11/13/1996 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Editorial: Wireless Update Scoops RCR with the Gwinnett County Lawsuit Wireless Update first heard about the Bell South Mobility v. Gwinnett County lawsuit in June 19% and jumped right on it. Wireless Update readers alerted its readers to this case in the July issue, fully discussed the issues in the August issue and analyzed the decision in the September issue. This case was important because the decision was based solely on procedure and not on substance. Imagine our surprise, then, to rea:. bout Gwinnett in the October 21,1996 issue of RCR. Why did this case — which should be the champion of the industry — take four months to come to the industry's attention? Before you wonder, "who cares?" please consider the following. Wireless deployment is a brand new ball game. The carriers are giving it the best shot they can, but their emphasis is on time. Cities and counties, on the other hand, have seen applicants in a hurry before. Wireless Update sees it this way: • There will be a flurry of litigation, not all of which makes case law, but some of which will influence the way things get done. • Telecommunications attorneys will lead the way, and they are expert in filing ex parte briefs, normally before commissions such as the FCC and those that regulate utilities in the 50 states. • However, local government is still trying to figure out whether this wireless phenomenon calls for land use, environmental or infrastructure law ... or all three. • Cases like Medina (June & July Wireless Update) and Baldwin (this issue of Wireless Update) are really just sorting out the way courts view wireless planning. Gwinnett, on the other hand, is a completely new issue: the Telecommunications Act of 1996 requires written substantial evidence in a denial of a cell site and, because the judge found that Gwinnett didn't provide that evidence, he overturned the County's denial. Wireless Update understands that we are all learning how to deal with this increasingly frenzied pace of meeting time commitments to approve or deny. As — Kreines & Kreines, Inc. - Consultants to Cities & Counties on Planning for Personal Wireless Facilities 58 Paseo Mirasol Tiburon, CA 94920 11 NOVEMBER 13, 1996 frustration builds, some harried applicants may turn to the courts for remedies. Wireless Update will let cities and counties know first what litigation is pending and how that may affect local government decisions. November is for Giving Thanks When Wireless Update sent its first issue out to 100 prospective subscribers and potential clients last March, we had no idea that we would find so many interested readers in eight months' time. We are thankful for your interest and your'votes of confidence. As the holidays draw near, many Wireless Update readers will take trips to other parts of the country. While visiting other regions, take a look at how their cities and counties are approving personal wireless facilities. We have much to learn from each other, even if it's how not to do something next time. Wireless Update wishes its readers a Happy Thanksgiving. And thanks for being a loyal reader. Windsor, Connecticut Holds a Workshop Kreines & Kreines, Inc. traveled to hold a workshop in the Town of Windsor, the oldest town in Connecticut, which happens to have a strategic location between the City of Hartford and Bradley International Airport. Not only is this town careful about the way it looks, it happens to be very successful in economic development. Most cities and counties active in economic development fear over -regulation of wireless, but Economic Development Director Harry Freeman takes a different approach: "If I can't offer a quality environment to prospective tenants, they'll go elsewhere." Planning Director Mario Zavarella, AICP, noted that the process of wireless planning might take a little longer at first, but if Windsor plans, the result is likely to come sooner for all carriers and the outcome will be appreciated by all. Connecticut is a particularly difficult state within which to plan for cell sites because there is a Connecticut Siting Council that actually can pre-empt local government. Stay tuned and VWreless Update will keep its readers apprised. BOOK 99 PAU 820