Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s Executive Budget included an amendment to municipal law (TED Part F) that would severely limit local control over small wireless facilities deployment within and outside of the public rights-of-way. [See Exec. Budget: (Page 14)]
I wish to express my strong opposition to Gov. Cuomo’s overreaching, industry-drafted, Small Wireless Facilities Deployment Bill [Ted part F.].
Imagine if a private, billion-dollar, for-profit company decided to place roughly 40 cubic feet of industrial equipment on the roof of your home and offered you pennies on the dollar to “rent” that space. Now imagine that you didn’t have the right to say “no.”
This is what Gov Cuomo is proposing for every municipality in New York State in language contained in TED Part F.
The only difference is that this industrial equipment will be attached to the streetlight, traffic light, utility pole, or street sign in the public right-of-way in front of your home or business and neither your town nor you will be able to do anything about it.
Wireless providers are pushing hard for this bill because they want the ability to put their bulky, unsightly equipment wherever they want, while not paying a fair share to offset community impacts. And they might just get their wish in a matter of weeks unless we, as residents, and our elected officials come together and oppose this bill!
At its core, this bill is inconsistent and contrary on its face to home rule by eviscerating local control over the deployment of small cell wireless facilities within and outside of the public rights-of-way. The single most important job a municipality has is land use and here the state would be taking this away.
By eliminating zoning review or approval, this bill prohibits public input and violates our First Amendment rights to petition government for the redress of grievances and be heard at public hearings.
This bill is a gift of public funds to billion-dollar telecommunications companies that don’t need the help, by eliminating negotiated leases and placing well-below-fair-market-value caps on the amount a municipality can charge for the private use of public property.
By preventing municipalities from negotiating leases over antenna locations, this bill eliminates a municipality’s ability to push companies to provide high-speed internet access in under-serviced and/or underprivileged areas. Without that leverage, wireless companies will focus only on areas where they make the most money while robbing municipalities of revenue.
Nor has the wireless industry pledged to pass on the millions of dollars in savings they will receive from the proposed capped lease fees to the consumer by way of lower-priced service contracts. The public should not further subsidize billion-dollar companies at the expense of the public.
The only things residents will get out of this bill is lower property values, blight, and a front row seat to unregulated, mass proliferation of wireless infrastructure in their town.
Wireless providers have scheduled meetings with state legislators and their staff over the next few weeks and have begun sending out well-funded e-mail marketing campaigns.
We must tell our leaders in Albany to reject this attempt to wrest control from municipalities and stand up for the best interests of New York residents.
The municipalities of New York State, not Albany, should have the final say on what private industry can build within its borders! Remind Gov. Cuomo that New York is a home rule state!”
TED part F is very similar to that industry lobbyists attempted to get passed in California. However, Gov. Brown y vetoed it.
Utility poles throughout the state may soon be hosting communication antennas
By Tony Farina I’ve covered many court proceedings and trials in my more than 35 years as a newspaper and television reporter and I want to make the point at the beginning of this story that whether elected or appointed, some judges are fair and honest and many others fall short of the mark. In other words, the word jurist does not convey skill and knowledge of the law; it is just a role that some serve with distinction, and others do not. By definition, a jurist is a person who has expert or thorough knowledge of the law but
By Tony Farina There are certainly many questions swirling around the mayor’s declaration of a state of emergency in Niagara Falls over trash, blight, and deteriorating streets that was declared back on July 20 and has been extended several times since because, according to Mayor Robert Restaino, the City Council refused to approve contractor agreements. But some observers point to depleted staff at City Hall, like in Public Works and Code Enforcement and other departments, as really self-inflicted wounds that are the underlying reasons work is not getting done in the city. Or is there even more to the story,
The Data Center That Answers Hochul’s Objections There was a time when Niagara Falls did not ask Albany whether it was permitted to prosper. The river was here. That was enough. The town had something Albany couldn’t give it. It used what was here. Water. Power. Work. Jobs. Industry. A future. In 1895, the Adams plant took the river and put it into wire. The current went to Buffalo. It changed the industrial world. Tesla supplied the designs. Westinghouse built the machines. Niagara supplied the falling water. Then industries came. Electrochemical. Electrometallurgical. They came because Niagara offered abundant, inexpensive electricity.
By Tony Farina The City of Niagara Falls, N.Y., boasts one of the world’s greatest natural wonders that people from around the world come to see, but despite incredible tourism numbers of more than nine million visitors a year, the city of now less than 50,000 people is still pretty darn poor. Niagara Falls does not have a tourism problem; it has a tourism-capture problem, and the distinction should be a starting point for a serious new discussion about the city’s future. And ladies and gentlemen, that discussion needs to start now. The question is no longer whether Niagara Falls