Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wireless Communications Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kootenai County to draft more detailed wireless facility ordinance; staff to compare city models
Summary
Commissioners directed staff to pursue development of a more comprehensive wireless communications facility ordinance, drawing language from Coeur d'Alene, Post Falls and Dalton Gardens and to brief the planning commission.
Get email alerts on the Wireless Communications Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kootenai County commissioners instructed staff to proceed with drafting a more detailed wireless communications facility ordinance and to compare features of local city ordinances, with particular attention to technical review, applicant-paid engineering checks and drive-testing requirements.
A board member described the current county ordinance as "fairly minimalist" and said carriers have increasingly sought approvals under federal and state frameworks. The proposed approach would not categorically ban towers but would set systematic conditions and review steps. The staff presentation noted language and features taken from Coeur d'Alene, Post Falls, Hayden and Dalton Gardens ordinances and proposed an initial draft derived mainly from Coeur d'Alene and Post Falls for clarity and ease of use.
Key provisions discussed included the ability to require applicant-funded radio-frequency engineering review, the option to require drive tests to validate coverage claims, and provisions ensuring applicants or property owners acknowledge liability and maintenance responsibilities. Commissioners also discussed including a provision allowing the county to have an independent measurement of emissions or compliance and to require reimbursement for the county's cost of such testing.
Why it matters: Commissioners said a more systematic ordinance could give the county predictable review standards and conditions that permit wireless deployment while protecting county interests, and reduce ad hoc litigation and confusion.
Board response and next steps Staff has placed draft materials on the planning commission agenda as a discussion item; commissioners asked staff to retract drafts until the board finalizes direction and to circulate Dalton Gardens and other ordinances for comparison. Staff was asked to return a cleaned draft that incorporates useful provisions (applicant-funded RF review, drive testing, liability/maintenance acknowledgments) and to coordinate with the planning commission once the board approves circulation.
Ending Commissioners agreed the county needs a more robust wireless communications ordinance, asked staff to finalize comparisons and a draft, and to ensure planning commission members are aware the proposal is preliminary and not yet authorized by the board.

