Some Cities Feel Ignored by FCC on Infrastructure
Cities, led by Next Century Cities, sent a letter to the FCC Thursday arguing cities aren't to blame if carriers encounter problems deploying 5G. Mayors repeated that theme on a call with reporters. The letter comes the week before an FCC vote on an order addressing wireless infrastructure. That order also is stirring controversy (see 1803150058), in this case mostly from tribes but now from some cities.
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.
“The most effective means to expedite progress is to encourage collaboration between industry and municipalities,” the cities' wrote. “It’s ridiculous to claim that our cities are seeking a ‘bounty,' or the delay of deployments that are important for our citizens. In fact, our communities strongly desire more options for high quality internet access and we are happy to work collaboratively with any ISPs that are willing to provide such opportunities.”
RVA, a consultant firm working with the coalition, released a survey based on interviews with 176 local governments on small-cell deployments. Forty-four percent reported seeing deployments mostly “related to 4G densification and 5G emulating fixed wireless,” the survey found. “Small cell deployment is clearly correlated with city size (and likely density) and also clearly correlated with fiber deployment (ease of actualizing fiber backhaul for small cells).”
Two-thirds of cities report collaborating with carriers on small-cell deployments and 60 percent say an agreement is in place with providers, the survey found: “On the other hand, cities could be somewhat more proactive in developing actual written policies for small cell deployment. To date only 31 percent have completed policies.”
Ponca City, Oklahoma, has an historic downtown and the city is careful of everything it does in installing infrastructure, said Mayor Homer Nicholson on the call with reporters. “We would expect any provider to comply with the same expectations,” he said. “We’re concerned about providers thinking that they can come in and arbitrarily take command of our infrastructure.”
Ammon, Idaho, has put lots of emphasis on fiber and created some of the cheapest options in the U.S. by working with ISPs, said Mayor Sean Coletti. “We want to continue that great relationship with providers as we move into 5G,” he said. “We would expect and anticipate that the FCC would see that local [governments] know their communities best.”
The order teed up for next week could lead to reduced environmental and historic review of infrastructure projects, said Deb Socia, executive director of Next Century Cities. “Some of our members are concerned about that,” but the group isn’t weighing in, she said. “Anyone who has been paying attention to this and is a local official feels disrespected by the process,” said Michael Render, president of RVA.
“We appreciate and welcome the important role that state and local officials play in reviewing and approving wireless siting requests,” an FCC official responded. “The FCC order being considered at next week’s commission meeting reforms the federal [National Environmental Policy Act] and [National Historic Preservation Act] processes, not the state and local review process. We look forward to continuing to work with state and local officials as we pursue the shared goal of promoting more broadband deployment.”