ARCHIVED - Telecom Commission Letter Addressed to Matt Lonsdale (Law Department, City of Calgary)

This page has been archived on the Web

Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. Archived Decisions, Notices and Orders (DNOs) remain in effect except to the extent they are amended or reversed by the Commission, a court, or the government. The text of archived information has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Changes to DNOs are published as “dashes” to the original DNO number. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats by contacting us.

Ottawa, 26 January 2017

Our reference: 8690-C126-201612250


Mr. Matt Lonsdale
Legal Counsel
City of Calgary
Law Department,
P.O Box 2100 Stn. M
Calgary, Alberta  T2P 2M5

RE: Application for Determinations and Approvals re: Municipal Consent by the City of Calgary – Request for a suspension or extension

Dear Mr. Lonsdale:

On 28 November 2016, the City of Calgary (Calgary) filed an application requesting that the Commission make certain determinations concerning the access and use of municipal rights-of-way (ROW) by telecommunications service providers pursuant to its ROW Bylaw and its proposed Municipal Consent and Access Agreement (MCAA)  (the Application).

By letter dated 23 January 2017, Bell Canada, Rogers Communications, Shaw Communications Inc., TELUS Communications Company and Zayo Canada (collectively, the Carriers), advised the Commission that they intend to file in February 2017 an application with the Alberta Court of Queens’ Bench (the Alberta Court) to challenge the constitutional validity of  Calgary’s ROW Bylaw. Consequently, the Carriers requested that the Commission suspend consideration of the Application while the related constitutional issues are before the courts; subject, however, to the ability of any party to file a procedural request to resume consideration of the Application.

In the alternative, the Carriers requested that, should the Commission determine that adjournment of the Application is not appropriate, an extension of time be granted to file comments in response to the Application of 30 days from the date of any such determination or from the date its constitutional challenge has been filed in the Alberta Court, whichever occurs first. The Carriers were of the view that as the ROW Bylaw is not meant to come into effect before 1 January 2018, such an extension would not be prejudicial to any party.

Calgary has requested that it be given until 21 February 2017 to file its reply due to the nature of the issues raised by the request and the availability of Calgary’s counsel.

In the circumstances, Calgary and any other interested party may, by 21 February 2017, file its response only with respect to the Carriers’ procedural request that the Commission suspend consideration of the Application for the time being or alternatively, extend the timelines for filing comments in response to the 28 November 2016 Application, and serve a copy of such submissions on the Carriers.  The Carriers may, by 27 February 2017, file a reply and serve a copy on Calgary and any other interested party.

In view of the above, the date of 31 January 2017 for the filing of interventions and answers to the Application issuspended pending the Commission’s ruling on the Carriers’ procedural request.


Original signed by

Michel Murray
Director, Dispute Resolution and Regulatory Implementation
Telecommunications Sector

c.c.:  Jesslyn Mullaney, CRTC, 819-953-5255,
Bell Canada,
Rogers Communications,
Shaw Communications Inc.,
TELUS Communications Company,
Zayo Canada,
The Federation of Canadian Municipalities,

Date modified: