Summary of Comments on Wireless Expansion Plan Draft

 

·         Request to move December 9 meeting to either December 7 or December 12

 

·         Concerns about $55 million budget:

o        The build out area may be over estimated (e.g., Baxter State Part and Allagash Waterway should not have cellular service). 

o        Landline area is not the best proxy for area to be served by wireless carriers – it should be driven by roadways and population.

 

·         Concerns about proposed USF expansion

o        Additional tax may be significant for some customers and may dampen market demand.

o        It is potentially anti-competitive

o        If USF goes to non-eligible telecommunications carriers it would violate federal law

o        The purpose of USF is to support affordable access to the public switched network for households who would otherwise not have access – the proposed use would violate that purpose.

o        It should be clear that funding wireless expansion may include on-going operating expenses, in addition to the capital expenses.

 

·         Bonds and tax incentives should be considered to supplement or replace the proposed USF.

 

·         The goal of wireless coverage for 100% of Maine Communities by 2008 is not possible and should be revised.

 

·         View shed analysis requirements should be a determined by the local zoning authority

 

·         A statewide land value appraisal study is too large – a representative sample would be sufficient (page 6)

 

·         A Wireless Oversight Committee should be established

 

·         Extreme caution must be exercised in this process:  The TISC should

 

o        Further consider the ongoing investment plans private industry will likely make to improve wireless coverage in Maine, to better define the areas less likely to receive coverage absent government intervention.

o        Strengthen the methodology being used to identify the infrastructure requirements for this initiative and resulting budget development.

o        More fully consider the resulting impacts that may result from implementing public policy recommendations.

o        Better evaluate the pros and cons of alternative incentive approaches that can be used to support infrastructure build out to areas that otherwise would be left without coverage due to poor market economics.

 

·         The growth management statue (30-A §4326) should be amended to include a 12^th area of planning concern: wireless and broadband expansion.

 

·         The fall zone recommendations should be clarified.

 

·         Consider offering incentives to communities to site a tower.