Court Is Urged to Grant AT&T's Requested Permit to Build Walla Walla Cell Tower

There’s “no dispute” that AT&T has a “significant service coverage gap” in Walla Walla, Washington, said AT&T’s reply Thursday (docket 4:23-cv-05162) in U.S. District Court for Eastern Washington in Richland. AT&T's April 25 motion seeks summary judgment for the city’s denial of its application for a conditional use permit to build a 65-foot cell tower (see 2404260004). The only issues for the court to decide about AT&T’s effective prohibition claim under the Telecommunications Act are whether the carrier submitted a complete tower application, and whether the city met its burden to identify an available, feasible and less intrusive alternative to the proposed tower, said the reply. The defendant didn’t offer any available alternatives during the administrative process, “as contemplated by federal case law,” said AT&T. Despite this, the city has pointed to four “purported alternatives” to the tower through its briefing on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment, it said. But none of those “alleged” alternatives is “both available and feasible,” it said. Because there’s no dispute about AT&T’s coverage gap, and because the city can’t identify an available and feasible alternative to the tower, the city has effectively prohibited the plaintiff from providing wireless services in violation of the TCA, it said. The “appropriate remedy” is for the court to order the city to grant AT&T’s requested permit, it said.