3/24/1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

600K 1-04' Introduced in Florida has also been introduced in many of the states. The telecommunications industry has been active in congress also arguing for preemption of local control over rights of way; however, the speakers at the conference indicated that preemption would be considered by the federal government only as a last resort. The federal telecommunication regulators would like to give local governments adequate time to respond to the needs of Industry while protecting their rights of way to see if the two interests can coexist. If they can't, then the federal government will revisit preempting the field to federal control. The NACO representative present were strongly opposed to preemption. On another matter, In the future it will be technically feasible to identify and locate 911 calls. There was discussion on a move at the federal level to require that 911 calls be Identifiable as to phone number and location and whether this was an invasion of privacy. There was also some discussion regarding the concern of congress about rapidly rising cable rates. All rate regulation disappears in March, 1999, and it was the hope of the federal government that by that time there would be effective competition for cable service providers such that the rates would find a reasonable market level. However, the senators involved in the telecommunications committees indicated that they were keeping an eye on the rates and if effective competition did not materialize something would have to be done at the federal level. I personally questioned why all cable subscribers have 46.pay over $6.00 per month extra to fund the sports channels' expenses which are related to their extravagant sports salaries. The Senate Aide indicated that there was the Imminent possibility of federal regulations to break the monopoly on set -top -box rental charges by cable companies. This would allow generic competitors to be able to access the market for these accessory Items at a much lower cost than the cable companies are providing them. The discussion of the tower siting problem nationally showed that Indian River County's moratorium and ordinance adoption with the cooperation -of the tower Industry was the right way to go, and the procedures followed by our county are still being presented as the proper solution to the problem, so our county is several years ahead of the nation in that respect. There was also an announcement of an Invention of a wire antenna system which would hang from phone lines and power lines which would obviate the necessity for towers at all. The feeling of the speakers was that In the long run, tall communication towers are going to be obsolete, and that these three-foot long metal strips would adequately satisfy the needs of the cellular phone network. The cost of switching devices in each communication tower Is between one quarter and one-half million dollars, and that cost will totally disappear for the price of a three-foot strip of iron. The strip antenna inventor can be reached at "Sanders.com" at his e-mail on the Internet or by calling 603- 646-6460. Speakers discussed the requirement for universal service on phone systems and how that would be provided If the market were truly deregulated, since no one company would provide the infrastructure necessary to service Isolated areas of the country. No solutions were presented, although there was hope that coming technology will allow satellite service for isolated areas with very little infrastructure necessary. An interesting court case was mentioned which had just been handed down from a district court which held that in tower siting decisions the input of adjacent property owners Is a valid consideration if the presence of the proposed tower would adversely impact property values. This is the type of case which, If followed by other district courts throughout the nation, would be a factor In congress' decision to preempt the field of zoning regulation of tower siting cases, so the decision is a mixed blessing. Finally, and most interestingly, a valuation expert from a national law firm dealing with right of way issues has reached agreement with several telecommunications companies that the value of the right of way for franchise purposes was 8% of their gross revenue of the system using the right of way rather than the 1% currently under review in -Florida. The audience of elected county officials was most interested to hear that several national telecommunication companies have -settled for 8% valuation on right of way Issues, since that belies any statements to the effect that 1% is the most that a company can pay and still be economically viable. No action requested or taken. MARCH 24, 1998 • -60- •