Michigan Legislation Aims at Better Telecom Access to State-Owned Lands
A Michigan bill would make it easier for providers to install telecom facilities on state-owned lands now being used for rail trails. The bill, sponsored by Republican Senator Tom Casperson and recently passed in the Senate, is expected to gain House support, industry officials said. The bill is significant for broadband expansion in the state because Michigan has more than 2,000 miles of rail trails, they said. However, opponents feared the bill might hurt funding for trail maintenance and development.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
The bill, SB 499, requires the state Department of Natural Resources to authorize the installation of telecom facilities within 45 days of application. Michigan’s current policies related to rail trail corridors has prevented broadband investments due to excessive fees and wait times for permits, Scott Stevenson with the Michigan Telecom Association told us. The bill’s fee structure is modeled on Michigan’s law that establishes a standard fee for access to public road rights-of-way, he said, citing the state’s 2002 METRO Act (Metropolitan Extension Telecom Rights-of-Way Oversight). The bill proposes a one-time five cents per linear foot fee for installation of broadband facilities along rail trails, a legislative analysis said. That would replace a fee schedule “arbitrarily” set by the state Department of Natural Resources that contains fees up to $15 per linear foot, Stevenson said.
The Michigan Department of Natural Resources is concerned that the bill wouldn’t generate enough revenue for trail maintenance, said Harold Herta, chief of resource management. All other funds for the trails have run dry, he said. An annual fee is better than a one-time fee, even if it’s less than the one-time fee, “if you are looking for a long-term funding solution,” he said. The bill’s great for telcos because rail trails offer a “straight shot to communications in a protected environment,” he said. It’s difficult to maintain facilities installed under highways, he said.
The bill would benefit rural communities, Casperson said. Rail trails are “straight shots and cut across rural land,” enabling providers to reach rural areas easier, he said. He acknowledged the fee structure is a key concern. Another requirement is that the trail must be left in the same condition it was before the facilities were installed, he said. This is “a good component and must stay in the bill,” he said. The Senate passed revisions that include creating a Michigan Trailway Development Fund to support trail maintenance and development. Other revisions include coordination with the Department of Natural Resources on project dates.
The concept of the bill is fine, but the fee system is insufficient, said Michigan Environmental Council Policy Director James Clift. It should either be changed to an annual 5 cent per foot fee or a larger one time fee, he said. Other states have higher fees; Minnesota, for example has about 80 cents per linear foot, and some states might charge up to $2 or $3 per foot, he said. The council wants to see fees better reflect that market, he said, and he leans towards a larger one-time fee because it would be easier for everyone involved and would lower transaction costs.