Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tacn Fees Department Of Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Subcommittee forwards bill allowing Department of Safety to charge fees for use of state radio towers
Summary
The Public Service and Employees Subcommittee voted unanimously to forward House Bill 122, which would allow the Tennessee Department of Safety to collect fees from private companies for use of the state's P25 interoperable radio towers.
The Public Service and Employees Subcommittee voted unanimously to forward House Bill 122 to full committee. The bill clarifies that the state’s communication network, a division of the Tennessee Department of Safety that operates the statewide P25 interoperable communication system, may collect fees for use and improvement of those services.
Representative Scarborough (sponsor) told the subcommittee the bill ‘‘clarifies the communication network is a division of Tennessee Department of Safety that operates, maintains oversees the state wide P25 interoperable communication system’’ and would authorize the department to collect fees for use and improvement.
Elizabeth Stroker, legislative director for the Tennessee Department of Safety, testified for three minutes. Stroker told members the towers in question are owned by the Department of Safety and that any fees authorized by the bill would not be assessed to local 911 centers or local law-enforcement agencies using the TACN/P25 network. She said the fees are intended for private companies and large commercial networks that seek to attach to or use the towers. "Absolutely not," Stroker said when asked whether local entities would be charged, "this is not a fee that will be assessed to your constituents, to your local entities that are on TACN. This is for private companies, your AT and Ts, things like that, big communication networks that want to join on to the towers." She also told the committee there are 22 towers currently and "about 60 in the works."
Committee members asked clarifying questions about ownership and who would be charged; no amendments were filed. The clerk reported a voice vote of 6 ayes and 0 nos and the bill was moved on to full committee for further consideration.
The hearing record did not include a detailed fee schedule, projected revenue, or implementation timetable; the Department of Safety testimony emphasized that local public-safety users would not be charged under the proposal.
Votes at a glance: HB 122 forwarded to full committee, voice vote 6-0.
