Comments on: Wireless Industry Attorney Disregards Public Concerns,Promotes Misleading Documentation,Asks for County Approval “Because of the Law” http://sunroomdesk.com/2009/06/25/wireless-industry-attorney-disregards-public-concernspromotes-misleading-documentationasks-for-county-approval-because-of-the-law/ A Glendale, California Outlook Sat, 11 Feb 2012 03:34:28 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Doug Loranger http://sunroomdesk.com/2009/06/25/wireless-industry-attorney-disregards-public-concernspromotes-misleading-documentationasks-for-county-approval-because-of-the-law/comment-page-1/#comment-453 Doug Loranger Thu, 25 Jun 2009 18:23:38 +0000 http://sunroomdesk.com/?p=2178#comment-453 In addition to pushing for change in the State and federal laws that unfairly favor the wireless industry in these types of situations, it's also important to educate local government officials about the extent to which the law is on their side in this issue, namely that the Telecommunications Act of 1996 does preserve local zoning authority to regulate wireless facilities (with the exceptions relating to health, significant gaps in coverage, and unreasonable discrimination, among others, that communities are all-too-familiar with). The evidence, arguments and testimony presented by residents before the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors on June 23 are an excellent example of using the County's existing planning and zoning codes to make a convincing case why this facility should not be approved at the location T-Mobile had chosen. Other communities can use this general approach as a model as well because – to paraphrase T-Mobile's Mr. Flynn – it's the law. In addition to pushing for change in the State and federal laws that unfairly favor the wireless industry in these types of situations, it’s also important to educate local government officials about the extent to which the law is on their side in this issue, namely that the Telecommunications Act of 1996 does preserve local zoning authority to regulate wireless facilities (with the exceptions relating to health, significant gaps in coverage, and unreasonable discrimination, among others, that communities are all-too-familiar with).

The evidence, arguments and testimony presented by residents before the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors on June 23 are an excellent example of using the County’s existing planning and zoning codes to make a convincing case why this facility should not be approved at the location T-Mobile had chosen. Other communities can use this general approach as a model as well because – to paraphrase T-Mobile’s Mr. Flynn – it’s the law.

]]>