A Question of Balance

Recently, the CTO for a na- tional wireless carrier told his staff, "From now on I want 250-foot towers everywhere -- cells with a 7-mile radius. No excuses."

Such naive dictatorial pronouncements sow the seeds of community opposition or worse.

Although some years have passed since the implementation of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, it is clear both carriers and local governments have much to learn with respect to the means by which the act's provisions may efficiently and promptly be implemented. During my years as general counsel of several leading telecommunications companies, including PacTel Cellular and Cox Communications PCS, it became clear to me that too often carriers and governments cling to extreme positions in a recalcitrant refusal to comprehend and acknowledge the other's interests and concerns.

It doesn't take a lot of creative thinking to envision employees of the above-mentioned carrier doing "whatever it takes" -- properly or improperly -- to meet the stated goal.

Unquestionably there are community activists who parallel the weaknesses of some in the wireless industry. Those who oppose any change to the community on any real or imagined basis make those communities tempting targets for costly industry pattern-setting litigation.

Ultimately, the creation of high-quality, competitive wireless communications services is a question of balance. The Telecom Act supports this goal and provides legislative tools to accomplish the task. Carriers and communities alike should reflect upon their conduct in this area. Communities cannot ban wireless infrastructure absolutely any more than carriers can demand 250-foot towers wherever they want them.

I offer some specific suggestions.

For Carriers * Prepare a videotape (not longer than 10 minutes) introducing your company, its people, its purpose and how it goes about the process of selecting sites. The tape should give enough information about the technical nature of coverage considerations to assure the viewer of reasonable public interest, community and competitive concerns. This tape should be your introduction to land-use planners, staffers, city councils and hearing boards. Use knowledgeable company spokespersons supplemented, when possible, by employees living in the community.

* Prepare a "leave with" piece for the board and others to consider. Wherever possible, include in it a discussion of all alternatives and specifically why they are less desirable than the subject site. Such documentation will establish your position and make it clear when others are "misinterpreting" it.

* Give the community the time lines for the project. Show that you have given yourself and the community a reasonable time for consideration of the project.

* When describing the effects of delay or rejection of a project, be honest. Not every adverse decision will cause the collapse of wireless competition, nor will it lead to litigation. Nationally, there is little indication that individual site delays will affect wireless competition irreversibly.

For Communities * Be sure your processes are open and fair. Although land-use planning primarily is a political process, it is a process that the courts are quite willing to oversee. Insist that hearing dates and times are reasonable for all parties and give adequate advance notice to all.

* For decision makers, understand the community concerns, those that are rational and well presented, and those that may not be. Know the limits in the Telcom Act, and keep your focus on those areas in which you may lawfully act.

* Be good listeners despite the emotions that often become a factor. Good listeners ask good questions on alternatives, reasonable planning, timelines and overall community impact. The answers to these questions will create a basis for sound decisions, decisions that courts will be reluctant to overturn.

* Avoid arguments and positions that lead to "absolutely no sites in this community at any time." With advances in stealth technologies, some sites can be deployed with little or no community impact. Don't encourage the courts to manage land uses in your community.

Wireless competition and high quality coverage for the public can be delivered with minimal local effects -- but only if the parties communicate by listening well.