Exh 6AAGENDA ITEM #GA
SEPTEhIBEIt 2G, ?005
RESOLUTION NO. OS-10
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ATLANTIC BEACH, EXPRESSING OPPOSITION TO SENATE BILL
' ' 1504 KNOWN AS THE "BROADBAND INVESTMENT AND
.. CONSUMER CI-IOICE ACT" (S. 1504), URGING CONGRESSIONAL
REPRESENTATIVES TO REFRAIN FROM ANY FORM OF SUPPORT
OR CO-SPONSORSHIP OF S. 1504 AND TO VOTE IN OPPOSITION TO
S. 1504, AND DIRECTING THAT THIS RESOLUTION BE FORWARDED
TO THE FLORIDA CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION, OTHER
MEMBERS OF CONGRESS AS DEEMED APPROPRIATE, AND THE
- PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS, on August 2, 2005, Senators John Ensign and John McCain introduced the
Broadband Investment and Consumer Choice Act of 2005 (S. 1504); and
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Atlantic Beach, opposes the passage of
S. 1504 because:
The bill would preempt all local authority over the provision of cable and video
services within the community, including the ability of the local government to provide
' ' appropriate oversight to entities conducting business within their jurisdiction and in the
local public right-of--way;
• The City's negotiated contract with its cable operator would be abrogated under the
terms of the bill;
' The bill would substitute a new compensation methodology lowering the existing
franchise fee and replacing it with a fee, or in the State of Florida, the cable component
of the Communications Services Tax, which must be justified as being "reasonable" in
the eyes of the user, limited to management costs (which denies the rights of the
property owner to obtain fair and reasonable compensation for the use of public
property for private gain), and not in excess of 5%;
• These requirements and restrictions would result in the creation of a subsidy to the
cable and telecommunications industries; at the expense of the City's taxpayers;
The bill would deprive local citizens of the ability to address local issues locally, by
removing to the state all customer service issues, and further by denying consumers
any form of recourse for any actions of a communications provider;
AGENDA ITEM #GA
SEPTEMBER 2G, 2UU5
. , The bill would preempt any state or local law that is not generally applicable to all
businesses, thereby potentially preempting any law applicable to only certain classes of
' ' businesses, such as utilities and rights-of--way users (such as requiring undergrounding
of facilities and ensuring electric code compliance);
' ' The bill would prohibit the City from imposing any fee for issuance ofrights-of--way
.. construction permits yet would require the City to act on requests for permits in a
timely manner as determined by the FCC, thereby insinuating inappropriate federal
government involvement in the basic day-to-day management of local rights-of--way;
• .The bill would prohibit municipalities and their utilities from providing
communications services without giving a right of first refusal to private industry, and
would tY~en grant industry unfettered access to all municipal facilities and financing in
the event private industry chooses to provide services;
The bill would deprive the City of the authority to establish and maintain government
owned and operated networks, known as institutional networks, that may be utilized by
first responders and other government officials in the day-to-day management of the
' City's business;
• The bill would permit broadened preemption of local zoning decisions relating to the
` placement of cell towers, depriving the City of the authority to ensure that such towers
are safely and appropriately located in areas to provide the greatest degree of services
without unnecessarily posing a hazard to the public health, safety and welfare; and
The bill would eliminate the protection the City currently has against liability for
damages and attorneys fees in lawsuits brought by communication service providers
against local governments, a type of litigation that the bill would seem to invite service
providers to bring.
WHEREAS, for these reasons, the City Commission finds that it should oppose S. 1504
and urges the Florida Congressional Delegation and other members of Congress to oppose S.
1504; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission finds that this Resolution should be forwarded to the
Florida Congressional Delegation, other members of Congress as deemed appropriate, and to the
President of the United States.
NOR', THI':IH'/FORE, BE IT RESOL'S~I•;D BY TIIE CITY CO1+rI1YIISSION OI' TIIE
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, THAT:
Section 1. For the reasons stated above, the City Commission of the City of Atlantic
Beach, declares its opposition to S. 1504 and urges the Florida Congressional Delegation and all
other members of Congress to oppose S. 1504.
AGENDA ITEM #6A
SEPTEMBER 26, 2UU~
Section ll. The City Commission hereby directs that this Resolution be forwarded
immediately to the Florida Congressional Delegation, other members of Congress as deemed
appropriate, and to the President of the United States.
Section 111. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage.
SIGNED this day of _ _ , 2005.
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ALAN C. JENSEN, ESQUIRE
City Attorney
ATTEST:
DONNA L. BUSSEY, CMC
City Clerk