Indeed, by requiring the companies to work with Vermont towns, acceptable alternative locations could be suggested. This would be much better than allowing any company to just come in willy-nilly and plop down towers next to our backyards. Your federal regulations should be carefully designed to permit Vermont, and states with laws like Act 250, to control where these towers are located. Regional planning is also important since knowing the proposed locations of other towers will help improve the decision-making process. The answer is no.
States have a primary responsibility in protecting the health and safety of their citizens.
While states should be reasonable in the exercise of that, power it should, nonetheless, remain their power. Reasonable and more- protective state regulation, based on science, should be permitted under the final FCC rules. First, I want to make clear that I endorse the comments filed by the State of Vermont Environmental Board, supported in a letter to the Commission by Governor Dean, and the Vermont Planners Association. They have done an excellent job representing the views of Vermonters and they make a strong case for giving state and local governments more control over these important land use issues. The Vermont Environment Board carefully lays out the history of Act 250 and explains how well this law has worked in both promoting business opportunities in Vermont and in protecting the environment and Vermont s natural beauty.