2006_0821_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Christopher K. Miller May 22,2005 Page 5 opinion, although it is an unsettled area of the law, we believe that a strong argument could be made for interpreting the word "intended" in Minn. Stat. � 237.162, subd. 4, as encompassing any facilities that are designed and/ar capable of transporting telecommunications or other voice or data information, therefore requiring such facilities to be located in a high-density corridor, if established. A review of the existing franchise agreement between MeciiaOne North Central Communications Corporation and the City of Roseville reveals nothing that would hinder the application of a high-density corridor ordinance, if passed. Minnesota Statute � 238.086 provides that if there is a conflict in language between the franchise of a person holding a franchise agreement with a local unit of government and an ordinance regulating the use of public rights-of-way, the terms of the franchise will prevail. However, the language of the City's franchise agreement already accounts for discrepancies between the agreement and the City's right-of-way ordinances. In specific, Section 2.6 provides that: Grantee shall comply with the terms of any City ordinance or regulation of general applicability which addresses usage of the Rights-of-way within the City which may have the effect of superceding, modifying or amending the terms of Section 3[relating to construction standards] a�d/or Section 8.5 [relating to furnishing and filing maps with the City] herein...In the event of any conflict between Section 3 and/or Section 8.5(c} of this Franchise and City ordinance or regulation which addresses usage of the Rights-of-way, the conflicting terms in Section 3 andlor Section 8.5(c) shall be superceded by such City ordinance or regulation, except that Grantee shall not, through application of such City ordinance or regulation of Rights-of-way, be subject to additional burdens with respect to usage of Rights-of-way which exceed burdens on similarly situated Rights-of-way users. CONCLUSION The City does have the authority to require any company, whether it is primarily a telephone or cable company, to locate any facilities used for transporting telecommunications or other voice or data information (i.e., telephone lines or fiber optic cable) in a City provided conduit, if the City establishes a high-density corridor pursuant to Minnesota Rule 7819.0200. However, if the City would like a telephone or cable company to relocate existing telecommunications facilities, the City can only do so when the specific circumstances under the Rule are met. Additionally, although not directly stated in statute or rule, the City would likely have the authority to require any cable company laying fiber optics cable that has the