No Significant Gap in Verizon Telecommunications Coverage in Petaluma CA, Aug 3, 2020
Link to 47 U.S. Code § 324 – Use of minimum power
“In all circumstances, except in case of radio communications or signals relating to vessels in distress, all radio stations, including those owned and operated by the United States, shall use the minimum amount of power necessary to carry out the communication desired. (June 19, 1934, ch. 652, title III, § 324, 48 Stat. 1091.)”
Link to Aug 26, 2020 Ruling in Extenet vs. City of Cambridge, MA
The Court stated on Aug 26, 2020:
“Where ExteNet’s complaint and its original applications fail to show the existence of a coverage gap, it is impossible to infer that the denial of ExteNet’s applications has the effect of prohibiting the provision of wireless services”.
It is required that the wireless companies who will be leasing from the neutral host provider be named participants and provide the necessary information, whereas until now they have been able to avoid the need to do so while also keeping important information away from cities and citizens. The district court approved the City of Cambridge’s substantive requirement for all relevant information. The Cambridge policy required that the “applications include evidence that the proposed installation is needed to prevent a material inhibition of wireless services.”
ExteNet did not (and claimed it could not) make this showing since AT&T was the customer and the one with the information necessary to prove the facilities were needed to fill a significant gap in coverage, would in fact be used to fill any gap that did exist, and there were no viable alternative locations. The court held, however, that ExteNet had a burden of proof and failed to meet it.