My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2018-02-06 Letter to Glenn Wakai and Rosalyn H. Baker re SB 2704, Relating to Wireless Broadband Facilities
PublicDocuments
>
Office of the Mayor
>
Office of the Mayor Documents
>
2016-2020
>
Correspondence
>
2018
>
02-2018
>
2018-02-06 Letter to Glenn Wakai and Rosalyn H. Baker re SB 2704, Relating to Wireless Broadband Facilities
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/7/2018 1:33:25 PM
Creation date
2/6/2018 3:18:50 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br />Wil Okabe <br /> <br />Managing Director <br /> <br />Harry Kim <br />Mayor <br /> <br />Barbara J. Kossow <br /> <br />Deputy Managing Director <br /> <br /> <br />25 Aupuni Street, Suite 2603 96720 (808) 961-8211 Fax (808) 961-6553 <br />KONA: 74-5044 lole Hwy., Bldg C Kailua-96740 <br />(808) 323-4444 Fax (808) 323-4440 <br /> <br /> <br />February 6, 2018 <br /> <br /> <br />Senator Glenn Wakai, Chair <br />Committee on Economic Development, Tourism, and Technology <br />, Room 414 <br />Honolulu, HI 96813 <br /> <br />Senator Rosalyn H. Baker, Chair <br />Committee on Commerce, Consumer Protection, and Health <br /> <br />Honolulu, HI 96813 <br /> <br />Dear Chair Wakai, Chair Baker and Committee Members: <br /> <br />Re: Testimony in Opposition of SB 2704, <br /> Relating to Wireless Broadband Facilities <br /> Hearing Date: 02/07/18 1:15 pm; Conference Room 414 <br /> <br />Thank you for this opportunity to testify in opposition of SB 2704. <br /> <br />SB 2704 deals with the installation of telecommunication facilities on state and <br />county-owned property. This Bill is similar to legislation which was proposed last year <br />that the County opposed; however, the present version of the Bill has some aspects <br />which are even more cumbersome than the prior versions. <br /> <br />The County objects to the limitation in the Bill of $40 for annual fees (which is <br />supposed to, but likely will not, cover the costs of the private company occupying space <br />in the right of way and using resources such as electricity), the overbroad definitions of <br /> <br />poles that the County does not solely own, manage, or operate), the lack of discretion <br />wireless facilities, the limits on bonds of $200 per small wireless facility and $10,000 for <br />total bonds county- <br />named as an additional insured to any insurance policy it may require, the piecemeal <br />process which will result if an app <br />multiple sites and there are problems with some of the sites but the County needs to <br />continue processing the same application for the other sites, the time-limit on <br />applications imposing deemed approv <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.