Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Telecommunications Franchise Ez Fiber topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Tacoma committee hears EZ Fiber franchise request; motion to advance fails
Summary
City staff presented a 10-year telecommunications franchise request from EZ Fiber Texas LLC on Sept. 16. The Government Performance & Finance Committee heard the presentation and asked questions about right-of-way capacity and state law limits on franchise fees; a motion to move the franchise to council consideration was made but not adopted.
Jeff Leiders, division manager of cable communications and franchise services in Tacoma’s Media and Communications Office, presented a 10-year telecommunications franchise request from EZ Fiber Texas LLC to the Government Performance & Finance Committee on Sept. 16.
Leiders said EZ Fiber is an incumbent in other Western communities and is operating or nearing completion in several Washington and Oregon cities. “Before you today is a franchise request for ordinance for a telecommunications franchise agreement with EZ Fiber of Texas LLC, which is a new provider, to our community,” Leiders said. He noted the company’s service footprint includes communities such as Kent, Lakewood, Des Moines, Federal Way and Issaquah, and that it is “almost complete in Bremerton and fully complete in Vancouver, Washington, and Salem, Oregon.”
Leiders described the franchise as a 10-year agreement that would allow the provider to operate in the public right-of-way and would require the provider to furnish bonds, letters of credit and insurance consistent with Title 16B and Title 10 of the municipal code. He also explained “dark fiber” to the committee: “Dark fiber is where they have a path in the community that they they wanna get from point a to point b, and they don't wanna install it. They wanna they offer they they'll install it, but someone else is gonna light it up with their own” — a description the presenter framed as a situation in which fiber is installed and a third party can “light” the network.
Committee members asked whether the city can deny additional right-of-way permits if the right-of-way becomes crowded and whether Tacoma can extract compensation similar to franchise fees. Leiders and committee discussion noted a 2001 Auburn court decision limits the city’s ability to obtain franchise fees from telecommunications franchise agreements; Leiders said that case prevents the city from getting franchise fees in the same manner as earlier cable-franchise regimes.
A motion to advance the proposed franchise agreement to council consideration was moved and seconded during the committee meeting; committee members were asked for voice votes. The clerk recorded “All those in favor signify to say aye. Aye.” The committee chair then said the “Motion is not adopted.” The record does not include a roll-call vote or named vote tally in the meeting transcript.
Leiders and committee members also noted additional near-term franchise and transfer items on the calendar: an anticipated filing related to Lumen/AT&T’s buyout was mentioned as an upcoming item. Leiders provided the procedural timeline he understood: the ordinance would next go to council (a September date shifted to Sept. 30), with a final reading currently scheduled for Oct. 14 and publication Oct. 17, with an effective date in October if adopted by council.
