Decision Clarifies that Local Government’s Decision Need Not State Reasons if they are Contemporaneously Published Elsewhere

A local government need not state the reasons for its denial of a new cell-tower application in its written decision, so long as its reasons are also available in a written record released at roughly the same time, the U.S. Supreme Court held in T-Mobile South v. City of Roswell, Georgia.

Although the cell-tower industry may claim victory because the Court imposed a new narrow requirement that the two documents be published roughly contemporaneously, the decision  is likely to be viewed as a positive for local governments. Each of the justices agreed that local governments need not set forth its reasons in its decision and each affirmed that Congress preempted local government authority under 47 U.S.C. section 332(c)(7) in only narrow respects.

In this case, Roswell held a public hearing to consider an application by T-Mobile to build a cellphone tower on residential property. During the hearing, several councilmembers expressed concerns about the tower’s impact on the area, and the hearing ended with the Council unanimously voting to deny the application. Two days later, the City’s Planning and Zoning Division informed T-Mobile by letter that the application was denied and that minutes from the hearing would be made available — but those minutes were not published until 26 days later. T-Mobile filed suit alleging the denial was not supported by substantial evidence in the record, as required by federal law.

The district court concluded that the City, by failing to issue a written decision stating its reasons for denying the application, had violated the Telecommunications Act. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit found that the requirements of the Act were satisfied because T-Mobile received a denial letter and possessed a transcript of the hearing outlining the basis for the denial. The Supreme Court affirmed that the law permits localities to deny an application for a cell tower in two separate documents, as was the case in Roswell, but that the delay of 26 days prejudiced the applicant’s ability to bring a judicial challenge in the 30 days’ timeframe provided by the Telecommunications Act.

Roswell’s lesson to local governments is that, while being mindful of any state or federal shot clock for action, no denial of a cell tower application should be issued until the document providing the substantial evidence for the denial is complete.