2017.11.06 CC Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

of rent they can charge for collocation of small wireless facilities on city -owned structures. Fee limitations are described in the statute. If a city does not have an ordinance, can it pass a moratorium on processing any applications it receives until it can pass an ordinance? Probably not. The law prohibits cities from establishing a moratorium with respect to filing, receiving, or processing applications for right-of-way or small wireless facility permits, or for issuing or approving right- of-way or small wireless facility permits. However, for cities that did not have an ordinance enabling it to manage its right-of-way before or on May 18, 2017, the prohibition on moratoria does not take effect until January 1, 2018, giving those cities an opportunity to enact an ordinance regulating its public rights-of-way. Can a city still deny applications for siting of telecommunications equipment in its right of way? Generally, yes, however, any denial or revocation of either a right-of-way permit or a small wireless facility permit must be done in writing and must document the basis for the denial, including the health, safety and welfare reasons for the denial. The local government unit must notify the telecommunications right-of-way user, in writing, within three business days of the decision to deny or revoke a permit. If the city denies a permit application, the telecommunications right-of-way user may cure the deficiencies identified by the local government unit and resubmit its application. If the telecommunications right-of-way user resubmits the application within 30 days of receiving written notice of the denial, the city may not charge an additional filing or processing fee. The local government unit must approve or deny the revised application within 30 days after the submission of the revised application, or it is deemed granted. Can cities treat the siting of all cell equipment the same? It depends. If the city plans to regulate cell sitings and require telecommunications right-of-way users to get permits, then the 2017 amendments to the law create a separate permit system for small wireless facility technology that places additional limitations on a city's ability to regulate those specific types of technology. Does the new law mean our city cannot enter into a separate agreement with telecommunications right- of-way users who want to place equipment on city owned structures? The amendments do not require cities to have separate agreements, and some cities may choose to put these provisions in their ordinance or permit instead. For cities that want a separate `collocation agreement' in place, they must develop and make that collocation agreement available no later than six months after May 31, 2017 (the effective date of the act) or three months after receiving a small wireless facility permit application from a wireless service provider. "Collocate" or "collocation" means to install, mount, maintain, modify, operate, or replace a small wireless facility on, under, within, or adjacent to an existing wireless support structure that is owned privately or by a local government unit. The template of the agreement must be made available in a substantially complete form. The parties to the separate small wireless facility collocation agreement always may incorporate additional mutually agreed upon terms and conditions. Also, the law now clearly classifies any small wireless facility collocation agreement between a local government unit and a wireless service provider as public data accessible to the public under Minnesota's Data Practices Law.