BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 855|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 445-6614 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 855
Author: Firebaugh (D), et al
Amended: 9/3/03 in Senate
Vote: 27 - Urgency
SENATE GOVERNMENTAL ORG. COMMITTEE : 8-1, 7/1/03
AYES: Vincent, Cedillo, Chesbro, Dunn, Karnette, Morrow,
Murray, Soto
NOES: Brulte
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 7-4, 8/29/03
AYES: Alpert, Bowen, Burton, Escutia, Karnette, Machado,
Murray
NOES: Aanestad, Ashburn, Johnson, Poochigian
NO VOTE RECORDED: Burton, Speier
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 68-9, 6/5/03 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Wireless telecommunications: access to state
property
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill requires that 15 percent of the
revenues derived form new leases of state-owned property to
wireless telecommunications providers be redirected from
the General Fund to a separate account, administered by the
State Public Utilities Commission for the purpose of
funding a "Digital Divide" grant program, as specified.
ANALYSIS : Existing law requires the State Department of
CONTINUED
AB 855
Page
2
General Services (DGS), with the approval of the state
agency concerned, to negotiate, in the name of the state,
access to state-owned property not used for highway
purposes, for those purposes and subject to those
conditions, limitations, restrictions, and reservations,
determined by DGS to be in the interest of the state. This
requirement to negotiate access applies to
telecommunications and information technologies. Existing
law requires, to the extent permitted under existing law,
DGS to determine the amount of consideration for, and means
of access, including, but not limited to, lease, permit, or
other form of providing a monetary or service consideration
for the access.
Existing law also imposes similar requirements on the
Director of the State Department of Transportation (DOT)
with respect to state-owned highway rights-of-way.
Existing law requires the State Public Utilities Commission
to develop a plan to encourage the widespread availability
and use of advanced communications infrastructure
consistent with the state policy of bridging the "digital
divide."
This bill:
1.Requires the Director of DGS to compile and maintain an
inventory of state-owned real property (excluding
state-owned highway rights-of-way) that may be available
for lease to providers of wireless telecommunications
services for location of wireless telecommunications
facilities.
2.Requires DGS to place the inventory on the department's
website and authorizes DGS to negotiate and enter into
agreements to lease state-owned property for wireless
telecommunications facilities.
3.Stipulates that any such lease agreement must (a) contain
an acceptable lease term and provide for a reasonable
rental fee paid to the state, (b) provide for use of the
wireless provider's facilities located on state property
by any appropriate state agency, and (c) promote, if
possible, agreements among providers for co-location of
AB 855
Page
3
their facilities.
4.Requires that 15 percent of the revenues collected
pursuant to this bill be available, upon appropriation by
the Legislature, for the purpose of addressing the
state's "digital divide."
5.Requires that the revenues described in item #4 above be
deposited in a newly created Digital Divide Account
within the California Teleconnect Fund Administrative
Committee Fund.
6.Establishes the Digital Divide Grant Program, under which
the PUC shall award grants from the Digital Divide
Account on a competitive basis to non-profit
organizations for the purpose of funding "community
technology programs."
7.Requires the PUC to develop, implement, and administer a
program to advance universal service by providing
discount rates to qualifying schools, libraries,
hospitals, health clinics, and community organizations,
consistent with existing law.
8.Defines "community technology programs" and "digital
divide projects" for purposes of the bill and requires
the PUC to report to the Legislature and Governor on an
annual basis on the effectiveness of the program.
Prior Related Legislation
AB 468 (Firebaugh), 2001-02 Session . A similar bill that
passed the Senate Floor with a vote of 30-0 on 9/31/02 and
ultimately vetoed by the Governor. In his veto message,
Governor Davis expressed concern over (1) exempting from
local land use review the location of telecommunications
facilities, and (2) the transfer of revenues from the
General Fund given the state's fiscal situation.
AB 1150 (Firebaugh), 2001-02 Session . Also a similar bill
that died in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
AB 855
Page
4
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2003-04 2004-05
2005-06 Fund
DGS inventory list Unknown costs, probably not
substantial General
Lease revenues/ Unknown loss of revenues to the
General General/
Digital Divide Fund, potentially $14 in 2003-04
and Special*
program increasing to $154 by 2008-09,
redirected
to grant program
PUC Digital Divide Unknown, potentially $100-$200 annually
Unknown
*California Teleconnect Fund Administrative Committee Fund
SUPPORT : (Verified 9/3/03)
AT&T Wireless
California Community Technology Policy Group
The Children's Partnership
Cingular Wireless
CompuMentor
Crescent Park Multi-Cultural Family Resource Center
New Directions, Inc.
Nextel Communications
Richmond District Neighborhood Center
San Diego Community Technology Coalition
Sprint
T-Mobile USA, Inc.
Verizon Wireless
Western Addition Community Technology Center
Women's Building (San Francisco, Ca)
Youth Opportunities Unlimited Inc.
OPPOSITION : (Verified 9/3/03)
City of Fountain Valley
AB 855
Page
5
Town of Apple Valley
State Department of Finance
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office,
this measure is intended to provide wireless
telecommunications providers the ability to locate cellular
towers on state-owned property and generate additional
revenue for "digital divide" projects in under-served
communities throughout the state. The author's office
maintains that making state property available for such
leases will help expedite the deployment of wireless
communication service and minimize the aesthetic impact of
these facilities. The author's office also points out that
this measure has been carefully drafted to address the
concerns raised by the Governor in his veto of AB 468 of
the previous legislative session.
Proponents emphasize that this bill will:
1.Help increase use of excess state property by the
wireless industry and generate new revenue for the state.
2.Help streamline the manner in which the wireless industry
obtains state property leases.
3.Help increase the service quality and capacity of the
wireless industry throughout the state which can be
critical in times of disaster or emergency situations.
4.Help ensure that all Californians have access to state
resources such as e-government kiosks and computer
centers and help enhance the academic performance of
school children.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : Opponents argue that this bill
will provide them with little input relative to the
approval process of telecommunications facilities and open
the door to significant local aesthetic impacts.
According to the State Department of Finance, in light of
the state's current fiscal situation, they are opposed to
this bill. DGS already compiles and maintains an inventory
of state property, and is authorized to lease property for
the purposes stated in this bill. The Governor vetoed a
AB 855
Page
6
substantially bill, AB 468 (Firebaugh) of the 2001-02
Session, indicating that as the state faces continuing
fiscal pressures, he was "unwilling to create this new
account at the expense of the General Fund."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Aghazarian, Berg, Bermudez, Bogh, Calderon,
Canciamilla, Chan, Chavez, Chu, Cohn, Corbett, Correa,
Cox, Diaz, Dutra, Dutton, Dymally, Firebaugh, Frommer,
Garcia, Goldberg, Hancock, Harman, Jerome Horton, Shirley
Horton, Houston, Keene, Kehoe, Koretz, Laird, Leno,
Levine, Lieber, Liu, Longville, Lowenthal, Maddox,
Maldonado, Matthews, Maze, McCarthy, Montanez, Mullin,
Nakano, Nation, Negrete McLeod, Nunez, Oropeza, Pacheco,
Parra, Pavley, Plescia, Reyes, Richman, Ridley-Thomas,
Runner, Salinas, Samuelian, Simitian, Spitzer, Steinberg,
Strickland, Vargas, Wiggins, Wolk, Wyland, Yee, Wesson
NOES: Bates, Benoit, Campbell, Daucher, Haynes, La Malfa,
La Suer, Leslie, Mountjoy
TSM:cm 9/3/03 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****