“Telecommunications: The Governmental Role in Managing the Connected Community” to be Updated

te_front_190x_01 (1)“Telecommunications: The Governmental Role in Managing the Connected Community”

I’m very pleased to share with you that Christina Sansone, Esq. and I have been signed by Solano Press to update, revise, and substantially expand Paul Valle-Riestra’s book, “Telecommunications: The Governmental Role in Managing the Connected Community.”

First published in 2002, Paul’s book remains a standard desk reference for planners and attorneys in the U.S. for all phases of governmental involvement in telecom law and policy.

Here is a link to the front/back covers of Paul’s book: http://solano.com/pdf/TE_FrontAndBack_01.pdf

Paul was also one of the national deans of municipal telecom law lawyers, never shying away from a juicy telecom law or policy battle. A true giant among municipal attorneys, Paul rose through the ranks ultimately serving as the City Attorney of the City of Walnut Creek, California (where he was born and raised) until his untimely death in 2011 at the far-too-young age of 52.

Paul was also one of the national deans of municipal telecom law lawyers, never shying away from a juicy telecom law or policy battle. Material portions of 9th Circuit judge-made law can be traced to Paul’s cases, and the influence he exerted in cases argued by others.

I had the very real privilege of being a principal reviewer and contributor to Paul’s book, so you’ll understand why I am so proud to be following in his footsteps.

I especially thank his widow, Alice (known to some as “Honey Sponge Cake”) for making it possible for a new edition to come about.

Paul was my friend, mentor, teacher, and critic. I could not have asked for more from him.

I know that Chris and I will do him and his memory real honor as we take on our task to continue his work.

Jonathan

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

FCC State & Local Government Wireless NPRM Discussion Audio

The FCC’s State and Local Government webinar today touched on the pending Wireless NPRM.  I recorded the audio of the lecture and have provided it via the live link below.  The running time is about 19 minutes and 11 seconds.

If you’d like to download the MP3 audio (about 3 MB) you can right click below and save the file to your local computer.

fcc.2014.0422.MSG00986

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

Jonathan Kramer Accepted Into Northeastern University Doctor of Law and Policy Program

northeasternuniversitylogoI am very pleased to announce that I received word today that I have been officially accepted into the Northeastern University School of Professional Studies Doctor of Law and Policy program.   I will commence my cohort studies in July, 2014.  I’ll be traveling to Boston every month for two years to complete in-class coursework, which will be supplemented by studying between the in-class sessions.

Having completed my Masters of Law degree in Information Technology and Telecommunications Law at Strathclyde University just last year, this next step will be my final and terminal academic degree.

I want to thank three people in particular for supporting me in my next life endeavor: Fred Polner, Associate Master of Trumbull College at Yale University; Ken Fellman of Kissinger & Fellman in Denver; and Dr. Konstantinos Komaitis of the Internet Society and Strathclyde University, all of whom were kind enough to write strong letters of recommendation on my behalf.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

IMLA Webinar on Cell Site Leasing and Lease Sales 4-2-14

imla April 2, 2014 1:00 – 2:30 p.m. EDT – Telecommunications – Event Code: T50

Cell Tower Leasing

Cell Tower site leasing/licensing for local governments is an excellent way to produce new long term non-tax revenues, but crafting the right terms and drafting the proper documents are fraught with potential legal landmines.  John Pestle, Esq. and Jonathan Kramer, Esq. are both deeply experienced with crafting and enforcing municipal cell tower site agreements.  In this 90-minute webinar, they will identify those legal landmines, discuss industry boilerplate provisions, and offer useful practice pointers to guide you through the process.  The program will cover both key aspects of cell leases, and the potential sale by municipalities of such leases and long-term leasing rights. Extensive handouts in PDF format will be provided to participants.

Speakers: John Pestle and Jonathan Kramer

Cost: $99 for IMLA Members; $199 for non-members.

CLEs: Available for an additional processing charge of $65.

Here is a link to download the registration form:  http://imla.org/images/2014Webinar/2014WebRF2.pdf

 

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

Missouri Limits Local Authority Regarding Cell Siting

Missouri Coat of Arms
Missouri Coat of Arms

Over the objections of local governments in Missouri, Governor Jay Nixon signed SB 650 into law on Thursday. At the same time, Governor Nixon signed into law three additional telecom bills: SB 649, SB 651, and SB 653.

SBs 649 and 653 regulate how the public rights-of-way are managed and also how utility poles are accessed.   SB 650 places hard limits on the wireless approval process in Missouri ostensibly to encourage investment in wireless/broadband services. SB 651 provides legal immunity for telecommunications providers during emergencies and requires disclosure of user location information to public safety officers.

The four bills singed into law yesterday contained various provisions of former telecommunications bills enacted in 2013 in violation of the state Constitution, and enjoined from enforcement by the Cole County Circuit Court.

Interestingly for those of us outside of Missouri, SB 649 includes “every cable television service provider” as a “public utility” under that state’s law.

Taken together, the bulk of the Senate Bills take away substantial planning powers that were formerly and traditionally in the hands of local governments to protect community aesthetics. The likely result will be the industrialization of wireless facilities in zones previously protected from that type of industrialization.

I have grouped together all four laws into a single PDF file (about 1 MB in size) which you can immediately download from here by filling out the following request form.  Once you submit the form, the PDF will be automatically emailed to you.

    Your Full Name (required)

    Your Email Address (required; this is where we will email the PDF file)

    If you'd like to leave us a message you can type it here (optional):

    To prove that you're a real person, rather than an automated BOT, please fill in the blank:

    Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

    Off topic: Southwest Airlines Safety Announcement

    Southwest_Airlines_BoeingI really love flying Southwest Airlines, especially after flying UAL for over 800,000 lifetime miles.  I’ll never make Million Miler status on UAL because of…well, if you fly UAL you know the rest of that sentence.

    Southwest is simply far less of a hassle, even when they screw up. And they have a sense of humor.  That’s one of the reasons I record the safety announcements on virtually every flight.

    Every so often you’ll hear a gem like the one here, which I recorded on a flight back to L.A. from a meeting in Denver.

    Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

    Permits? We’re AT&T and we don’t need no stinkin’ permits!

    TreasuremadreDobbs: “If you’re the cell phone company where are your permits?”
    Gold Hat: “Permits? We ain’t got no permits. We don’t need no permits! I don’t have to show you any stinkin’ permits!”     

         -with apologies to B. Traven and then John Huston

    It seems that Ridgewood, New Jersey is non-to-happy with AT&T Wireless at the moment.

    Can you guess why?

    Well, according to a published report on NewJersey.com, it seems like AT&T Wireless decided that it would forgo actually pulling permits for a COW (Cell on Wheels) which it parked and then set up at a local gas station in town.

    A portion of the NewJersey.com new report is telling. . .

    According to AT&T’s public relations representative Ellen Webner, the tower, called a cell site on wheels or COW, is “in a temporary location while we work with the local community, zoning, on a permanent location.”

    She did not comment when asked to explain why the village was not previously notified by AT&T about the tower.

    “We are now working with the town through zoning and going through all proper procedures,” Webner said.

    I enjoyed Ms. Webner’s use of the word “now” in that last sentence.

    – Read the entire story at THIS LINK.  Opens in a new window.

    Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

    Tower Building: An Article Worth Reading

    towerbuildingLynn Whitcher and Cynthia Hanson, both attorneys and both working for MD7, have authored the article titled “Tower Building” in the January issue of Los Angeles Lawyer.   Los Angeles Lawyer is the magazine of the Los Angeles County Bar Association.

    Okay… Lynn and Cynthia represent the wireless industry, so I was skeptical about the contents when I first saw the article.  That said, I have to tell you that I found the article to be very useful, almost 100% balanced and rounded, and an easy read.

    If you would like to read the article, and I recommend you do, you can click here to download the entire issue of Los Angeles Lawyer  in PDF.

    You’ll find the article starting at page 30.

    Jonathan Kramer

    Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

    California: Wireless Industry Gearing Up to Attack State Wireless Legislation and CEQA

    california_targetIt appears that the one of the leading wireless industry trade associations is getting ready to launch a new California legislative initiative to sharply restrict existing siting controls by local governments under current laws, and to marginalize CEAQ by changing the Permit Streamlining Act.

    A copy of the circulating draft found its way into my hands, which appears to be authored by a well-known California wireless industry lawyer with input from a government affairs attorney working at a major wireless trade association.

    There are two main areas expected to form the industry’s attack.    Each area of the expected attack is discussed below.

    I
    Unlimited Permit Terms
    for Wireless Sites

    Under an existing California law from 2006, Cities and Counties shall not. . .”[u]n reasonably limit the duration of any permit for a wireless telecommunications facility.  Limits of less than 10 years are resumed to be unreasonable absent public safety reasons or substantial land use reasons.   However, cities and counties may establish a build out period for a site.”  (California Government Code § 65850.6).

    In a circulating industry draft, they would bar all wireless permit duration and build out limitations.  They seem intent on accomplish this by changing the Government Code to read that Cities and Counties shall not “[l]imit the duration of any permit for a wireless telecommunications facility.”

    As you can see, the draft amendment if enacted would require that when a city or country government issues a wireless telecommunications facility permit, there be no limit to its term.

    As a “Plan B” if the industry is unsuccessful in finding a legislator willing to take the political heat for deleting the term limitation altogether (which will certainly be unpopular with the public who care about such things), it appears that the industry will press for permits that are valid for at longer than 25 years.

    II
    Short Circuit the
    Permit Streamlining Act and CEQA Processes

    The wireless industry seems to believe that 2014 is the right year to modify California’s Permit Streamlining Act (the “PSA”) to correct what it suddenly sees as a problem dating back some 20 years.

    The law for the past 20 years has been that the PSA deadline for a government to take an action on a project only starts to run when the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEAQ”) review is  completed, but that the time-frame for completing the CEAQ analysis is not mandatory.  The ‘solution’ to the ‘problem’ (as viewed by the wireless industry) is to perform a major rejiggering of the established PSA rules.  The rejiggering would  be to make the government take-action deadline based on when the application is tendered as complete to the local government, thereby ignoring whether the CEAQ process has been completed when the clock runs out.

    To preempt CEAQ as a vital element of wireless siting–as it appears is the wireless industry’s goal–the industry will apparently propose multiple and significant changes to Government Code § 65950.


    Maybe the industry will try slipping its 2014 Christmas List above into the now dormant AB 162 when that bill is expected to return from the dead sometime in the next 45 days.  Stay tuned… this will be interesting.

    Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail