You may wanted to argue two points.... 1) That your company/broadcast site does not match the description of "telecom facility" as defined in the County Code. And that there is no provision listed in the county code that specifically states your business type and use, and that bundling you into the closest thing is not appropriate because the closest thing is far away from the profile of your company and infrastructure, and therefore appropriate to assume that you should be exempt from the County code requirements as written.
2) Second, argue that you are Grandfathered at that site from any future legislation, as you were installed prior to any new legislation or ammendments that may decide to make to attempt to charge you unfair amounts. You must get the county code, and read it like a hawk, and be clear on exactly what it states. Thinks like "telecom facility" you re specifically exempt from if you are not a "telecom (LEC)". Brand X case should have proved that an ISP is a "broadband" company. A wireless provider is usually portrayed as a "broadband company". The key to your defense is in the "definitions" of terms used in the County code. Additional approached.... 1) Contact FCC for help. The Otard does not specifically protect the right to build towers, it falls under the jurisdiction of county code (unless a smaller governing intitiy liek an incorporated city).. But there are provisions at the federal level that prevent counties from putting overly stringent demands and delays on broadband/tower owners. There was a really well known and big case on this issue, that was won by the tower owner, after several years of legal trials. (guessing around 3 years ago). The FCC will help you, by putting pressure on the County to play fair. 2) Determine if you have public support for your services and tower, versus a tower that the public wants to seen torn down. If its likely you'd have public support, you can always go to the media. Stories like "County plans to shut down local entreprenure, stop economic development, and deprive under served areas and consumers of broadband." Followed by ideas that you might move your business to another county that supports economic development. Etc Etc. Stating the County should be pitching contributing matching funds, instead of burdening you with fees and taxes. Maybe send the rough draft to your local legislators prior to sending it to the local newspaper. Important note.... In most cases, they do NOT have the right to prevent you from operating and broadcasting while legal trials or appeals are being faught and negotiated, provided you are not causing a significant safety concern. The burden of proof is on them, to get a ruling of why you need to take it down. They do have ways to make life hard for you, so if hard ball occurs, you'll probably need an attorney. For example, even if they just used the dispute to put a hold on your corporate status, that could prevent you from getting a loan until resolved. Another option is that if the site is important enough to you, and it becomes a large enoug problem, you may want to seperate it from your other core business. You could set up a seperate company that owns that tower, so any legislation regarding that tower does not effect your other business operations. Lastly, info is needed like whether you followed the proper proceedure and permitting in building the tower in the first place. In most counties, you do not specifically have the right by default. They just didn't update their code to consider new business types like WISPs. 3) You can always go the HAM radio tower route. Federal law allows you to build a HAM radio tower, for a license fee of about $95. The catch is that you are NOT allowed to use it for commercial purposes. You could say anything you are doing is free to the users you are connecting with (other HAMs). That would then add an additonal burden to the county to have to prove that you were actually serving paying customers from that site. An important factor here is... what makes the county more money? If you give service away, and aren't making any money, you don't pay income tax on the revenue that you useed to make. If they learn your tower isn't going anywhere do to the HAM license, and that your business model truly does not afford to pay tower telecom level permit fees, and they are only accomplsihing reducing your taxable income, they very well may give up, and give up on it, without a justifyable reason to pursue it further. Good luck with it. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband ----- Original Message ----- From: "Isp Operator" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 5:37 AM Subject: [WISPA] Tower site liscensing problem > Hi Gang, > > We recently received notice that one of our locations has received the > interest of our county planning department, who has determined that the > location requires a 'use permit' for a major impact utility location > (eg: Cellular telephone). Naturally, we strongly disagree with this > determination. > > The site is in a remote location, on private property completely out of > view of anybody(*), solar powered, on a 25' mast, with only the most > basic of equipment installed including two access points with an omni > and a sector. Aside from being 'outdoors', really, there's no > resemblance to a 'cellphone tower' as the gear is equivalent to what > most people use for their home wireless networks, albeit with slightly > larger externally mounted antennas. The planning department DID NOT cite > any building codes or height restrictions, just that we seem to be > 'transmitting' as well as 'receiving', and we're certain that the > determination has to do ONLY with the fact that it's a wireless repeater > and otherwise wouldn't receive any attention at all if it was a wind > generator, weather station or other application. > > The substantial weight of the use permit process they wish us to go thru > is exactly that for a major cellphone site, complete with hefty > application fees, public hearings, zoning approvals, and the whole nine > yards. Assuming we made it all the way thru the process, we would then > also be required to build it up with severe site upgrades including fire > access and other features, which is simply too much overkill and we > would not be able to comply. > > Isn't there some kind of exemption or otard-similar ruling or legal > guidelines from the fcc regarding this type of situation? I can only > imagine that the criteria cited would also apply to many, many other > uses of part-15 devices and that the regulations just predate (2001 in > our case) the real onslaught of linksys in every home. I also imagine > that there would be substantial damage if every wisp was required to get > cellphone tower permits for every single repeater in use according to > these strict interpretations. We're going to need more than common sense > here, we're going to need legal precedence or references to directly > refute this determination, and we would appreciate your help. > > Thanks all. > > > (* We were turned in by a certain tin hat, who has been dogging us for > some time now and attempting to create sympathy for their extreme views > which we are sure you all are aware of. Just one more reason to not > share detailed system information with anybody....) > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
