Telecommunications Mandatory Access
BOMA St. Louis and BOMA International are opposed to any form of mandatory access legislation for the following reasons:
- Marketplace Is Competitive And Working
Studies have documented that for apartment and office buildings to remain competitive in today's marketplace, they must offer tenants not only a wide array of telecommunications services, but also an array of choices in telecommunications service providers. Such a marketplace does not need government-mandated access; telecommunications competition is alive and thriving.
- Proposals are Unconstitutional
While tenants may rely upon the marketplace to ensure their rights are protected, building owners will look to the U.S. and Missouri Constitutions for our defense. The U.S. Supreme Court in Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan, 458 U.S. 420 (1982), established for all times that any regulation allowing a telecommunications provider to emplace its cables in, on, or over a private multi-tenant building is a governmental taking.
- No Active States Today
More than 30 states have rejected mandatory access legislation. The only two states that have adopted forced access rules in the past six years are Massachusetts and Texas. The Massachusetts rules were overturned as unconstitutional and the Texas rules are being challenged today in court.