T-Mobile’s appeal of a zoning board decision on a cell...
T-Mobile’s appeal of a zoning board decision on a cell tower permit in Howard County, Md., raises some important issues for the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Free State Foundation Research Fellow Seth Cooper said on the group’s blog.…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Last year, the Howard County Board of Appeals denied T-Mobile’s application to build a 100-foot concealed monopole on a church property. In March, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland upheld the ruling. “The District Court … upheld the Board’s decision by applying a highly deferential standard of review,” Cooper wrote (http://xrl.us/bnktwt). “Such a highly deferential standard allows local governments to reject wireless facility permit applications for shallow reasons and in the face of facts supporting approval.” The 4th Circuit in Richmond, Va., agreed to hear T-Mobile’s appeal. “Appealing this ruling is worthwhile simply on account of the weak factual support for the Board’s position. The 4th Circuit might find that the Board’s rationale is too thin to support its rejection of T-Mobile’s permit application,” Cooper said. “There is also a question as to whether Maryland law requires closer judicial scrutiny of local government rulings such as the one by the Howard County Board. T-Mobile has argued that Maryland case precedents call for an independent judicial review of the record that considers the merits of the permit application itself. The 4th Circuit might clarify whether a less deferential standard is called for in wireless facility siting cases in Maryland than in Virginia."