Section 38-5.5-106 - Consent necessary for use of streets(1)(a) This article 5.5 does not authorize any telecommunications provider or broadband provider to erect, within a political subdivision, any poles or construct any communications or broadband facilities, including small cell facilities and small cell networks; conduit; cable; switch; or related appurtenances and facilities along, through, in, upon, under, or over any public highway without first obtaining the consent of the authorities having power to give the consent of the political subdivision.(b) A telecommunications provider or broadband provider that, on or before July 1, 2017, either has obtained consent of the political subdivision having power to give consent or is lawfully occupying a public highway in a political subdivision need not apply for additional or continued consent of the political subdivision under this section.(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a political subdivision's consent given to a telecommunications provider or a broadband provider to erect or construct any poles, or to locate or collocate communications and broadband facilities on vertical structures in a right-of-way, does not extend to the location of new facilities or to the erection or construction of new poles in a right-of-way not specifically referenced in the grant of consent.(2)(a) The consent of a political subdivision for the use of a public highway within its jurisdiction shall be based upon a lawful exercise of its police power and shall not be unreasonably withheld.(b) A political subdivision shall not create any preference or disadvantage through the granting or withholding of its consent. A political subdivision's decision that a vertical structure in the right-of-way, including a vertical structure owned by a municipality, lacks space or load capacity for communications or broadband facilities, or that the number of additional vertical structures in the rights-of-way should be reasonably limited, consistent with protection of public health, safety, and welfare, does not create a preference for or disadvantage any telecommunications provider or broadband provider, provided that such decision does not have the effect of prohibiting a provider's ability to provide service within the service area of the proposed facility.Amended by 2017 Ch. 143,§ 10, eff. 7/1/2017.L. 96: Entire article added, p. 301, § 1, effective April 12. L. 2017: Entire section amended, (HB 17-1193), ch. 143, p. 480, § 10, effective July 1.