In her article, “In T-Mobile Wireless Equipment Dispute, San Francisco Wins on Aesthetics” (September 20, 2016) reporter Bloomberg/BNA Lydia Beyoud discusses some of the key impacts of San Francisco’s appellate win in the case. I provided her with insights and several quotes. I link the decision to 5G deployment pressures which drive carriers to want . . . → Read More: Bloomberg BNA on the T-Mobile v. San Francisco Appellate Decision
Back on May 27, 2016 Martha DeGrasse of RCR Wireless published a very interesting article titled, “Mobilitie to increase transparency for jurisdictions”. It’s well worth going back to (re)read her article about how Mobilitie’s President, Christos Karmis said his firm would use its own corporate name with local jurisdictions.
Huh? Use its own name? Why . . . → Read More: Mobilitie’s Increased Transparency is Somewhat Opaque
Today the California Court of Appeal (1st) affirmed the trial decision in T-Mobile v. San Francisco (San Francisco City and County Super. Ct. No. CGC-11-510703).* That decision held that local governments in California have rather broad aesthetic control over wireless facilities in the public right-of-way.
This decision is hot off the press, so a deep . . . → Read More: California: PUC Sec. 7901/7901.1 Loc. Gov. Aesthetic Control Upheld
When Crown Castle was unhappy with a decision by the City of Westfield, Indiana denying a cell site application, they sued Westfield in state court. The case is:
Crown Castle Towers 06-2 LLC v. City of Westfield, Tracy Pielemeier, Ginny Kelleheret al, Case No. 29C01-1511-MI-009308.
Of course Crown Castle sued the City of Westfield. No . . . → Read More: Who are John DuBois, Suzy DuBois, Tracy Pielemeier, Kristen Burkman, and Ginny Kelleher and why are they important?