Sneaky Georgia Lawmaker Wants to Speed Up Cell Tower Approval Process

To write to your state legislators to offer constructive opposition to this bill, please click here.

ATLANTA - We seem to have a love-hate relationship with cell phone towers.

We protest when someone tries to put one in our neighborhood, but we also complain about poor connections to the gadget crazy wireless world many of us now crave.

A Cobb County state lawmaker wants to make it easier for cell towers to sprout, he claims for better public safety and more jobs.

"If companies come here and they don't see that they have the bandwidth and the coverage they need, then they're going to be looking someplace else," Rep. Don Parsons (R-Cobb County) told 11 Alive News.

Parsons' HB 176 would limit the power of Georgia's local governments to deal with cell tower requests.

Among other things, it would require that government to make a decision on a new application within 150 days or an improvement application within 90 days.

If they don't act one way or the other in that time, those applications would automatically be approved.

It would also no longer require a company to prove the technical need for the tower, such as a gap in coverage.

And it would allow certain improvements without approval, such as making a tower up to 10 feet taller or up to 20 feet wider.*

Communication companies believe it would help streamline things.

"It's a very long process to begin with, 18 to 24 months today, and that's if everything goes right," ATT spokesman Bob Corney told 11 Alive.

"This is really about just trying to take out that unnecessary component of it," he added.

Local governments complain it would tie their hands and muzzle public opposition.

"It will significantly limit the power of local government and the public at the negotiating table on new cell tower locations within their communities," said Todd Edwards of the Association of County Commissions of Georgia.

Edwards said the 150 day decision limit may sound reasonable at first, but it doesn't take into account a case where a communications company or several companies might file multiple applications at one time, which could overwhelm a local government.

Rep. Parsons argued that because so many governments lack expertise in the field they have to hire outside consultants to study the applications.

He claimed that can drag out the process since consultants are often paid by the hour.

Wednesday afternoon the House Energy, Utilities and Telecommunications Committee unanimously approved Rep. Parson's bill.

It now heads to the State House for possible debate on whether Georgia should speed up the cell tower process.

*******************

*  GTCO-ATL is currently checking with our sources at the FCC to determine if these suggestions are legal.  It is our belief that the FCC Telecommunications Act of 1996 has put forth certain minimum standards and states and local governments can choose to make their regulations MORE strict, but not LESS.   

The necessity of showing a need is a very important issue when we are talking about giving tower companies the right to place towers that emit constant low-level radiation that has a compounded effect on the Earth and living beings (like humans) below.  If they do not have to show a need, then tower companies will begin putting up towers at higher and higher levels of radiation just so that they can OFFER services to communities that they may or may not even want, need or have a desire to ever try.   

The World Health Organization, the Environmental Protection Agency, the American Pediatrics Association and even the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) itself are all coming out right now and saying that the standards of allowable radiation standards in the U.S. need another look.  There is growing evidence being supported by scientific research that shows our current standards are not sufficient and were never intended to protect women and children, especially considering the high frequency of use that we are seeing for wireless devices compared to just 7 - 10 years ago.   

We need to be passing legislation that calls for TIGHTER controls over this industry and most towers are not even inspected or regulated by any outside agency and are frequently services by contractors and subcontractors who are the only ones liable if something goes wrong.  To place an "automatic approval" into the process that is already relaxed to the point that the towers are going up faster than local commissioners can keep up with the approvals is irresponsible, in our opinion.   

Adding height or width to a tower could create a significant hazard to the community if a tower is top heavy and not secured or constructed according to industry guidelines to support the additional girth.  This is one industry that does not need more legislation to assist it as the telecoms' profits are only behind National Defense and Oil.   

There has been significant slowing down in the consumer market and lower demand for the latest releases of products as they have only offered minor improvements over the prior version and are creating hassles for people who do not want to have to buy a new phone or switch plans when they only recently found one they could live with for a while.   

And, electromagnetic hypersensitivity is becoming more and more common as doctors are unable to suggest any more safe harbors for those who suffer from the condition as we are becoming saturated by wireless over the majority of the entire national and worldwide landscape.   

Caution and care should be preserved to give local governments the time that is necessary to fully review all applications, once they are complete before they make a decision about them that fits within the local laws and ordinances in place to protect the rights of the citizens and preserve the value of the land being proposed as a site.