01 - Laserfiche WebLink

City of Pleasanton City Council February 20, 2019 Page 4 of 6 are low-profile, low-power facilities that need to be placed near customers to provide and improve service. Aesthetic requirements that prohibit installations in large portions of the city will materially inhibit provision of wireless services, which violates the Telecommunications Act. 6. Indemnification. The city should not seek indemnity from an underlying property owner, as it does under Section 2.5(a)(10). Not only does this risk interfering with existing leases, it also has the effect of interfering with prospective economic relations between AT&T and property owners within the city. In addition, the indemnification provisions need to carve out exceptions to indemnity in instances of the city's own negligence. And AT&T must retain the right to select its own counsel. 7. Bond. Section 2.5(a)(11) requires a performance bond to cover facility removal. Both federal and state law provide that this requirement can only be imposed on wireless providers to the extent it is applied to other right-of-way users. 8. Landscaping. The city requires that landscaping, landscape features and street trees must be restored or replaced when damaged, to which AT&T does not object in Section 2.5(a)(15), Section 2.7(a)(3) and Section 2.7(b)(14). But the city should not require maintenance of replacement landscaping, replacement landscape features or replacement street trees, which is inappropriate. This is unreasonable and the city must eliminate the maintenance requirements. 9. Cost Reimbursement. Section 2.5(a)(16) states that applicants must"reimburse the city for all costs incurred in connection with the permit." It also states that the city has the right to withhold any permits or other approvals unless any outstanding costs have been reimbursed to the city by the permittee. In addition, Section 2.2(a)(8) also requires applicants to reimburse the city for the cost of preparing and mailing public notices. These provisions must be revised because only objectively reasonable costs that are recovered on a nondiscriminatory basis can be included in fees. AT&T looks forward to working with the city to ensure its proposed fees do not exceed reasonably cost-based and lawful fees. 10. Undergrounding. Several provisions in the Proposed Policy mandate undergrounding of equipment. These requirements must be revised to the extent necessary to avoid unlawful discrimination or effectively prohibiting wireless services in violation of the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996. Wireless facilities cannot operate with all equipment underground. For example, radio units must be placed above ground in order to be near enough to the antennas to function properly. Moreover,to comply with state law in Section 7901.1(b), the city cannot impose undergrounding requirements in a more burdensome way than applied to other right-of-way users.14 11. Electric Meter Upgrades. AT&T objects to Section 2.5(b)(2). Once AT&T installs a ground-mounted electric meter,the meter is permitted to remain for ten years. AT&T will discuss removal of a ground-mounted electric meter in the context of a permit renewal. 14 See also Infrastructure Order at¶86.