Wireless providers back extending Vermont’s 2‑48a siting sunset, urge longer window for investment predictability

The House Energy and Digital Infrastructure committee on Wednesday heard unified support from wireless industry representatives for H.527, a bill that would extend by three years the sunset on Vermont’s section 2‑48a wireless siting process.

Jeremy Crandall, testifying for CTIA, told the committee the siting process for a new or upgraded wireless site is “technical, complicated, [and] expensive,” and said the average timeline from initial idea to activation is roughly two years. “It is important for us that this process and ultimately deployment be both effective and successful,” Crandall said, urging the committee to preserve the statute’s predictability for carriers and the municipalities that review projects.

Why this matters: Carriers told lawmakers that predictable permitting windows help them plan multiyear capital investments to expand coverage, maintain service for first responders and meet rapidly growing consumer data demand.

Ryan Clark, external affairs director for AT&T in Vermont, said AT&T has used section 2‑48a frequently — citing more than 166 applications since 2022 and “more than 75” certificates of public good in 2025 alone — and estimated permitting could take roughly twice as long under the alternate process if 2‑48a lapses. “We see [2‑48a] as a reliable tool that we can use to make sure in the long term we know how to permit,” Clark said, urging the committee to consider a longer sunset (five years or more) or permanent extension for investment certainty.

Stephanie Lee, who leads government relations for Verizon in New England, echoed those points and said Verizon supports H.527. She recommended a horizon longer than three years to reduce recurring legislative reviews and provide “a little bit more runway” for capital planning.

Committee concerns and requests: Several legislators said they support extending the statute but pressed for changes or additional information to protect public engagement and local control. Committee members asked for clarity on how the public‑participation rules in section 2‑48a compare with the default land‑use permitting process (Act 250/2‑50), and whether smaller “de‑minimis” projects could be carved out for permanent treatment while keeping more intensive projects on a longer sunset.

Lawmakers also requested technical follow‑up from the parties: coverage maps from AT&T and Verizon, legal perspectives on the public‑participation differences from legislative counsel or attorneys who handle 2‑48a cases, and testimony from the Department of Public Safety or the FirstNet Authority (Corey Chase was named as a possible witness) about federal/state coordination for public‑safety coverage planning.

Details and claims in testimony: CTIA said the siting process requires federal environmental and historic‑preservation reviews and a 60‑day advance notice to state and municipal bodies; it added that nationwide wireless data use and private investment have grown rapidly (the witness cited industry investment figures and year‑over‑year data growth in testimony). AT&T described its FirstNet public‑safety partnership and a multi‑year buildout with ongoing monthly updates to state partners; Verizon said longer statutory certainty helps budgetary and network planning.

What’s next: Chair Rep. Kathleen James said the committee could vote on H.527 as soon as next week if members are ready, but she encouraged colleagues to submit specific requests for follow‑up witnesses and materials before the vote. The committee has not taken a vote; members discussed options that include keeping the bill as a three‑year extension, extending the sunset to five or more years, or eliminating the sunset for some or all projects.

The committee requested coverage maps and additional testimony and will schedule follow‑up briefings prior to any committee vote.