AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
208 Posts
No, it sounds like the FCC will address environmental/health concerns and cultural/religious/historical preservation concerns. I don't see where it says the FCC intends to preempt local government zoning regulations.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,267 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Quote:
Originally posted by Wayne Bundrick
No, it sounds like the FCC will address environmental/health concerns and cultural/religious/historical preservation concerns. I don't see where it says the FCC intends to preempt local government zoning regulations.
I quite agree with you except your conclusion. There would be no reason for the FCC to even worry about these issues except that local zoning boards etc, have been trying to block towers all over.


And it clearly states that the FCC needs to set national standards, which automatically preempt local state and town control.


Finally it talks about the need to accelerate building the communications infrastructure for national security among other reasons.


Remember the FCC has always had jurisciction here, that is the only reason we can put tv antennas on our houses in this country and can ignore homeowners associations etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
208 Posts
The FCC can only do what it is authorized to do by an act of Congress. The OTARD rules that allow us to put antennas on our houses comes from the Telecommunications Act of 1996.


It still sounds to me like the FCC is going to set a national standard for where communications towers can't be located, for historic and environmental concerns, but that does not mean that any locations not restricted by the FCC will become free and clear of any and all further restriction by state and local governments. The wording of the FCC press release does not imply that any existing restrictions or the authority of local government to make further restrictions will be set aside. No, I still don't see where it says they're going to tackle the NIMBY syndrome.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,267 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
You might be right. but it makes little sense to me because:


1 Local governments already block antennas almost everywhere they are needed, at least in certain places, leading to court cases and delays such as in CO and CT.


2 I agree they will set National Standards for where towers can't be located, but the purpose is to see that they do get built in the other places, where they are currently blocked by phony lawsuits, etc. (Note only some of this is about Historic issues, others are due to claims of excess RF energy, or endangered species claims, etc.)


3 My understanding of the FCC is that they always have had the authority to override local zoning for station antennas just as they do for homeowners and ham radio operators.


4 The FCC has no legal jusisdiction to even address banning towers from somewhere for Historic area reasons. My reading of what they plan is to bring in expertise on the issue, and to work with other gov't agencies that do have jurisdiction over such things, so they can set up guidelines to go by to try to minimize lawsuits, and improve their chances of winning cases when they do go to court in the future.
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top