(A) Declaration of finding and intent.
(1) Findings regarding rights-of-way. The city finds that the rights-of-way within the city:
(a) Are critical to the travel and transport of persons and property in the business and social life of the city;
(b) Are intended for public uses and must be managed and controlled consistent with that intent;
(c) Can be partially occupied by the facilities of utilities and other public service entities delivering utility and public services rendered for profit, to the enhancement of the health, welfare, and general economic wellbeing of the city and its citizens; and
(d) Are a unique and physically-limited resource requiring proper management to maximize the efficiency and to minimize the costs to the taxpayers of the foregoing uses, and to minimize the inconvenience to, and negative effects upon, the public from such facilities’ construction, placement, relocation, and maintenance in the rights-of-way of the city.
(2) Finding regarding compensation. The city finds that the right to occupy portions of the rights-of-way for limited times for the business of providing telecommunications services is a valuable use of a unique public resource that has been acquired and is maintained at great expense to the city and its taxpayers, and, therefore, the taxpayers of the city should receive fair and reasonable compensation for use of the rights-of-way.
(3) Finding regarding local concern. The city finds that while telecommunications systems are, in part, an extension of interstate commerce, their operations also involve rights-of-way, municipal franchising, and vital business and community service, which are of local concern.
(4) Finding regarding promotion of telecommunications services. The city finds that it is in the best interests of its taxpayers and citizens to promote the rapid development of telecommunications services, on a nondiscrimination basis, responsive to community and public interests, and to assure availability for municipal, educational, and community services.
(5) Findings regarding franchise standards. The city finds that it is in the interests of the public to franchise and to establish standards for franchising providers in a manner that:
(a) Fairly and reasonably compensates the city on a competitively neutral and nondiscriminatory basis, as provided herein;
(b) Encourages competition by establishing terms and conditions under which providers may use valuable public property to serve the public;
(c) Fully protects the public interests and the city from any harm that may flow from such commercial use of rights-of-way;
(d) Protects the police powers and rights-of-way management authority of the city in a manner consistent with federal and state law;
(e) Otherwise protects the public interests in the development and use of the city infrastructure;
(f) Protects the public’s investment in improvements in the rights-of-way; and
(g) Ensures that no barriers to entry of telecommunications providers are created, and that such franchising is accomplished in a manner that does not prohibit, or have the effect of prohibiting, telecommunications services within the meaning of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Pub. Law No. 104-104; hereinafter the “Act”).
(6) Power to manage rights-of-way. The city adopts this telecommunications subchapter pursuant to its power to:
(a) Manage city rights-of-way, pursuant to common law, the Utah Constitution, and relevant statutory authority; and
(b) Receive fair and reasonable, compensation for the use of rights-of-way by providers as expressly set forth by § 253 of the Act, being 47 U.S.C. § 253.
(B) Scope of subchapter. This subchapter shall provide the basic local scheme for providers of telecommunications services and systems that require the use of the rights-of-way, including providers of both the system and service, those providers of the system only, and those providers who do not build the system but who only provide services. This subchapter shall apply to all future providers and to all providers in the city prior to the effective date of this subchapter, whether operating with, or without, a franchise as set forth in § 114.50(B).
(C) Excluded activity.
(1) Cable television. This subchapter shall not apply to cable television operators otherwise regulated by city Ords. 650, 656, 675, and their progeny (the “Cable Television Ordinance”).
(2) Wireless services. This subchapter shall not apply to personal wireless service facilities.
(3) Provisions applicable to excluded providers. Providers excused by other law that prohibits the city from requiring a franchise shall not be required to obtain a franchise, but all of the requirements imposed by this subchapter through the exercise of the city’s police power and not preempted by other law shall be applicable.
(Prior Code, § 13.10.010) (Ord. 11-98, passed 5-20-1998)