ACTIONS TAKEN RE: Cell towers

And opposing comments to the FCC sent by the National Assoc. of Telecommunications Officers and Advisers, National League of Cities, and the United States Conference of Mayor’s Opposition (Oct. 14, 2008):

• http://www.mml.org/advocacy/federal/nlc-comments-cita-petition.pdf

We won’t be alone when we say “no.”  Here are some of the recent actions and resolutions taken and made by cities, counties, school boards, and courts:

• Dec. 8, 2009: LAUSD issues condemnation of T-Mobile cell tower near Taper Elementary School.  See Attachment below, or read Item 34, page 7 at: http://laschoolboard.org/files/12-08-09%20Revised%20Order%20of%20Business.pdf
• Nov. 18, 2009: Los Angeles Council member Janice Hahn Moves to Regulate Placement of Cell Towers by local utilities and wireless companies, while her constituents in San Pedro neighborhood protest T-Mobile Cell Tower on DWP pole near their school: http://westsanpedro.org/Councilwoman%20Hahn%20Moves%20to%20Regulate%20Placement%20of%20Cell%20Phone%20Towers%20in%20Los%20Angeles.pdf
• Nov. 10, 2009, Agoura, CA: City Council issues moratorium on cell towers and resolution asking for repeal or modification of Telecommunications Act of 1996: http://www.vcstar.com/news/2009/nov/12/agoura-extends-cell-phone-antenna-moratorium/
• Nov. 10, 2009, Santa Barbara, CA: Board of Supervisors approves hearing to consider moratorium on wireless facilities, and passes resolution asking for repeal and modification or opposition to current Telecommunications Act of 1996 and California Utilities laws governing wireless facilities: http://santabarbara.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=536114&GUID=3D142EF5-AB4A-4244-BFD1-72F46246FC06&Options=&Search=  and http://santabarbara.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=535664&GUID=280ABCAE-9574-4381-BEC8-589BE44AB62A&Options=&Search=
  
• Nov. 9, 2009, Northwest  Neighborhood San Pedro Council calls for Los Angeles City Council to develop and
  adopt a policy on the siting of cell towers and related equipment and that the city place a moratorium on all cell towers until such a policy is adopted: http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/2009/09-2645_misc_11-20-09.pdf
• Oct. 27, 2009, Los Angeles, CA: Council member Bill Rosendahl asks City Attorney to report on what tools Los Angeles city can use to regulate cell facilities as a result of recent court decisions: http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/2009/09-2645_MOT_10-27-2009.pdf
• Oct. 27, 2009, Los Angeles, CA: County Board of Supervisors sides with Hacienda Heights homeonwers and denies approved T-Mobile project during appeal process: http://sunroomdesk.com/2009/10/27/la-county-supervisors-deny-cell-site-permit-after-appeal-from-hacienda-heights-residents or here: http://file.lacounty.gov/bos/sop/cms1_139141.pdf.  To watch VIDEO of proceedings, including homeowner statements and Board of Supervisor questions and decisions, Part 1: http://bosvideoap.co.la.ca.us/mgasp/LACounty/VideoPlayer_NS.asp?VideoID=1456&ClipID=13433 and Part 2: http://bosvideoap.co.la.ca.us/mgasp/LACounty/VideoPlayer_NS.asp?VideoID=1456&ClipID=13434
• Oct. 15, 2009: City of Glendale issues draft ordinance regarding regulation of wireless telecommunications facilities: http://www.ci.glendale.ca.us/pdf/Ord101509.pdf
• Aug. and Sept. 2009, Pacific Palisades Community Council, CA, issues moratorium on cell towers, see Aug. 13 minutes, Item 9, and Sept. 24, Item 8: http://www.pp90272.org/minutes2009.htm#11JUN09
  
• Aug. 4, 2009, Pima County Board of Supervisors passes resolution, Arizona: http://www.cloutnow.org/localrespdf/PimaCountyResolution.pdf
• July 2009, Marina Del Rey, CA: Environmental group sues DWP and T-Mobile over cell tower: http://www.argonautnewspaper.com/articles/2008/08/07/news_-_features/marina_del_rey/m1.txt
• VIDEO June 23, 2009: LA County Board of Supervisors supports residents by denying proposed T-Mobile tower in Windsor Hills neighborhood upon appeal: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBa3cY-L4yM&feature=related
• June 9, 2009, City of Glendale, CA, passes resolution: http://www.cloutnow.org/localrespdf/GlendaleResolution.pdf
• June 7, 2009, City of Glendale, CA, extends moratorium on cell towers: http://www.glendalenewspress.com/articles/2009/01/09/politics/gnp-cell09.txt
  
• June 2, 2009, Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors passes resolution regarding wireless facilities: http://www.emrpolicy.org/news/headlines/2jun09_clout_lactybos.pdf
• May 29, 2009, Los Angeles Board of Education prohibits cell phone towers near schools: http://www.emrpolicy.org/news/headlines/29may09_lausd_press_release.pdf
• May 26, 2009, Los Angeles Unified School District opposes cellular facilities near schools: http://www.emrpolicy.org/news/headlines/26may09_lausd_resolution.pdf and read letters of support from other organizations and experts here: http://www.cloutnow.org/lausd
• May 27, 2009, Portland City Council passes resolution, Oregon: http://www.portlandonline.com/fritz/index.cfm?a=247126&c=49233
• July 7, 2009, City of Sebastapol, CA, passes resolution: http://www.radiationresearch.org/pdfs/20090708_sevastopol_cell_tower.pdf
• April 27, 2009, City of Huntington Beach, CA,stops cell tower planned for Harbour View Park: http://www.ci.huntington-beach.ca.us/files/users/city_clerk/council_minutes_042709.pdf
• January 13, 2009: City of Glendale issues moratorium on cell tower installations to study issue and draft new ordinance.  With amendments: http://www.ci.glendale.ca.us/government/council_packets/Reports_012709/CC_7a_012709.pdf
  
• Sept 2008, West Linn-Wilsonville School District votes against cell towers near schools, Oregon: http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/2008/09/west_linnwilsonville_school_bo.html
• Feb. 2008, Mendocino County, CA, says no to cell tower: http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20080222/NEWS/802220314/1033/NEWS01
• Feb. 2007, San Francisco Board of Supervisors issues 45-day moratorium on cell towers: http://www.examiner.com/a-581263~Carriers_set_roof_antennas_without_residents__OK.html
• VIDEO, San Francisco Board of Supervisor Matt Gonzalez supports neighborhood and challenges proposed Sprint cell tower during hearing: http://www.youtube.com/user/SNAntennaFreeUnion

Recent Court Decisions In Favor of Local Governments:

• Oct. 14, 2009, Palos Verdes Estates, CA, wins right to bar cell towers in public rights of way: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-ugly-telecoms26-2009oct26,0,5439620.story and http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2009/10/13/05-56106.pdf
• Oct. 9, 2009, U.S. Court of Appeals sides with City of Ferguson, MO, and its right to deny cell tower: http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/09/10/083705P.pdf
• Aug. 6, 2009, U.S. Court of Appeals sides with Platte County, MO, and its right to deny cell tower based on appearance: http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/09/08/081965P.pdf
• June 29, 2009, U.S. Supreme Court sides with San Diego County and City of St. Louis in regulating placement and appearance of wireless poles and towers in public rights of way: http://www.oml.org/npps/story.cfm?ID=1617
  
• May 2009: U.S. Solicitor General recommendation to Supreme Court to deny appeal by Sprint in Sprint v. San Diego:  http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/08-626_cert_amicus.pdf
• Sept. 11, 2008, U.S. Court of Appeals sides with San Diego County in regulatingplacement and appearance of wireless poles and towers: http://www.naco.org/CountyNewsTemplate.cfm?template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=28810 and http://www.portlandonline.com/cable/index.cfm?a=210701&c=47566
• Sept. 4, 2008, U.S. Court of Appeals sides with City of St. Louis in prohibiting cell phone tower: http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/073509p.pdf
  
• June 4, 2008, National League of Cities, National Association of Counties, International Municipal Lawyers Association, National Association of Telecommunications Officer and Advisers, League of California Cities, New Jersey State League of Municipalities, and the California State Association of Counties file Amici Curiae Brief  in support of San Diego County’s right to regulate local wireless facilities (in its case against Sprint): http://www.natoa.org/policy-advocacy/Documents/SprintvSanDiegoAmicus060408.pdf