Loading...
20SusanaBarrios From: VOZENILEK, DAN <dv574p@att.com> Sent: Monday, October 7, 2024 2:07PM To: Public Comment <publiccomment@anaheim.net> Subject: \[EXTERNAL\] AT&TComments onAgenda Item #20 Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. Iwould like tosharemycomments regarding item number 20on theOctober 8, 2024 Agenda ofCityCouncil. Please ensure thiscomment letter isincluded inCouncilmembers meeting packets. Thankyou, Dan Vozenilek | External Affairs | AT&T dv574p@att.com 1 DAN VOZENILEK External Affairs AT&T Services, Inc. 1452 Edinger Ave. Rm 1140 Tustin, CA 92780 562.716.4647 Phone Dv574p@att.com October 7, 2024 VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL (apupubliccomments@anaheim.net) Anaheim City Council Members of the Public Utilities Board 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92805 Re: Comments regarding Item 20 on the October 8, 2024 Agenda of City Council concerning “An Ordinance Amending Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter 17.24 Establishing A Timeline, Declaring A Public Nuisance, and Authorizing Enforcement And Penalties Associated With The Removal Of Overhead Telecommunications Facilities Within Underground Utility Districts Dear Councilmembers, AT&T California submits these comments to the proposal before the Council for an amendment to the City’s undergrounding ordinance which seeks to set a deadline for completion of all utility undergrounding projects. The proposal would declare any failure to comply with such a deadline a public nuisance and impose criminal and administrative penalties. AT&T believes that some of these deadlines and related provisions are somewhat unreasonable and respectfully asks the Council to direct the Public Utilities Staff to work with AT&T on a few remaining issues as discussed herein. My team and I have been working hard to review past projects and determine additional internal procedures that will help AT&T streamline its pole removal processes. We have met with Anaheim Utilities Staff and attended the Anaheim Public Utilities Board meeting to discuss some of the concerns we have with the current draft of the amendment. Through these meetings we have agreed on several improvements that will reduce our current project durations. We appreciate the recent update to the amendment section 17.24.100.020 which recognizes that some projects may require more time due to size and complexity. AT&T and the City have cooperated on these matters over decades, and we look forward to our continued ability to meet our joint objectives to complete these projects successfully. We believe we are now down to two issues that we feel need revision with the Public Utilities Staff. They are: 1. The draft amendment needs to clearly define the start of the clock on telecommunications work. Right now, the clock commencement depends on the Department sending a notice that all civil engineering work has been completed.” Our concern is that this standard is too vague and unworkable. The time needed to build the joint trench, potential errors during that construction, and AT&T/Anaheim October 7, 2024 Page 2 of 3 environmental factors (new construction, new Caltrans or railroad projects, improvements, landscaping, etc.) may all requires changes to the civil engineering and actual construction timetables in the undergrounding process. We thus respectfully suggest that notice should be issued after City Staff and all involved utilities have successfully completed final inspection and acceptance of the conduit system, including all service laterals per the project specific “Agreement for Replacement of Overhead with Underground Communications Facilities.” Also, if issues outside the control of the telecommunications utilities later arise that require modification to the trench, it is only fair that the deadline be extended for the period necessary to implement that modification (including permitting and construction). To speed up this process, Staff and the utilities can work together to create reasonable deadlines for the completion of the permitting and construction of such corrections. 2. Finally, throughout the City’s efforts to underground aerial facilities in recent years, AT&T has readily gone beyond the cooperation required by the Public Utilities Code and the California Public Utilities Commission’s Tariff Rule 32, which govern AT&T’s undergrounding obligations. We remain willing to work with the Utility Staff to develop and implement this proposed new paradigm to expedite the removal of aerial facilities after the City completes the development of new infrastructure. But AT&T nevertheless remains concerned that the present draft of the ordinance extends beyond the City’s legal power. For example, the City proposes to declare a nuisance, subject to criminal enforcement, if AT&T is unable to remove aerial facilities of a type that have been permitted under California law for more than a century. While it would not cure all of AT&T’s concerns, we believe modest changes to the proposal will substantially reduce the possibility of a future dispute over the ordinance’s enforceability. First, AT&T believes the declaration that utility poles without electrical utilities will be deemed a public nuisance should be removed (17.24.030.040). AT&T has hundreds of poles in the City that do not have City electrical facilities. These poles are maintained and inspected by AT&T in accordance with the safety regulations of the California Public Utility Commission. We believe it is thus inappropriate to declare these poles a public nuisance based on the erroneous conclusion that they are not maintained or inspected. Moreover, such an inaccurate label regarding AT&T’s infrastructure, although factually erroneous, could cause substantial harm to AT&T and other utilities because it may mislead others into the false belief that these poles are somehow unsafe or illegal. AT&T is also concerned about the declaration that failure to meet the proposed deadline would be punishable as a misdemeanor (17.24.030.030). While the potential enforcement of deadlines established under the new ordinance via a civil penalty, in the event of a knowing and unexcused violation, might be appropriate, imposing criminal liabilities without proof of any wrongdoing – and where the City and its processes (and the activities of its electric utility) may have contributed to a delay – is harsh and could compel AT&T to seek a legal challenge to the City’s attempt to impose such deadlines. Consequently, AT&T respectfully requests that the City delete the entire proposal imposing a misdemeanor punishment. We further request (which the City itself has suggested) that the City limit enforcement to civil penalties under Code § 1.20 and only upon a knowing and unexcused violation. AT&T/Anaheim October 7, 2024 Page 3 of 3 Based on the above, AT&T strongly urges the Council to direct Staff to work with the affected utilities to develop a revised proposal that will improve timeliness of utility undergrounding projects with the full consideration of the above concerns. Sincerely, Dan Vozenilek