The battle over who controls the clock on broadband infrastructure permitting has moved squarely to the FCC’s doorstep, and America’s mayors are not going quietly.
A coalition of the nation’s most influential local government organizations has formally pushed back against federal proposals that would impose strict deadlines — known as “shot clocks” — on local reviews of broadband and wireless infrastructure projects, arguing that the push to accelerate deployment is coming at a direct cost to public safety and local oversight.
The FCC Moves Toward a Vote
The Federal Communications Commission is set to vote this month on local permitting shot clocks, building on proceedings underway since the agency’s 2018 Small Cell Order, which established 60-day review windows for small wireless facility collocations on existing structures and 90-day windows for new structure attachments. The current proceeding goes considerably further, examining whether to establish new shot clocks on rights-of-way authorizations, create a “deemed approved” provision that would treat any project not acted upon within a specified timeframe as automatically approved, and restrict local governments from charging fees beyond cost-based amounts.
Local Governments Fire Back
In joint comments filed with the Commission, the United States Conference of Mayors, the National League of Cities, the National Association of Counties, and the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors — collectively identifying themselves as the Local Government Associations — strenuously objected to the industry’s depiction of local permitting as an obstacle to broadband deployment. The groups maintained that local reviews are reasonable and necessary, that the FCC lacks the legal authority to preempt them, and that the reviews are essential to public safety, often conducted with scarce staffing and limited resources.
Their safety argument is backed by documented data. The coalition cited a report tallying more than 12,000 gas line strikes due to telecom deployments from 2021 through 2023, arguing that imposing new deadlines would make the problem significantly worse.
The Congressional Battle Running in Parallel
The FCC fight is unfolding simultaneously with a high-stakes legislative battle on Capitol Hill. The American Broadband Deployment Act would impose shot clocks on local permit reviews, and local governments have argued that the bill creates a framework that prioritizes communications companies’ shareholder value at the expense of the safety and financial interests of the communities and taxpayers they serve. The legislation would also impose a “deemed granted” penalty for localities that exceed shot clock deadlines, effectively allowing providers to conduct construction or excavation without local oversight, while permanently exempting non-cable services such as bundled broadband from franchise agreements.
Local government groups countered that in the rare instances where a municipality truly obstructs deployment, the FCC already possesses sufficient authority to intervene under Sections 253 and 332 of the Communications Act of 1996.
What the Industry Wants
The telecommunications industry has been equally aggressive in pressing its case. Broadband providers have complained to the FCC and lawmakers about unnecessarily long wait times and excessive fees, arguing that a patchwork of permitting procedures poses a serious impediment to network deployment. Industry groups including USTelecom, NCTA, CTIA, and ACA Connects have urged the FCC to implement standardized shot clocks, eliminate non-cost-based fees, and strengthen coordination across states.
Why It Matters for Tower Contractors and Towercos
For the tower construction and wireless infrastructure industry, the outcome of this dual-front battle — at the FCC and in Congress — has direct operational implications. Faster permitting timelines, if enacted, could accelerate project pipelines and reduce the administrative delays that have long complicated deployment schedules. However, the “deemed granted” provisions embedded in both the legislative and regulatory proposals carry their own risks, potentially exposing crews to job sites where local safety reviews were bypassed by the clock rather than completed on the merits.
The FCC’s vote, expected before the end of June, will offer the clearest signal yet of how aggressively the Carr Commission intends to use its preemption authority to reshape the permitting landscape — with or without Congress’s blessing.
