T-Mobile South v. City of Roswell
Issues
Does a letter from a local government denying an application to construct a cell tower without providing reasons for the denial, but offering the minutes of the meeting denying the application, satisfy the “in writing” requirement of the Telecommunications Act of 1996?
In this case, the Supreme Court will address whether the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (“1996 Act”) requires State or local governments that deny an application to construct a new cell tower to provide clear reasons for the decision in the same written document as the denial. Citing the statute’s text, purpose, and legislative history, T-Mobile argues that the City of Roswell violated the 1996 Act when it denied T-Mobile’s permit application but did not provide a clear statement of reasons for the denial. The City of Roswell argues that the 1996 Act merely requires that a state or local government provide the denial “in writing,” regardless of whether the reasons for the denial appear in a separate written record. The Supreme Court’s decision will likely have significant implications for the future of wireless deployment and judicial review of state and local resistance to wireless telecommunications services. The Court’s decision may also impact economic growth and public safety.
Questions as Framed for the Court by the Parties
In order to promote the prompt deployment of telecommunications facilities and to enable expedited judicial review, the Communications Act of 1934, as amended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996, provides that any decision by a state or local government denying a request to place, construct, or modify a personal wireless service facility “shall be in writing and supported by substantial evidence contained in a written record.” 47 U.S.C. § 332 (c)(7)(B)(iii).
The question presented is whether a document from a state or local government stating that an application has been denied, but providing no reasons whatsoever for the denial, can satisfy this statutory “in writing” requirement.
In 2003, the Respondent City of Roswell, Georgia (“City”) enacted an ordinance (Roswell City Ordinance 21.2) governing the standards for wireless communication towers. T-Mobile South LLC v.
Edited by
Additional Resources
- Seth L. Cooper: States Can Promote Next-Generation Wireless by Removing Regulatory Barriers, American Legislator (Apr. 3, 2014).
- Brian Heaton: U.S. Supreme Court to Decide Key Cell Tower Siting Case, Government Technology (May 29, 2014).
- Brent Kendall: Supreme Court to Hear T-Mobile Cell-Tower Case, The Wall Street Journal (May 5, 2014).
- Matthew Schettenhelm: Is a Local Government’s Decision in Writing? The U.S. Supreme Court To Rule, Best Best & Krieger, LLP (July 29, 2014).