Editor’s Note: Welcome to our weekly Reader Forum section. In an attempt to broaden our interaction with our readers we have created this forum for those with something meaningful to say to the wireless industry. We want to keep this as open as possible, but maintain some editorial control so as to keep it free of commercials or attacks. Please send along submissions for this section to our editors at: dmeyer@ardenmediaco.com or tford@ardenmediaco.com.
As all carriers move toward 4G deployments of one technology or another, the wireless industry also needs to move beyond 2G network deployment strategies in working with local jurisdictional approval authorities. Alas, aside from some isolated attempts, there hasn’t been much strategy employed at all.
Local jurisdictions are familiar with the wireless industry approaching new sites and modifications with a “one-off” strategy. This forces the city to act on a case-by-case basis. The resulting impact is that each individual site is treated simply on its own merits and subject to scrutiny without consideration of the larger network of sites. The result is that too many sites are denied on spurious grounds or required to employ cost-prohibitive measures to gain approval.
One of the complaints from city officials is that wireless “zoning managers” are neither trained in urban planning principles nor are they subject matter experts on the topic of wireless technology. Whether it be through new site deployment or the tens of thousands of site upgrades that need to be processed through cities, 4G presents an opportunity to reset the impression that cities typically have of the industry.
No single site is an island. In other words, the whole of the network is greater than the sum of its sites. A broader network argument needs to be made to the city as the primary justification for individual site needs. Yet, for this argument to be made, a certain level of sophistication in working with cities, community groups, and interested parties is the order of the day. That sophistication includes the recognition that city officials have solid memories – they especially remember “being burned.” I sometimes marvel at how many wireless consultants act as if they are filing their last application in a particular community.
One of the first things that an industry representative must be able to answer in working with city officials is, “What will our community be deprived of if this site is not approved?” The answer needs to be relatable to people’s lives (and not some long, drawn-out discussion about how cell sites “talk” to each other).
Also on the sophistication front, the wireless industry is not keeping up with emerging grassroots activities that are increasingly placing roadblocks and delays on approvals for new or upgraded cell sites – whether antennas and infrastructure are being placed on existing structures or brand new wireless facilities.
Movies, social networking, placard-carrying neighbors – all opposed to construction of cell sites – are drumming up local mayhem and moratoriums. During 2009, Glendale, Calif., imposed a moratorium on cell sites that is still in effect; Santa Fe, N.M., is considering a moratorium as I write this article; Eureka Springs, Ark., passed a six-month moratorium in April 2010. Need more evidence? Watch a teaser to “Full Signal” – a movie released in late 2009 that is winning film critic awards around the globe (www.fullsignalmovie.com).
Can our industry respond in thoughtful ways that bring success? Can we build closer relationships with communities, zoning boards and city councils? Have we stepped up to the plate and provided the tools and the education for our local representatives to use at public meetings and hearings?
Here in Southern California where my company works with dozens of jurisdictions on wireless siting and permitting, we find success is better served with proactive work at community meetings and hearings, rather than reactive work with lawsuits and court systems.
As a consulting company, proactive strategies and education are our bread-and-butter. They achieve success with many short-term objectives, increase the likelihood of success over the long-term, and are cost-effective alternatives to long, drawn out litigation.
Additionally, though some may abhor the concept, my firm, Core Development Services, recognizes the value of politically supporting technology-friendly local candidates. This support has, directly and indirectly, yielded paradigm shifts in wireless technology policy at a number of cities. Again, it comes down to sophistication, and begs the question, “Why does the wireless industry routinely ignore benefits of political engagement?” Like with any interest group trying to affect change, being in the arena is necessary.
As an industry, I’ve observed two recent proactive strategies that deserve our focused attention and replication. It is time for other companies and organizations to step in with their own strategies and tactics like these:
First, everyone should take a look at a brand new video produced by the California Wireless Association. The brief and compelling presentation takes on one issue – and tells the right story that is not understood outside our industry: for more than 80 percent of the population in California that owns a cell phone (the same percentage applies to all of America), you can’t have mobile connectivity without the infrastructure. It was debuted publicly at an Orange County (CA) League of Cities meeting on April 26 to great reception by the city officials present. You can view a streaming version of the five-minute video at www.calwa.org – I recommend it and encourage other state wireless programs to replicate the concept.
The second example comes from T-Mobile. For more than four years, T-Mobile’s mock city councils and siting messaging training programs have been conducted across the country – for employees and consultants. More recently, the company rolled out the unconventional Community Q-Tube. The “meeting in a box” turns a cold lectern/audience style meeting into more of an “open house” on wireless technology. It teaches people all the legal and practical steps T-Mobile takes to find a good location, get the needed permit, and build a cell site that provides the mobile connectivity consumers are craving. It also changes the dynamics of confrontation experienced at many community meetings by virtue of the interpersonal vibe the format creates.
Even when my firm is advocating for the approval of an emergency generator at an existing site, we have found planning staff unwilling to support such proposals. When public safety and emergency response can be so readily dismissed, it is no wonder that radio emissions, site aesthetics and property-values questions can bring a screeching halt to permit applications.
With broader industry-wide efforts, we can provide the education and needed advocacy that will reach the right audiences.Engaging planning professionals, elected and appointed officials, law enforcement, as well as wireless consumers and small business owners is critical to our success.
It’s always amusing to me how the fanciful technological concepts of my youth (and my parents’ youth) have become readily available consumer projects in recent years. Some of us are old enough to remember Batman’s “Bat Phone” in his Batmobile from the 1960s television show. The Bat Phone was rich with features that included: 1) secure calls that were answered outside of working hours, 2) immediate access straight through to high-level management, and 3) problem-solving action that was quickly initiated. We don’t even fully grasp all the consumer advantages that 4G will offer, but we do know many. I’d like this short article to be a call to action to the industry. In promoting 4G, act 4G.
While I’m not Commissioner Gordon, and most readers do not think they are Batman, we can
certainly take action to help solve
the problems we face. For siting and permitting, the wireless industry must invest in more education with communities, neighborhoods and planning departments. We must hire trained professionals who understand government processes and attitudes. We must embrace the political realities that are unique to each community. In short … sophisticated 4G technology deployment requires sophisticated outreach and education to communities.
Mr. Koos is a Founding Principal of Core Development Services, a Southern California site development consulting firm. Mr. Koos began his career as an urban planner, working for the City of Orange, County of Orange, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, and the Southern California Association of Governments. He currently serves as the Chairman of the City of Brea Planning Commission and formerly served as a City of Anaheim Planning Commissioner from 1998 to 2003. John holds a BS degree in Urban & Regional Planning from Cal Poly, Pomona.
Reader Forum: Second-gen political strategies need updating for 4G realities: Think 'Bat phone'
ABOUT AUTHOR