Last month the Douglas County Commission wouldn’t let Verizon Wireless erect a cell phone tower, and now the telecommunications company is suing.

The county’s denial of the tower request led Verizon to file the lawsuit Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Kansas City, Kan., claiming the county had violated the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996.

The county never issued a written denial of the request and the denial was not based on substantial evidence, Verizon claims. Verizon is asking the court to order the county to approve the permit so it can build a 150-foot tower near the intersection of U.S. highways 56 and 59 west of Baldwin City.

Twice Verizon attempted to obtain a conditional use permit from the county to build the tower. According to the lawsuit, the tower is needed because Verizon’s network has inadequate coverage in the southwestern part of the county that causes dropped calls and lost signals.

Evan Ice, county counselor, and other county officials declined to comment on the lawsuit Thursday because they weren’t aware of it.

In August 2006 Verizon filed a permit application, which was later denied by county commissioners on a 2-1 vote. Commissioners Jere McElhaney and Charles Jones voted against it and Commissioner Bob Johnson voted in favor of it.

Jones said he wasn’t convinced Verizon had fully explored whether it could put its equipment on another wireless company’s tower. He also suggested the need for a third party more knowledgeable about the cell phone industry than commissioners to review the request.

Verizon returned to commissioners with a new application in May. This time it supplied documents from an independent third party, Trott Communications of Texas, that supported Verizon’s need for a tower.

Some residents in the area of the proposed tower site submitted a petition opposing it. This time Jones was the only commissioner to vote against it, saying he still wasn’t convinced the tower was necessary and wondering whether it was the county’s responsibility to see that cell phone companies provided adequate service.

Because of the opposition petition, state statute requires a unanimous vote for the tower to be approved.