California 2017-2018 Regular Session Status: To Executive

SB 649 — Wireless telecommunications facilities.

Last action — Last day to consider Governor’s veto pursuant to Joint Rule 58.5.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. ✓
    Passed Senate
  4. ✓
    Passed Assembly
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2017-2018 Regular Session. It reached “To Executive” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

(1) Existing federal law prohibits a state or local statute, regulation, or legal requirement from prohibiting an interstate or intrastate telecommunications service, but recognizes the ability of a state to impose, on a competitively neutral basis, requirements necessary to preserve and advance universal service, protect the public safety and welfare, ensure the continued quality of telecommunications services, and safeguard the rights of consumers. If the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) determines that this prohibition has been violated, existing federal law requires the FCC to preempt the enforcement of the offending statute, regulation, or legal requirement to the extent necessary to correct the violation. Existing federal law additionally recognizes the authority of a state or local government to manage public rights-of-way or to require fair and reasonable compensation from telecommunications providers, on a competitively neutral and nondiscriminatory basis, for the use of public rights-of-way on a nondiscriminatory basis, if the compensation required is publicly disclosed by that government. Existing federal law provides that no state or local government has the authority to regulate the entry of, or the rates charged by, a commercial mobile service, but permits a state to regulate the other terms and conditions of commercial mobile services. Under existing law, the placement or installation of certain wireless facilities, including antennas and related equipment, on or immediately adjacent to a wireless telecommunications facility, as specified, is a permitted use not subject to a city or county discretionary permit, but certain other wireless telecommunications facilities are subject to city or county discretionary permitting and are required to comply with specified criteria. This bill would provide that a small cell, as defined, is a permitted use, subject only to a specified permitting process adopted by a city or county, if the small cell meets specified requirements. By imposing new duties on local agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize a city or county to require an encroachment permit or a building permit, and any additional ministerial permits, for a small cell, as specified. The bill would authorize a city or county to charge 3 types of fees relating to these small cells: an annual charge for each small cell attached to city or county vertical infrastructure, an annual attachment rate, and a one-time reimbursement fee. The bill would require the city or county to comply with notice and hearing requirements before imposing the annual attachment rate. The bill would require an action or proceeding to challenge a fee imposed under the provisions of this bill to be commenced within 120 days of the effective date of the ordinance or resolution. This bill would require each wireless service provider, on or before July 1, 2019, and again on or before December 31, 2020, to submit a report to the Legislature specifying the number of, and geographical location by ZIP Code of, the small cells that the wireless service provider has commenced operating within the state during the 18 months preceding the date of each report. (2) Existing law requires a local publicly owned electric utility, as defined, to make available appropriate space and capacity on and in certain utility poles and related structures. Existing law requires fees adopted to cover the costs to provide this use, and the terms and conditions of access, to meet specified requirements, and specifies the manner in which these fees and terms and conditions of access may be challenged. This bill would provide that it does not authorize or impose an obligation to charge a different use fee on a local publicly owned electric utility, and does not change or remove any obligation by the owner or operator of a small cell to comply with a local publicly owned electric utility's reasonable and feasible safety, reliability, and engineering policies. (3) The Digital Infrastructure and Video Competition Act of 2006 establishes a procedure for the issuance of state franchises for the provision of video service and cable service and designates the Public Utilities Commission as the sole franchising authority for a state franchise under the act. The act requires the holder of a state franchise to pay franchise fees, as specified. The act prescribes the extent of the obligation of a holder of a state franchise to provide public, educational, and governmental access (PEG) channels, but authorizes a local entity, as defined, to establish a fee to support the costs of PEG channel facilities, in the amount of 1% of gross revenues, or more in specified circumstances. This bill would prohibit a city or county from requiring a provider of video or cable service to obtain any additional authorization or permit not described above to provide any communications services that are provided by a provider that holds a franchise pursuant to the act. The bill would prohibit a city or county from requiring the provider of video or cable service to pay any tax, fee, assessment, or other charge not authorized by the act, this bill, or other state laws. (4) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Last day to consider Governor’s veto pursuant to Joint Rule 58.5.

  2. In Senate. Consideration of Governor's veto pending.

  3. Vetoed by the Governor.

  4. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 5:30 p.m.

  5. Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 22. Noes 10. Page 2898.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.

  6. In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.

  7. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 46. Noes 16. Page 3313.) Ordered to the Senate.

  8. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  9. Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.

  10. From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 12. Noes 1.) (September 1).

  11. August 23 set for first hearing. Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  12. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  13. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 10. Noes 0.) (July 12).

  14. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on C. & C.

  15. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on C. & C. (Ayes 6. Noes 2.) (June 28).

  16. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.

  17. Referred to Coms. on L. GOV. and C. & C.

  18. In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.

  19. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 32. Noes 1. Page 1350.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  20. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  21. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 6. Noes 0. Page 1188.) (May 25).

  22. Set for hearing May 25.

  23. May 15 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  24. Set for hearing May 15.

  25. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  26. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 884.) (April 26).

  27. Set for hearing April 26.

  28. April 26 hearing postponed by committee.

  29. Set for hearing April 26.

  30. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on GOV. & F. (Ayes 11. Noes 0. Page 621.) (April 4). Re-referred to Com. on GOV. & F.

  31. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on E., U. & C.

  32. Set for hearing April 4.

  33. Referred to Coms. on E., U. & C. and GOV. & F.

  34. From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 23.

  35. Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

  • Dababneh · Cosponsor
  • Dodd · Cosponsor
  • Hueso · Primary
  • Quirk · Cosponsor

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 3 co-sponsors · 118 not signed on · 8 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Hueso

Co-sponsors (3)

  • Dababneh
  • Dodd
  • Quirk

Not signed on (118)

118 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 118 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Unfinished Business SB649 Hueso et al. Concurrence

Passed 22 Yea · 10 Nay · 8 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 20807
Democratic 2201
Total 221008
% of votes cast 55%25%0%20%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Anderson — Yea
Hertzberg — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Cannella — Yea
Dodd — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Galgiani — Not Voting
Mitchell — Not Voting
Portantino — Nay
Allen — Nay
Glazer — Nay
Hernandez — Yea
Hill — Nay
Bates — Yea
Beall — Nay
Bradford — Not Voting
Leyva — Nay
Mendoza — Not Voting
Monning — Nay
Moorlach — Not Voting
Morrell — Yea
Newman — Not Voting
Pan — Yea
Roth — Not Voting
Vidak — Yea
Wieckowski — Nay
De León — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Lara — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Fuller — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Nay
McGuire, Mike Democratic Nay
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Not Voting
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

SB 649 Hueso Senate Third Reading By QUIRK

Passed 46 Yea · 16 Nay · 17 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 3612010
Democratic 6405
Republican 4002
Total 4616017
% of votes cast 58%20%0%22%
How each member voted (79)
Member Party Vote
Acosta — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Bloom — Not Voting
Brough — Yea
Holden — Not Voting
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Low — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Mathis — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Rendon — Not Voting
Rodriguez — Yea
Thurmond — Nay
Ting — Nay
Weber — Yea
Eggman — Nay
Frazier — Yea
Gonzalez Fletcher — Yea
Burke — Yea
Fong — Yea
Salas — Yea
Gloria — Yea
Harper — Yea
Kiley — Yea
Gray — Yea
Bocanegra — Yea
Rubio — Yea
Mayes — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Medina — Yea
Melendez — Yea
Nazarian — Nay
O'Donnell — Nay
Baker — Nay
Chiu — Nay
Chávez — Yea
Cooley — Nay
Cooper — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Steinorth — Yea
Voepel — Yea
Waldron — Yea
Levine — Nay
Chau — Not Voting
Chu — Not Voting
Cunningham — Not Voting
Mullin — Not Voting
Ridley-Thomas — Nay
Wood — Not Voting
Dababneh — Yea
Daly — Yea
Friedman — Not Voting
Cristina Garcia — Nay
Eduardo Garcia — Not Voting
Jim Patterson — Yea
Mark Stone — Nay
Travis Allen — Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Not Voting
Bonta, Mia Democratic Not Voting
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Nay
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Not Voting
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Nay
Limón, Monique Democratic Not Voting
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Nay
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Nay
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Not Voting
Chen, Phillip Republican Yea
Choi, Steven S. Republican Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Not Voting
Flora, Heath Republican Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Not Voting
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended.

Passed 12 Yea · 1 Nay · 4 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 8104
Democratic 3000
Republican 1000
Total 12104
% of votes cast 71%6%0%24%
How each member voted (17)
Member Party Vote
Bigelow — Yea
Bloom — Nay
Brough — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Fong — Yea
Gonzalez Fletcher — Yea
Bocanegra — Yea
Friedman — Not Voting
Gray — Not Voting
Jones-Sawyer — Not Voting
Chau — Not Voting
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]

Passed 10 Yea · 0 Nay · 3 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 2000
Unaffiliated 7003
Republican 1000
Total 10003
% of votes cast 77%0%0%23%
How each member voted (13)
Member Party Vote
Low — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Holden — Not Voting
Obernolte — Yea
Dababneh — Yea
Rodriguez — Not Voting
Wood — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Not Voting
Jim Patterson — Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on [Communications and Conveyance]

Passed 6 Yea · 2 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 3101
Democratic 2100
Republican 1000
Total 6201
% of votes cast 67%22%0%11%
How each member voted (9)
Member Party Vote
Waldron — Yea
Ridley-Thomas — Nay
Voepel — Yea
Gonzalez Fletcher — Yea
Bloom — Not Voting
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Nay
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea

Official roll call →

3rd Reading SB649 Hueso et al.

Passed 32 Yea · 1 Nay · 7 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 28106
Democratic 4001
Total 32107
% of votes cast 80%3%0%18%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Hill — Yea
Lara — Yea
Mendoza — Yea
Monning — Not Voting
Nielsen — Yea
Wieckowski — Not Voting
Dodd — Yea
Beall — Not Voting
Newman — Not Voting
Skinner — Yea
Allen — Not Voting
Portantino — Not Voting
Atkins — Yea
Cannella — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Fuller — Yea
De León — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Hertzberg — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Moorlach — Yea
Morrell — Yea
Pan — Yea
Roth — Yea
Vidak — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Anderson — Yea
Bates — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Glazer — Nay
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Not Voting
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass

Passed 6 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 5001
Democratic 1000
Total 6001
% of votes cast 86%0%0%14%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Bates — Not Voting
Bradford — Yea
Hill — Yea
Beall — Yea
Lara — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Placed on suspense file

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 6000
Democratic 1000
Total 7000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Bates — Yea
Hill — Yea
Lara — Yea
Beall — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Governance and Finance]

Passed 11 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 3000
Unaffiliated 8000
Total 11000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (11)
Member Party Vote
Cannella — Yea
Morrell — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Hertzberg — Yea
Hill — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Vidak — Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

public-safety technology
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does SB 649 do?
(1) Existing federal law prohibits a state or local statute, regulation, or legal requirement from prohibiting an interstate or intrastate telecommunications service, but recognizes the ability of a state to impose, on a competitively neutral basis, requirements necessary to preserve and advance universal service, protect the public safety and welfare, ensure the continued quality of telecommunications services, and safeguard the rights of consumers. If the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) determines that this prohibition has been violated, existing federal law requires the FCC to preempt the enforcement of the offending statute, regulation, or legal requirement to the extent necessary to correct the violation. Existing federal law additionally recognizes the authority of a state or local government to manage public rights-of-way or to require fair and reasonable compensation from telecommunications providers, on a competitively neutral and nondiscriminatory basis, for the use of public rights-of-way on a nondiscriminatory basis, if the compensation required is publicly disclosed by that government. Existing federal law provides that no state or local government has the authority to regulate the entry of, or the rates charged by, a commercial mobile service, but permits a state to regulate the other terms and conditions of commercial mobile services. Under existing law, the placement or installation of certain wireless facilities, including antennas and related equipment, on or immediately adjacent to a wireless telecommunications facility, as specified, is a permitted use not subject to a city or county discretionary permit, but certain other wireless telecommunications facilities are subject to city or county discretionary permitting and are required to comply with specified criteria. This bill would provide that a small cell, as defined, is a permitted use, subject only to a specified permitting process adopted by a city or county, if the small cell meets specified requirements. By imposing new duties on local agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize a city or county to require an encroachment permit or a building permit, and any additional ministerial permits, for a small cell, as specified. The bill would authorize a city or county to charge 3 types of fees relating to these small cells: an annual charge for each small cell attached to city or county vertical infrastructure, an annual attachment rate, and a one-time reimbursement fee. The bill would require the city or county to comply with notice and hearing requirements before imposing the annual attachment rate. The bill would require an action or proceeding to challenge a fee imposed under the provisions of this bill to be commenced within 120 days of the effective date of the ordinance or resolution. This bill would require each wireless service provider, on or before July 1, 2019, and again on or before December 31, 2020, to submit a report to the Legislature specifying the number of, and geographical location by ZIP Code of, the small cells that the wireless service provider has commenced operating within the state during the 18 months preceding the date of each report. (2) Existing law requires a local publicly owned electric utility, as defined, to make available appropriate space and capacity on and in certain utility poles and related structures. Existing law requires fees adopted to cover the costs to provide this use, and the terms and conditions of access, to meet specified requirements, and specifies the manner in which these fees and terms and conditions of access may be challenged. This bill would provide that it does not authorize or impose an obligation to charge a different use fee on a local publicly owned electric utility, and does not change or remove any obligation by the owner or operator of a small cell to comply with a local publicly owned electric utility's reasonable and feasible safety, reliability, and engineering policies. (3) The Digital Infrastructure and Video Competition Act of 2006 establishes a procedure for the issuance of state franchises for the provision of video service and cable service and designates the Public Utilities Commission as the sole franchising authority for a state franchise under the act. The act requires the holder of a state franchise to pay franchise fees, as specified. The act prescribes the extent of the obligation of a holder of a state franchise to provide public, educational, and governmental access (PEG) channels, but authorizes a local entity, as defined, to establish a fee to support the costs of PEG channel facilities, in the amount of 1% of gross revenues, or more in specified circumstances. This bill would prohibit a city or county from requiring a provider of video or cable service to obtain any additional authorization or permit not described above to provide any communications services that are provided by a provider that holds a franchise pursuant to the act. The bill would prohibit a city or county from requiring the provider of video or cable service to pay any tax, fee, assessment, or other charge not authorized by the act, this bill, or other state laws. (4) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Who sponsors SB 649?
SB 649 is sponsored by Dababneh, Dodd, Hueso, and Quirk.
What is the current status of SB 649?
This bill died with 2017-2018 Regular Session. It reached “To Executive” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track SB 649?
Track SB 649 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 649

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of SB 649

Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →