CopyCited 58 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 2005 WL 3310297
...ous entities including municipalities was to "provide customers with freedom of choice, encourage the introduction of new telecommunications service, encourage technological innovation, and encourage investment in telecommunications infrastructure." § 364.01(3), Fla....
..., because the challenger must establish that no set of circumstances exists under which the statute would be valid.") We conclude that in a situation in which municipal telecommunications services do not promote any of the goals set forth above from section 364.01, Florida Statutes, for the benefit of the municipal population, property used to provide those services does not serve "municipal or public purposes" and therefore is not exempt *266 from ad valorem taxation under article VII, section 3(a)....
...New Orleans to Offer Free Wireless Internet Citywide, Gainesville Sun, Nov. 30, 2005, at 9B. [17] The majority notes that telecommunications services have historically been provided by the private sector and that, furthermore, since municipalities are not required to further one of the goals stated in section 364.01(3), Florida Statutes (2004), this serves as additional evidence that their participation in the market does not serve a "municipal purpose." Majority op....
CopyCited 44 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 1994 WL 70104
...d by the audit team. As the regulating body for telecommunications companies, the PSC is charged with ensuring that a company's non-regulated activities are not subsidized by ratepayers, the company's regulated rates, or by a company's affiliates. §§
364.01 and
364.183, Fla....
...ent." In re Fischel,
557 F.2d 209, 211 (9th Cir.1977). The "broad view," on the other hand, considers virtually all communication from an attorney to a client to be privileged. Jack Winter, Inc. v. Koratron Co., 54 F.R.D. 44, 46 (N.D.Cal. 1971). [8] Section
364.01(3), Florida Statutes, (1991) provides in pertinent part: (3) The commission shall exercise its exclusive jurisdiction in order to: (a) Protect the public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring that basic telecommunications services are available to all residents of the state at reasonable and affordable prices....
CopyCited 43 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 2007 WL 2492349
...SCthat the PSC is invested with discretion to determine what amount of storm recovery costs are reasonable to be charged to the consumer. Support for the PSC's interpretation is also found in a related statutory provision contained in chapter 364. Section 364.01(4)(a), Florida Statutes (2005), requires *788 the PSC to "[p]rotect the public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring that basic local telecommunications services are available to all consumers in the state at reasonable and affordabl...
...to protect consumers, in part, by ensuring the availability of telecommunications services at reasonable prices. This Court has previously recognized that the PSC's authority vis-a-vis ILECs derives in part from the legislative mandate contained in section 364.01(4)(a)....
...of the PSC's authority in matters involving price-capped companies. As we explained in GTC, other provisions in chapter 364 support the conclusion that the Legislature intended for the PSC to retain certain powers with respect to ILECs: For example, section 364.01 still gives the Commission broad regulatory powers with regard to the telecommunications industry. See § 364.01(2), Fla....
...forth in this chapter to the Florida Public Service Commission in regulating telecommunications companies, and such preemption shall supersede any local or special act or municipal charter where any conflict of authority may exist."). Additionally, section 364.01(4)(a)-(i) defines the Commission's scope of authority, including the power to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, the power to promote competition, and the power to "[e]liminate any rules and/or regulations which will delay...
...omoting competition and eliminating anti-competition rules) were added by the 1995 legislature. See ch. 95-403, § 5, Laws of Fla. Importantly, nothing within section 364.051 indicates that price-regulated companies are exempt from the provisions in section 364.01. Id. at 458 (emphasis supplied). In this case, reading section 364.01(4)(a) (the PSC shall exercise its jurisdiction to ensure telecommunications services are available at reasonable prices) together with section 364.051(4)(b)(3) (the PSC shall determine whether the costs are reasonable under the circums...
...b) that prevents consumers from paying twiceonce for all those costs *790 and expenses normally covered by their regular rates and once again for the same costs and expenses in a line-item storm recovery surchargefalls within the overall goal of section 364.01(4)(a)....
...s burden of showing that the PSC's construction of section 364.051(4)(b) is clearly unauthorized or erroneous or that the determinations by the PSC are not based upon competent, substantial evidence. The PSC is required by sections 364.051(4)(b) and 364.01(1)(4)(a) to consider the reasonableness of the cost of services to the consumers when making decisions that relate to rates or services, as it has done in the order under review....
CopyCited 27 times | Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 10837, 2001 WL 567711
...address each relevant section of each ordinance in turn, reserving judgment on the preemption of the
ordinances as a whole until both state and federal preemption analyses have been completed.
A. Preemption by Florida State Law
Under Florida Statutes § 364.01(2), the Florida Public Service Commission ("FPSC") has jurisdiction
over the regulation of telecommunications companies within the state....
...em as the City
may from time to time issue, including requests for information regarding its plans for construction, operation
and repair and the purposes for which the plant is being constructed, operated or repaired." As stated
previously, under §
364.01(2), local governments are preempted from regulating telecommunications
companies except to the extent provided in §
337.401....
CopyCited 22 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 184, 30 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 205
...This statute does not contain language similar to the phrase, "It is the legislative intent to give exclusive jurisdiction in all matters set forth in this chapter" language that has been held to establish a level of preemption in the field of telecommunication companies. See § 364.01, Fla....
CopyCited 19 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 1974 Fla. LEXIS 4355
...held that the matter was one within the exclusive jurisdiction of the PSC; hence, it impliedly held that the circuit court was without jurisdiction. This was in error. Although such a determination is understandable in view of the provisions of F.S. § 364.01(2), F.S.A....
CopyCited 15 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1994 WL 101078
...Florida Restaurant Ass'n,
603 So.2d 587, 590 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). Implied preemption occurs if a legislative scheme is so pervasive that it occupies the entire field, creating a danger of conflict between local and state laws. Id. at 590-91. In our judgment, section
364.01(2), Florida Statutes (1989), provides an express preemption from county regulation of telephone utilities by stating the following: It is the legislative intent to give exclusive jurisdiction in all matters set forth in this chapter to...
CopyCited 13 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 28 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 191, 2003 Fla. LEXIS 272, 2003 WL 747419
...PSC's decision will be afforded deference. At issue is whether the PSC has the authority to collect regulatory assessment fees on the collocation revenues of Level 3. The PSC has exclusive jurisdiction to regulate telecommunications of Florida. See § 364.01, Fla....
...Level 3 cites section 364.337 for support of its argument. This statute, which pertains to ALECs, provides in pertinent part: (2) Rules adopted by the commission governing the provision of alternative local exchange telecommunications service shall be consistent with s. 364.01.......
...f regulatory fees to a specific service. Level 3's argument that the PSC has limited authority over ALECs ignores the numerous statutes which give the PSC authority over a variety of activities of all local telecommunications providers. For example, section 364.01(4) gives the PSC broad regulatory powers over the telecommunications industry. See § 364.01(4), Fla....
CopyCited 10 times | Published | District Court, S.D. Florida | 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1808, 1999 WL 149769
...[3] (Cited with approval in City of Dallas,
8 F.Supp.2d at 591-92.) B. State Law The State of Florida has generally delegated power over telecommunication companies to the Public Service Commission ("PSC"), a statewide administrative agency. Fla. Stat. §
364.01. This exclusive jurisdiction of the PSC preempts local control over telecommunication companies, except for the regulation of use of rights-of-way and collection of a reasonable fee for the use thereof. Fla. Stat. §
364.01(2); Fla....
CopyCited 8 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 2007 WL 3170111
...2d DCA 2005) ("Express preemption of a field by *645 the legislature must be accomplished by clear language stating that intent."); Santa Rosa County v. Gulf Power Co.,
635 So.2d 96, 101 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (finding express preemption based on the following language of section
364.01(2), Florida Statutes (1989): "It is the legislative intent to give exclusive jurisdiction in all matters set forth in this chapter to the Florida Public Service Commission....
CopyCited 8 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 1996 WL 473317
...[2] Chapter 364, which regulates telecommunications companies, was extensively amended by the legislature in 1995. See ch. 95-403, Laws of Fla. The legislature found "the competitive provision of telecommunications services, including local exchange telecommunications service" to be in the public interest. § 364.01(3), Fla....
...Under the revised law, local exchange telecommunications services will be provided competitively rather than on a monopoly basis. Id. Under this new scheme, the Commission is charged with exercising its exclusive jurisdiction in order to encourage and promote competition in telecommunications services. Id. § 364.01(4)....
CopyCited 8 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 19 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 180, 1994 Fla. LEXIS 488, 1994 WL 124312
...The FCTA's narrow reading of legislative intent fails to see the forest for the trees. Although fostering telecommunications competition in the public interest is one purpose of chapter 364, the Commission has a broader, overall duty to regulate. See § 364.01(3)(a)-(f), Fla....
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 2004 WL 2051837
...al evidence. The following sections address the specific arguments raised by Verizon and Sprint. A. Authority Under Florida Law In the order below, the Commission stated that its authority to provide a definition of a local calling area derives from section 364.01(4)(b), (g), and (i), Florida Statutes (2002), which provides: The commission shall exercise its exclusive jurisdiction[ [7] ] in order to: .......
...Beard,
624 So.2d 248, 251 (Fla.1993), wherein this Court stated: By giving the Commission exclusive jurisdiction over telecommunications services, the Legislature has provided *292 the Commission with broad authority to regulate telephone companies.... The exclusive jurisdiction in section
364.01 to regulate telecommunications gives the Commission the authority to determine local routes....
...arbitration cases between carriers and some finality was necessary to avoid the issue being litigated multiple times, it decided to establish a default definition that was as competitively neutral as possible. Sprint and Verizon, however, argue that section
364.01(4) provides only a general pronouncement of legislative intent and that sections
364.16(3)(a) and
364.163, Florida Statutes (2002), [8] more specifically prohibit the Commission's action....
...adjust access charges and to prevent a diminution of access revenues to which ILECs are entitled. Sprint and Verizon argue that the specific provisions within sections
364.16(3)(a) and
364.163, therefore, must control over the general provisions of section
364.01(4)....
...However, what future actions ALECs may or may not take as a result of the Commission's order does not affect the Commission's jurisdiction to enter the order. [9] We agree with the Commission *293 that the Commission's broad authority to regulate telephone companies under section 364.01 provides the Commission with jurisdiction to enter an order that sets out the default provision....
...1999 Amendments to APA Next, Verizon argues that the Legislature's 1999 amendments to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), providing that agencies may adopt those rules that implement or interpret the specific powers and duties granted by the Legislature, overrules this Court's holding in Beard that section 364.01 provides broad authority to the Commission to adopt rules regulating telecommunications. However, we find this argument procedurally barred as it was not raised below. C. The FCC's Local Competition Order In addition to relying upon section 364.01 for authority, the Commission stated in its order: Furthermore, [paragraph 1035 of the local competition order] appears unequivocal in granting authority to state commissions to determine what geographic areas should be considered "loc...
...two carriers collaborate to complete a local call. In this case, the local caller pays charges for the originating carrier, and the originating carrier must compensate the terminating carrier for completing the call. Id. 1034 (footnote omitted). [7] Section
364.01(2) states, "It is the legislative intent to give exclusive jurisdiction in all matters set forth in this chapter to the Florida Public Service Commission in regulating telecommunications companies...." [8] Section
364.16(3)(a), Florida...
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 2005 WL 1577998
...events the creation of a *430 more attractive competitive local exchange market for the benefit of residential consumers," § 364.164(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2003), and "[i]nduce enhanced market entry." § 364.164(1)(b), Fla. Stat. (2003). Further, under section 364.01(4)(a), the Commission has an ongoing duty to "ensur[e] that basic local telecommunications services are available to all consumers in the state at reasonable and affordable prices." § 364.01(4)(a), Fla....
...Subsequently, the Commission entered an order on the Attorney General's and the AARP's motions for reconsideration, restating its conclusion that the petitions satisfy the provisions and mandate of section 364.164 and rejecting the argument that it failed to consider section 364.01(4)(a)'s mandate to ensure reasonable and affordable basic local telecommunications rates....
..."This Court will approve the commission's findings and conclusions if they are based upon competent, substantial evidence and are not clearly erroneous." Id. ANALYSIS At issue in this appeal is whether the Commission has acted in accord with the legislative mandates of sections 364.01 and 364.164, and whether there is competent, substantial evidence supporting the Commission's conclusion that the petitions satisfy sections 364.01(4)(a) and 364.164(1)(a) and (b)....
...BENEFIT We also conclude that the Commission acted within the bounds of its authority and discretion in construing the term "benefit," which is not specifically defined in chapter 364, Florida Statutes (2003), but is referred to in the legislation's policy language and statements of purpose. See § 364.01(3), (4)(b),(e)....
...Boccucci, the creation of section 364.164 was a significant factor inducing Knology's entry into Pinellas County's local market. Mr. Boccucci projected that "[i]f rate rebalancing is implemented, Knology has every intention to expand and compete further in Florida." Section 364.01(4)(a) Finally, we conclude that the Commission acted within the bounds of its authority and discretion in determining that "granting the petitions is consistent with the requirement [of section 364.01(4)(a)] to ensure that basic local service is available at reasonable and affordable prices." [5] *433 The Commission points to the testimony of Drs....
...will preserve reasonable and affordable rates for basic local telecommunications services despite the rate increases granted by the Commission. CONCLUSION In conclusion, we find that the Commission's determination that the petitions satisfy sections 364.01(4)(a) and 364.164(1)(a) and (b) is not clearly erroneous and is supported by competent, substantial record evidence....
...Service Commission's order granting the ILECs' petitions to reduce intrastate switched network access rates, I write separately to acknowledge that which is, in my view, undeniable tension and resulting conflict between section 364.164(1)(a)-(b) and section 364.01(4)(a) of the Florida Statutes....
...At the root of the conflict is the implementation of an underlying policy decision that section 364.164(1)(a)-(b) contemplates and will generate a universe of consumer "benefits" that is broader than the simple price and affordability construct that drives section 364.01(4)(a). Section 364.01(4)(a) reiterates the PSC's ongoing duty to ensure that basic local phone service is available to all of Florida's citizens at reasonable and affordable prices....
...ease in the rates for local telecommunications services. In some circumstances, such increases will, most assuredly, negatively impact the affordability of basic local telecommunications services for certain of Florida's citizens in contravention of section 364.01(4)(a). However apparent and inevitable the clash between section 364.164(1)(a)-(b) and section 364.01(4)(a) may be, it is not one this Court is institutionally empowered to address....
...Brian Staihr, senior regulatory economist at Sprint, testified that as a result of a grant "more customers will be offered more choices." [4] Mr. John Ruscilli, a senior director at Bell-South, agreed that the granting of the relief sought in the petitions will result in decreased long distance rates. [5] Section 364.01(4)(a) provides: (4) The commission shall exercise its exclusive jurisdiction in order to: (a) Protect the public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring that basic local telecommunications services are available to all consumers in the state at reasonable and affordable prices....
CopyCited 4 times | Published | District Court, S.D. Florida | 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16904, 1999 WL 33229296
...[4] (Cited with approval in City of Dallas,
8 F.Supp.2d at 591-92.) B. State Law The State of Florida has generally delegated power over telecommunication companies to the Public Service Commission ("PSC"), a statewide administrative agency. Fla. Stat. §
364.01. This exclusive jurisdiction of the PSC preempts local control over telecommunication companies, except for the regulation of use of rights-of-way and collection of a reasonable fee for the use thereof. Fla. Stat. §
364.01(2); Fla....
CopyCited 4 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2007 WL 1319256
...As stated above, in a facial constitutional challenge, we determine only whether there is any set of circumstances under which the challenged enactment might be upheld. . . . We conclude that in a situation in which municipal telecommunications services do not promote any of the goals set forth above from section 364.01, Florida Statutes, for the benefit of the municipal population, property used to provide those services does not serve "municipal or public purposes" and therefore is not exempt from ad valorem taxation under article VII, section 3(a)....
CopyCited 4 times | Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 2699
...Before WILSON and FAY, Circuit Judges, and MILLS * , District Judge. FAY, Circuit Judge: 1 This appeal presents primarily three questions: (1) whether the Florida Public Service Commission has exclusive jurisdiction over the regulation of pay phones located on private property under section 364.01, Florida Statutes; (2) whether a municipality has jurisdiction to regulate pay phones located in the public rights-of-way under section 364.01, Florida Statutes; and (3) if a municipality can regulate pay phones located in the public rights-of-way, then what constitutes a reasonable and non-discriminatory regulation related thereto....
...e location of pay phones located on private property in the enabling statute. A reading of the enabling statute shows that the Florida Legislature granted to the FPSC broad and exclusive powers to regulate telecommunications companies. Specifically, section 364.01, Florida Statutes grants to FPSC the exclusive jurisdiction over the regulation of telecommunications companies within Florida....
...ch broad powers but only very specific and limited powers. We find no merit in this argument about the extent of the enabling statute in this case. 12 It is also clear that the limitations to this broad authority are very specific. In relevant part, section 364.01(2), Florida Statutes provides that: 13 It is the legislative intent to give exclusive jurisdiction in all matters set forth in this chapter to the Florida Public Service Commission in regulating telecommunications companies, and such p...
...It claims that the FPSC has exclusive jurisdiction over telecommunications companies which includes the regulation of telecommunications companies' facilities located on either private or public property. The district court ruled that the Right-of-Way Ordinance was not preempted by section 364.01(4), Florida Statutes, because Miami Beach as a municipality, was expressly granted the right to regulate facilities located in its roads and the public rights-of-way including telecommunications companies' facilities. We agree. As discussed above, under section 364.01(2), Florida Statutes, local governments retain jurisdiction to manage their roads and the public rights-of-way....
CopyCited 4 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2007 WL 437219
...ed by the private sector. Id. at 264-65. The court further pointed out that although the Legislature's reason for opening telecommunications services to competition by various entities, including municipalities, was to promote the goals set forth in section 364.01(3), Florida Statutes, [3] municipalities can enter a market in which a high level of service and competition already exists without furthering any of those goals....
...Contrary to Gainesville II, the trial court erroneously concluded that the City's use of the fiber optic network and internet equipment to provide telecommunications services to the public served municipal or public purposes as a matter of law without considering whether the services promoted the goals set forth in section 364.01(3)....
...[4] In its first issue on appeal, the City argues that the trial court erred in finding its communication towers subject to ad valorem taxation. According to the City, the towers were exempt pursuant to Gainesville II because they were used to provide telecommunication services that promoted the goals of section 364.01(3), Florida Statutes....
...[2] Article VIII, section 2(b) provides in part, "Municipalities shall have governmental, corporate and proprietary powers to enable them to conduct municipal government, perform municipal functions and render municipal services, and may exercise any power for municipal purposes except as otherwise provided by law." [3] Section 364.01(3), Florida Statutes (2002), provides in part, "The Legislature finds that the competitive provision of telecommunications services, including local exchange telecommunications service, is in the public interest and will provide custom...
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 1993 WL 365714
...We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(2) of the Florida Constitution. For the reasons expressed below, we uphold the classification of the routes as local under the Commission's exclusive jurisdiction to regulate telecommunication common carriers. § 364.01(2), Fla....
...l, regardless of the call's duration, and business customers ten cents per minute for the initial minute and six cents for each additional minute per call. The Commission treated this as local service, which generally does not allow competition. See § 364.01(3)(b), Fla....
...Thus, GTEFL's application does not fall under the "new certificate" scope of section
364.335. Therefore, we hold that the Commission erred in using section
364.335 to restrict competition over the Extended Calling Service area. We find, however, that section
364.01, Florida Statutes (1991), gives the Commission exclusive jurisdiction to regulate telecommunications. [2] The Commission's jurisdiction extends over both the rates charged by telecommunications companies and the services the companies provide. See §
364.01(3)(a), (b), (c), and (e), Fla....
...The statute directs the Commission to exercise its exclusive jurisdiction to "[p]rotect the public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring that basic telecommunications services are available to all residents of the state at reasonable and affordable prices," § 364.01(3)(a), and to ensure that "monopoly services provided by a local exchange telecommunications company continue to be subject to effective rate and service regulation." § 364.01(3)(b)....
...By giving the Commission exclusive jurisdiction over telecommunications services, the Legislature has provided the Commission with broad authority to regulate telephone companies. Thus, it was not necessary for the Commission to rely on section
364.335 to reclassify the GTEFL tariff. The exclusive jurisdiction in section
364.01 to regulate telecommunications gives the Commission the authority to determine local routes....
...in providing service in the areas affected by Order No. 25708. Therefore, the Commission was not obligated to follow the administrative procedures required to revoke a license. See §
120.60(7), Florida Statutes (1991). The exclusive jurisdiction in section
364.01 gives the Commission the authority to determine local calling routes based on the needs of the community....
...364.3375, or private line service by a certified alternative access vendor, without determining that existing facilities are inadequate to meet the reasonable needs of the public and without amending the certificate of another telecommunications company to remove the basis for competition or duplication of services. [2] Section 364.01(2), Florida Statutes (1991), provides in pertinent part: It is the legislative intent to give exclusive jurisdiction in all matters set forth in this chapter to the Florida Public Service Commission in regulating telecommunications common carriers......
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 2000 WL 33381431
...ded to be temporary. The Commission argues further that neither the statutes nor the legislative history to the statutes guarantee GTC the revenues it was receiving at the time it elected price-cap regulation. Moreover, the Commission maintains that section 364.01(3) grants it regulatory oversight to promote the development of fair and effective competition, and thus it has the authority to terminate the subsidy....
...e telecommunication companies, including those companies who no longer operate under rate of return regulation. Several statutory provisions, which were not altered by the Legislature during the 1995 amendments, support this conclusion. For example, section 364.01 still gives the Commission broad regulatory powers with regard to the telecommunications industry. See § 364.01(2), Fla....
...forth in this chapter to the Florida Public Service Commission in regulating telecommunications companies, and such preemption shall supersede any local or special act or municipal charter where any conflict of authority may exist."). Additionally, section 364.01(4)(a)-(i) defines the Commission's scope of authority, including the power to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, the power to promote competition, and the power to "[e]liminate any rules and/or regulations which will delay...
...omoting competition and eliminating anti-competition rules) were added by the 1995 legislature. See ch. 95-403, § 5, Laws of Fla. Importantly, nothing within section 364.051 indicates that price-regulated companies are exempt from the provisions in section 364.01....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 2004 WL 1944461
...In re Investigation into Pricing of Unbundled Network Elements, order at 67-68. We emphasize that the Commission's statutory mandate is the establishment of reasonable rates, and on this record we conclude that the Commission's adoption of the ICM-FL model is acceptable. See 47 C.F.R. § 51.505; § 364.01(4)(a), Fla....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
...h relevant section of each ordinance
in turn, reserving judgment on the preemption of the ordinances as a whole until
both state and federal preemption analyses have been completed.
A. Preemption by Florida State Law
Under Florida Statutes § 364.01(2), the Florida Public Service Commission
(“FPSC”) has jurisdiction over the regulation of telecommunications companies
within the state....
...its system and plans for the system as the City may from time to time issue,
including requests for information regarding its plans for construction, operation
and repair and the purposes for which the plant is being constructed, operated or
repaired.” As stated previously, under §
364.01(2), local governments are
preempted from regulating telecommunications companies except to the extent
provided in §
337.401....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | District Court, S.D. Florida | 1981 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12322
...These counts are strictly actions at law and do not contain prayers for equitable relief. [2] The Court notes that there is a question as to whether Plaintiff's claim for declaratory relief should be brought in the courts or before the Public Service Commission. See Fla.Stat. 364.01; Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Co....
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida | 22 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 283, 1997 Fla. LEXIS 685
...s power to remedy such a situation. Thus, section 364.14 cannot serve as authority for the PSC’s decision to order transfer of title in the wire. Nevertheless, we do find that the PSC was authorized to order the transfer of ownership of the wire. Section 364.01(3)(a), *309 Florida Statutes (1993), charges the PSC with exercising its exclusive jurisdiction in order to “[pjrotect the public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring that basic telecommunications services are available to all res...
...communications service to the residents of Regency Towers pending the outcome of the circuit court action. This is especially true where RTOA is no longer paying for use of the wire. We therefore conclude that the PSC had the implied authority under section 364.01(3)(a) to order the transfer of title....
CopyAgo (Fla. Att'y Gen. 1996).
Published | Florida Attorney General Reports
substantially the following question: Does section
364.01, Florida Statutes, preclude a municipality
CopyPublished | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 8754, 2002 WL 1369550
...After a hearing on both motions, the trial court denied the county’s summary judgment motion and granted BellSouth’s motion for partial summary judgment. The court determined that Broward County did not have the authority to impose the annual occupancy fee under state law. The court first examined section 364.01(2), Florida Statutes (1999), which reads: It is the legislative intent to give exclusive jurisdiction in all matters set forth in this chapter to the Florida Public Service Commission in regulating telecommunications companies, and suc...
CopyPublished | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | 2003 WL 302103
FAY, Circuit Judge: This appeal presents primarily three questions: (1) whether the Florida Public Service Commission has exclusive jurisdiction over the regulation of pay phones located on private property under section 364.01, Florida Statutes; (2) whether a municipality has jurisdiction to regulate pay phones located in the public rights-of-way under section 364.01, Florida Statutes; and (3) if a municipality can regulate pay phones located in the public rights-of-way, then what constitutes a reasonable and non-discriminatory regulation related thereto....
...ay phones located on private property in the enabling statute. A reading of the enabling statute shows that the Florida Legislature granted to the FPSC broad and exclusive powers to regulate telecommunications companies. Specifically, sec *1050 tion 364.01, Florida Statutes grants to FPSC the exclusive jurisdiction over the regulation of telecommunications companies within Florida....
...such broad powers but only very specific and limited powers. We find no merit in this argument about the extent of the enabling statute in this case. It is also clear that the limitations to this broad authority are very specific. In relevant part, section 364.01(2), Florida Statutes provides that: It is the legislative intent to give exclusive jurisdiction in all matters set forth in this chapter to the Florida Public Service Commission in regulating telecommunications companies, and such pree...
...It claims that the FPSC has exclusive jurisdiction over telecommunications companies which includes the regulation of telecommunications companies’ facilities located on either private or public property. The district court ruled that the Right-of-Way Ordinance was not preempted by section 364.01(4), Florida Statutes, because Miami Beach as a municipality, was expressly granted the right to regulate facilities lo *1051 cated in its roads and the public rights-of-way including telecommunications companies’ facilities. We agree. As discussed above, under section 364.01(2), Florida Statutes, local governments retain jurisdiction to manage their roads and the public rights-of-way....
