California 5G Bill Designed To Ease Local Wireless Siting Review
California senators soon will consider a deregulatory bill to reduce local siting review for small-cell wireless infrastructure. The Senate Energy, Utilities and Communications Committee plans to consider the measure next Monday, a committee spokeswoman said. The bill has raised concerns from advocates for local government. The committee plans on Tuesday to consider a constitutional amendment to dissolve the California Public Utilities Commission and a bill to improve wireless 911 call routing. While the Assembly already passed the three measures, the small-cells bill had nothing to do with wireless until after it arrived in the Senate.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
AB-2788 started life as an “act relating to oil and gas,” unanimously passing the Assembly May 27 without any language related to telecom. June 13, the author, Assemblyman Mike Gatto (D), converted the bill into one about wireless infrastructure siting. As amended, the bill would permit use of small cells without a city or county discretionary permit or aesthetic review in all zoning districts. A building or administrative permit would still be required, but the locality would have to issue them within 60 days in most cases. The locality would be required to renew permits of 10 years or less for the same amount of time unless it found that the facility didn’t comply with codes and permit conditions when initially approved. It would prohibit localities from precluding the leasing or licensing of a site owned by the city or county for installation of small cells.
“Using a legislative maneuver delicately referred to as gut and amend, [Gatto] transmogrified a bill about natural gas storage into a free pass for mobile phone companies to 1. install cell sites pretty much anywhere they want with little or no oversight by local governments and 2. force local governments to lease publicly owned facilities for the purpose,” wrote Tellus Venture Associates President Steve Blum in a blog post Monday. Tellus consults with cities on developing community broadband systems. The definition of small cell is “remarkably big,” he said. “Given the current downsizing trend in cell site design, the free pass will apply to the vast majority of installations.” The bill defines a small cell as “a wireless telecommunications facility with antennas of no more than six cubic feet in volume each and associated equipment with a cumulative volume no larger than 21 cubic feet on all poles and structures and 28 cubic feet on all nonpole structures.”
The bill is “still a work in progress,” a Gatto spokesman told us. It’s meant to speed the upgrade of wireless infrastructure to support consumer 5G services, he said. “We have already spoken to the cities … the counties and the various associations of governments,” he said. “We’re bringing all parties to the table and listening.” He said the measure wasn’t introduced as new legislation because the deadline for bill introductions has passed, but rules allow legislators to amend an existing bill. If the Senate passes the new version of AB-2788, it will have to receive another floor vote in the Assembly before it moves to the governor, he said.
This week, the Senate committee will consider a constitutional amendment to dissolve the CPUC. Earlier this month, the State Assembly voted 61-9 to pass ACA-11, with sponsor Gatto and others citing the CPUC’s response to Frontier Communications problems in April as one of several reasons to rethink utilities legislation in California (see 1606020071). The bill hasn’t been materially changed since then, the Gatto spokesman said. The bill must receive a two-thirds vote in the Senate, then a ballot vote by voters in November. The Utility Reform Network (TURN) has opposed killing the CPUC, though it supports reform (see 1605260046).
“I don’t think it’s going to go anywhere,” said Sherry Lichtenberg, principal for telecom research and policy at the National Regulatory Research Institute, in an interview. The NRRI is the research arm of NARUC. “I assume even if it would pass that [Gov. Jerry Brown (D)] would certainly not agree to it. … Public utility commissions remain an important avenue for ensuring the public good and so will ultimately remain in place for that reason.” She said, however, that ACA-11 “opened an excellent discussion on what should be regulated and how.”
Also at the Tuesday hearing, the Senate committee will consider a 911 bill that would replace current state rules for handling wireless emergency calls. AB-1564 requires commercial mobile radio service providers to provide free access to local 911 service and route calls through the Department of the California Highway Patrol (CHP) unless an alternate route meets certain requirements. The bill would require state and local government agencies to determine the most efficient routing of wireless 911 calls, with a statewide review and routing decision-making process to be completed annually.
The Assembly unanimously passed the 911 bill in May. “There are currently significant problems with California's 911 system including the misrouting of calls to incorrect PSAPs, sometimes in different cities or regions, and inaccurate caller location information,” said a May 2 bill analysis by the Assembly Appropriations Committee. “The author points to an incident in 2014 when a 911 emergency call made in Santa Barbara was routed to Ventura CHP instead. Inaccurate location information given from CHP to the local dispatch further delayed the call and the arrival of medical care. Following the 2014 shooting in Isla Vista, CA, in August 2015 test calls made from Isla Vista revealed that cell sites were still routing calls to Ventura CHP instead of a local dispatch.”