said.

Chairman Gary Glenn (R) voted against the bills, saying he understands industry’s urgency but isn’t convinced the measures would be in the public interest. Glenn noted a ruling last week by the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals saying a mandatory smart-meter policy violates the Fourth Amendment. Hearing attendees submitted 27 cards in support and 194 cards in opposition from people who didn’t testify, the chairman said to audience applause. Several members of the public opposing the bill worried about health effects of RF emissions.

Supporting the measures, Rep. Jim Tedder (R) said he was frustrated some seemed to treat the bills like they were brand new. Legislation has been in the works for two years, in the House for six months, and seen more than 100 amendments, he said. Tedder found “compelling” RF emissions health concerns raised by several witnesses but thinks it’s too late to go back to a time before wireless, he said. The Michigan Municipal League is neutral on the bills, a spokesman said.

Georgia

After failing to pass small-cells legislation in 2018, Georgia convened state, local and industry officials to discuss ways forward. The livestreamed meeting of a Senate study committee on modernizing rights of way for advanced communications included representatives for Sprint, AT&T, Verizon, the Georgia Cable Association, Georgia Department of Transportation, and state county and municipal associations.

Georgia probably will introduce a new bill in January, said Sen. Steve Gooch (R), sponsor of last session’s bill. "Let's get back together now in the next 60 or 90 days and find a solution to this, because we're really all fighting over money … and control, and we need to be looking for solutions to help these people in rural areas to be able to get broadband in their homes."

Carriers have been meeting with cities and counties every other week since June and reached resolution on most small-cells issues, said AT&T Assistant Vice President-Legislative Affairs Kevin Curtin. Georgia ROW rules must be updated because current state law doesn’t account for broadband and “hasn't kept pace with the changing technology,” he said. Those rules make it more expensive to build broadband networks in Georgia than elsewhere, he said.

Wireless-service providers will use small cells one day for video services like cable, but wireless doesn’t have to pay franchise fees, said Georgia Cable Association Executive Director Steven Loftin. “It is all the same thing,” so all communications providers should pay the same fee for ROW use, he said. That tax should be low to get more broadband, he said.

Counties seek balance between streamlining deployment and protecting local authority, said Georgia Association of County Commissioners Deputy Legislative Director Todd Edwards. “We don't feel like the balance was met last legislative session.” The Georgia Municipal Association’s priority for next year’s bill is to incentivize collocation on existing infrastructure while having a discretionary review process for placement of new poles only in residential areas and historic districts, said GMA Director-Government Relations Tom Gehl. Atlanta approved 735 small-cell sites and rejected 10 since 2015; that's more approvals than Charlotte even though North Carolina has a law, he said. All the Atlanta sites are 5G compatible, but the service doesn’t yet exist, Gehl said.

Edwards noted FCC shot clocks and rate caps in its September order, saying shot clocks may be appropriate in some cases but not others. Georgia DOT is reviewing September’s FCC order, said Joshua Waller, director-policy and government affairs.

Sacramento

Sacramento hit a possible roadblock in its 5G infrastructure build this week.

Superior Court of California in Sacramento County ruled the city may not allow Verizon to install small cells on city assets subject to a previous contract with XG Communities. “The clear and unambiguous language of the Contract grants XG the sole and exclusive right to market, license, sublicense, and construct upon all City Assets to be developed with defined Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (small cell)," said a tentative decision in case 2018-0023195.

Sacramento "may remove City Assets from the Asset List at any time, but any such asset must in no way be deployed or commercialized for small cell use," the court said. The contractual list showed assets located by XG for small cells. The court said the city can’t remove it and then let a carrier use it for small cells “without engaging XG and compensating XG pursuant to the Contract.”

XG praised the decision, saying “lack of clarity had our business in a holding pattern which has cost huge sums of money and broadly slowed small cell deployment.” It affects more than 260 small-cells sites improperly licensed to Verizon, XG said. Disruption to 5G in Sacramento is possible, it said. “With a fair process in place, Sacramento and other cities will have accelerated competitive 5G.” Verizon and Sacramento didn’t comment.