Re: Muni Fiber

[Miles Fidelman <mfidelman () meetinghouse net>]

Charles Gucker wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 12:45 AM, Frank Bulk<frnkblk () iname com>  wrote:
> > I don't think a muni can prevent the ILEC from installing fiber in their RoW....
> First off, IANAL, Secondly, I've had a reasonable amount of experience
> with Village and Municipal Law.    In short, the statement above is
> incorrect, in so much that the RoW is not that of the ILEC, but rather
> the ILEC's ability to use the Muni's RoW.    So, if the Municipality
> wanted to prevent the ILEC, or any company with RoW use rights, they
> certainly can.     Unfortunately, a lot of the terms of the
> arrangement between the Municipalities and Telco's were written back
> in the 20's and 30's.    So, the "restriction" would have to be put
> into terms of that agreement.
>
> But in the end, it's up to the Municipality to set the guidelines (as
> with any local law) within the borders of their Municipality.
(Talking US only...)

Guess you weren't around when the Telecom Act hit... "you mean anybody 
who wants to can dig up our streets to lay cable???!!!!"  And today's 
cable franchising exercises have become almost a joke - given the 
restrictions implied by Federal and State laws.

Re. terms that were "written in the 20s and 30s"... where it gets really 
interesting are places like Texas, where there are perpetual ROW grants 
that predate statehood, and can not be rewritten or renegotiated.  Also 
some interesting legacies from ROW grants associated with building the 
transcontinental railroads (e.g., the City of Abilene, TX has to pay the 
Southern Pacific Railroad, or its successor, to run fiber along 
underpasses where their tracks bisect the City).

--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra