Broken Arrow council asks staff to study permitting, franchise and accountability options for broadband work in city rights-of-way
Loading...
Summary
City attorney and staff outlined how the city can regulate broadband companies that work in public rights-of-way, distinguishing permitting authority from franchise authority and recommending a staff review of permitting fees, reporting and enforcement.
City Attorney Trevor (last name not specified in the record) presented a legal briefing on municipal authority to regulate use of public rights-of-way and how that authority applies to broadband and telecommunications companies working in Broken Arrow.
Trevor explained there are two primary tools: (1) city ordinances and permitting to control and require reporting for work in the right-of-way, and (2) constitutional franchise agreements governed by Oklahoma law (Article 18, Section 5(a) of the Oklahoma Constitution) in which a city may approve a nonexclusive franchise subject to voter approval and limits on contract length.
He said the practical reach of the city’s authority depends on how a provider is classified. If a company is an "information service" (pure broadband) it may be regulated by permit and, in some cases, by franchise; if it is a telecommunications provider the state-level regulatory framework and the Oklahoma Corporation Commission’s certificate-of-convenience-and-necessity process constrain the city’s ability to use franchise agreements.
Trevor noted MetroNet has an Oklahoma Corporation Commission order approving it to provide facilities-based and resold competitive local exchange and interexchange telecommunications services in Oklahoma; that status suggests MetroNet is a telecommunications provider under OCC jurisdiction. The city attorney said he did not confirm whether MetroNet is actively providing all services in Broken Arrow and recommended staff verify operational status as part of next steps.
Councilors raised neighborhood complaints about contractors leaving safety hazards and damaging turf and sidewalks; one council member described a sinkhole at a new business site that took weeks to identify and required multiple contractor returns to repair. Several councilors said they want accountability for companies that work in city right-of-way and asked staff to return with options.
Engineering and public-works staff said the city already requires right-of-way permits for work that affects streets and sidewalks but that the permit process currently carries no fee; staff offered to assemble a team to propose permit fees, bonding, and enforcement mechanisms and to study models used by other cities (including non-franchise rental fees used elsewhere). A staff-led review will also map current occupants of the right-of-way and identify enforcement gaps.
No ordinance or franchise was adopted at the meeting; council directed staff to prepare recommendations on permit fees, reporting requirements and remedies for damage to city property.
