Industry Challenges SF Siting Ordinance in Calif. Supreme Court
T-Mobile urged the California Supreme Court to reverse a lower court’s decision upholding a San Francisco ordinance intended to block installation of telecom equipment that would diminish the city's beauty (Case S238001). The California Court of Appeal for the First…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
District said cities may consider aesthetics when assessing telco pole attachment applications, rejecting a challenge by T-Mobile, Crown Castle and ExteNet (see 1609160052). In a Jan. 20 opening brief, the companies said the state appeals court applied an incorrect standard of review when it said the challenge could succeed only if there were "no set of circumstances" under which the ordinance could be validly applied, the companies said. The ordinance conflicts with state telecom franchise rules in Section 7901 of the Public Utilities Code and the court "adopted an illogical reading" when it said municipalities must treat entities equivalently for temporary construction activities and occupations of the rights of way, but localities may discriminate among them when regulating long-term occupations. San Francisco hurts itself with the ordinance, the companies said. “While the rest of the country is moving forward to facilitate and streamline the wireless infrastructure deployments needed to support advanced services, some localities, such as the City and County of San Francisco … have enacted measures that stand in the way of progress.”