WASHINGTON-The Vermont congressional delegation last week applauded Federal Communications Commission Chairman Bill Kennard’s rejection-for now-of federal pre-emption of local zoning regulation, but vowed to continue fighting for legislation to overturn antenna siting provisions of the 1996 telecom act.
At the same time, it was announced that Kennard will visit Vermont March 9 to participate in a community forum on telecom towers at the town hall in Hardwick. Hardwick is 30 miles north of Montpelier, the state capital. Vermont Gov. Howard Dean previously invited Kennard to the state.
“This is a breakthrough at an important stage of the FCC’s rulemaking process,” said Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.). “Chairman Kennard clearly shares some of our concerns about the new law that overrides local and state tower-siting decisions. But we still need to move forward with our bill to repeal that law.”
Leahy and Sen. James Jeffords (R-Vt.) are co-sponsors of a bill to keep all jurisdiction of antenna siting with local and state authorities. A companion bipartisan bill in the House is backed by Reps. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Christopher Shays (R-Conn.).
Leahy reacted to Kennard’s statements first reported by RCR last week that “pre-emption shouldn’t even be considered” until local officials and wireless carriers first engage in substantive dialogue on the controversial siting issue.
In doing so, Kennard broke with former FCC chairman Reed Hundt, who leaned on U.S. mayors to make room for mobile phone towers.
The wireless industry, faced with more than 200 antenna siting moratoria throughout the United States, has had a petition pending before the FCC since late 1996 to outlaw local and state tower siting moratoria.
The industry is working with Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John McCain (R-Ariz.) and House telecommunications subcommittee Chairman Billy Tauzin (R-La.) to push through alternative legislation that might link wireless 911 mandates to tower siting moratoria relaxation.
But, with the prospect that lawmakers may want to avoid a costly confrontation with constituents over antenna siting in an election year, the wireless industry is said to be concentrating more on removing obstacles to siting on federal property in 1998.
Vermont, whose economy is heavily dependent on tourism, has become the key battleground for the national debate between mobile phone companies that believe national wireless policy is paramount and a grassroots coalition of homeowners, environmentalists and organized labor that believe decisions on where (or whether) antenna towers are erected are best left to local and state officials.
Kennard’s “comments clearly demonstrate that the FCC chairman has heard our concerns,” said Jeffords, who as former Vermont attorney general penned the state law (Act 250) that requires citizen input in local zoning matters. “Any decisions that change the beautiful landscape of our state must include local input. I look forward to showing Chairman Kennard first-hand how towers alter Vermont’s scenic vistas.”
Challenges to tower applications filed by carriers are based on concerns ranging from aesthetics to land value depreciation to health effects.
The 1996 telecom act pre-empted cities and states from blocking the construction of towers for health reasons if carriers comply with FCC radio-frequency radiation exposure guidelines.
