Municipal Minute
Thanks!
Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO ConsultantCTAC LEED Certification
The Harris Company, Forensic Appraisers and Real Estate Consultants
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*630 North Sepulveda Boulevard, Suite 9A, Number 702
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
310-251-3959 CellWebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com Resume: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdfCommercial Appraiser Blog: http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/ We Make a Simple Pledge to
Communicate, in a timely fashion, each appraisal, analysis, and opinion without bias or partiality
Abstain from behavior that is deleterious to our clients, the appraisal profession, and the public
Hold paramount the confidential nature of the appraiser/consultant - client relationship
and
Comply with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and the
Code of Professional Ethics of the National Society of Real Estate Appraisers
IT'S THE LAW- Statement 7: Prohibition Against Discrimination
State agencies should be aware that Title XI and the Agencies' regulations prohibit federally regulated financial institutions from excluding appraisers from consideration for an assignment by virtue of their membership, or lack of membership, in any appraisal organization. Federally regulated financial institutions should review the qualifications of appraisers to ensure that they are qualified for the assignment for which they are being considered. It is unacceptable to assume that an appraiser is qualified solely due to membership in, or designation from, an appraisal organization, or the lack thereof. The Agencies have determined that financial institutions' appraisal policies should not favor appraisers from one or more organizations or exclude individuals based on their lack of such membership. If a State agency learns that a certified or licensed appraiser allegedly has been a victim of such discrimination, the State agency should inform the Agency which has regulatory authority over the involved financial institution. INCLUDING THE APPRAISAL INSTITUTE-MAICONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Municipal Minute
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012 7:08 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Municipal Minute
Municipal Minute
Amendment to Telecommunications Act Limits Local Control of Cellular Facilities Posted: 27 Feb 2012 06:00 AM PST
Last week, President Obama signed HR 3630, the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, into law. In addition to extending unemployment benefits and tax cuts, the law also amends the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The new law would limit local government authority to control the collocation of new facilities or the removal or replacement of existing facilities on existing towers or structures.
The pertinent language is contained in Section 6409, as follows:
SEC. 6409. WIRELESS FACILITIES DEPLOYMENT.
(a) FACILITY MODIFICATIONS.
(1) IN GENERAL. Notwithstanding section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–104) or any other provision of law, a State or local government may not deny, and shall approve, any eligible facilities request for a modification of an existing wireless tower or base station that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower or base station.
(2) ELIGIBLE FACILITIES REQUEST. For purposes of this subsection, the term ‘‘eligible facilities request’’ means any request for modification of an existing wireless tower or base station that involves
(A) collocation of new transmission equipment;
(B) removal of transmission equipment; or
(C) replacement of transmission equipment.
* * *
The new law does not provide any guidance as to what constitutes a “modification” or a substantial change. Consequently, local governments should be prepared for telecommunication providers arguing for an expansive interpretation of the type of changes that local governments “shall approve.”
In most cases, the new law will have little impact on how municipalities process the majority of facility modifications. For example, the removal or replacement of transmission equipment has often been administratively approved by the local siting authority where the number and size of antennas have not substantially changed. On the other hand, if a new carrier wants to collocate their antennas on an existing pole or tower, they are likely to need a new base station, which would not fall within these new restrictions on local control. Where a new carrier can share a base station with an existing carrier, the law will apply to limit local zoning authority but this is a rare circumstance.
There will be even more emphasis on municipalities to ensure that their initial siting review is done correctly and that their cellular zoning ordinances are up to date so they can demand enough information to make a decision based on evidence in the record, and not just on speculation and bias. Moreover, the authority granted to each carrier should be the minimum required to permit service. In that way, municipalities can better limit the circumstances where the local zoning authority must issue a non-discretionary permit for collocation.
Thanks to IMLA’s Local Government blog for reporting on this new law.
Post Authored by Adam Simon and Julie Tappendorf, Ancel Glink
You are subscribed to email updates from Municipal Minute
To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.Email delivery powered by GoogleGoogle Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610
Thanks!
Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO ConsultantCTAC LEED Certification
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*630 North Sepulveda Boulevard, Suite 9A, Number 702
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
310-251-3959 CellWebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com Resume: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdfCommercial Appraiser Blog: http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/ We Make a Simple Pledge to
Communicate, in a timely fashion, each appraisal, analysis, and opinion without bias or partiality
Abstain from behavior that is deleterious to our clients, the appraisal profession, and the public
Hold paramount the confidential nature of the appraiser/consultant - client relationship
and
Comply with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and the
Code of Professional Ethics of the National Society of Real Estate Appraisers
IT'S THE LAW- Statement 7: Prohibition Against Discrimination
State agencies should be aware that Title XI and the Agencies' regulations prohibit federally regulated financial institutions from excluding appraisers from consideration for an assignment by virtue of their membership, or lack of membership, in any appraisal organization. Federally regulated financial institutions should review the qualifications of appraisers to ensure that they are qualified for the assignment for which they are being considered. It is unacceptable to assume that an appraiser is qualified solely due to membership in, or designation from, an appraisal organization, or the lack thereof. The Agencies have determined that financial institutions' appraisal policies should not favor appraisers from one or more organizations or exclude individuals based on their lack of such membership. If a State agency learns that a certified or licensed appraiser allegedly has been a victim of such discrimination, the State agency should inform the Agency which has regulatory authority over the involved financial institution. INCLUDING THE APPRAISAL INSTITUTE-MAICONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Municipal Minute
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012 7:08 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Municipal Minute
Municipal Minute
Amendment to Telecommunications Act Limits Local Control of Cellular Facilities Posted: 27 Feb 2012 06:00 AM PST
Last week, President Obama signed HR 3630, the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, into law. In addition to extending unemployment benefits and tax cuts, the law also amends the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The new law would limit local government authority to control the collocation of new facilities or the removal or replacement of existing facilities on existing towers or structures.
The pertinent language is contained in Section 6409, as follows:
SEC. 6409. WIRELESS FACILITIES DEPLOYMENT.
(a) FACILITY MODIFICATIONS.
(1) IN GENERAL. Notwithstanding section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–104) or any other provision of law, a State or local government may not deny, and shall approve, any eligible facilities request for a modification of an existing wireless tower or base station that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower or base station.
(2) ELIGIBLE FACILITIES REQUEST. For purposes of this subsection, the term ‘‘eligible facilities request’’ means any request for modification of an existing wireless tower or base station that involves
(A) collocation of new transmission equipment;
(B) removal of transmission equipment; or
(C) replacement of transmission equipment.
* * *
The new law does not provide any guidance as to what constitutes a “modification” or a substantial change. Consequently, local governments should be prepared for telecommunication providers arguing for an expansive interpretation of the type of changes that local governments “shall approve.”
In most cases, the new law will have little impact on how municipalities process the majority of facility modifications. For example, the removal or replacement of transmission equipment has often been administratively approved by the local siting authority where the number and size of antennas have not substantially changed. On the other hand, if a new carrier wants to collocate their antennas on an existing pole or tower, they are likely to need a new base station, which would not fall within these new restrictions on local control. Where a new carrier can share a base station with an existing carrier, the law will apply to limit local zoning authority but this is a rare circumstance.
There will be even more emphasis on municipalities to ensure that their initial siting review is done correctly and that their cellular zoning ordinances are up to date so they can demand enough information to make a decision based on evidence in the record, and not just on speculation and bias. Moreover, the authority granted to each carrier should be the minimum required to permit service. In that way, municipalities can better limit the circumstances where the local zoning authority must issue a non-discretionary permit for collocation.
Thanks to IMLA’s Local Government blog for reporting on this new law.
Post Authored by Adam Simon and Julie Tappendorf, Ancel Glink
You are subscribed to email updates from Municipal Minute
To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.Email delivery powered by GoogleGoogle Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610
commercial appraiser, commercial appraisal, commercial appraiser la
Comments