PC 022019 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Ritter referred to the letter from AT&T stating they want to delay the process, and he asked if there was anything contained in the letter that would cause Mr. May to modify any of the recommendations. Mr. May said the only concern from his standpoint were the bonding requirements. Under the California Government Code, governments are allowed to require removal bond for wireless facilities. AT&T was pointing out that the bonding requirements are not the same for other infrastructure deployments. FCC rules do not require the rules be the same for all infrastructure deployments; they just require them not to be more burdensome. Commissioner Ritter asked if there were letters received from other competitors which might have made Mr. May create his recommendations. Mr. May stated they received a letter from Verizon and in his opinion, it primarily included policy recommendations. Verizon is of the opinion that because of their statewide franchise fee, it gives them the right to put whatever they want in the right-of-way; the Courts of Appeal has said that this is not the case. The 7901 State Franchise carves out the City's police powers and while the City cannot say "no" to the facilities, they have all of the other powers and can exercise them for aesthetic regulations as long as they are reasonable, objective, published in advance and no more burdensome than other infrastructure requests. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Dante Williams, Verizon Small Cell team, asked that there be more time spent obtaining feedback from stakeholders and said they could hold conversations with Telecom Law Firm and other jurisdictions to work through some of the requirements. They see some which are problematic that may have unintended consequences and he recommended working out the issues. He said the first issue is the public noticing and appeals process. Verizon is concerned that while administrative approval of small cells is appropriate, soliciting public comments could introduce subjectivity into something that should be an objective standard. Another complication is underground equipment requirements, which they believe is unreasonable. The majority of the sites they will build will be on poles and there will be little furniture in the right-of-way. Another is a flat ban on ground-mounted cabinets which contradicts the small cell FCC order and state law and they would like to work through that with outside counsel. Lastly, they want the service to work at everyone's homes and in all public places. It is for 9-1-1 calls for public safety. In moving forward, a Master License Agreement (MLA) would allow them to sit down with the City and arrive at a couple of approved designs of how they would like the small cell facilities to look and it would be a matter of approving what matches that design. Commissioner Balch said because Verizon is telling him they have to get the 9-1-1 calls through, he asked if they would like to comment on throttling the 9-1-1 responders for the fires. Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 12 February 20, 2019 is. Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 12 February 20, 2019 missioners to describe what parts of the review process have worked well. Commissioner Balch stated that staff has done a great job asking applicants to bring their project to the Planning Commission as a workshop before they invest heavily in a design. He Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 5 January 23, 2019