[GPSCC-chat] Fwd: [G-C-F] Fwd: [SonomaGreens] Help urgently needed to stop AB 57 which removes local control over cell towers

Wes Rolley wrolley at charter.net
Wed Jul 1 08:49:33 PDT 2015 

Typical corporate strategy when they don't like what local governments 
are doing is to take the controls away from local government and move 
them to state or federal.   In this case, a local Santa Clara County 
legislator, Jim Beall, is sitting on the committee holding hearing on AB 
57.  Let him know what you think he should do.

The other side of the corporate strategy is to demand that "onerous" 
federal or state legislation be left to the local jurisdictions because 
they are the ones who know what is happening.


-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: 	[G-C-F] Fwd: [SonomaGreens] Help urgently needed to stop AB 57 
which removes local control over cell towers
Date: 	Tue, 30 Jun 2015 18:38:32 -0700
From: 	Jared Laiti <jared.laiti at gmail.com>
To: 	cal-forum at cagreens.org




---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: *Jenny Miller* <sonomagreens at lists.riseup.net 
<mailto:sonomagreens at lists.riseup.net>>
Date: Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 5:16 PM
Subject: [SonomaGreens] Help urgently needed to stop AB 57 which removes 
local control over cell towers
To: Sonoma Greens <sonomagreens at lists.riseup.net 
<mailto:sonomagreens at lists.riseup.net>>


Deadline is Wednesday for getting formal opposition to the committee.
The hearing is July 8, 9:30 AM.
 > From: Kevin M <kmottus at gmail.com <http://gmail.com>>
 > Date: June 29, 2015 11:28:26 AM PDT
 > Subject: *Need Help NOW Fighting AB57 Fast Tracks ALL Cell 
Towers-BOOK FLIGHT NOW-Kevin Mottus*
 >
 > Without any local input at all, wireless companies will be able to 
put a cell tower anywhere in your community and add transmitters to 
current towers if local governments take too long to process 
applications which governments have already said they cannot process 
given limited resources. The wireless companies will swamp local 
governments with cell tower applications and place them near you. file 
order front hearing
 >
 > *PRIORITY-Arrange to be at AB57 hearing in Sacramento Capitol July 
8th at 9:30am Room 112; you will have 1-3 mins to speak.*Â Â There was 
only one person opposing during last committee hearing.   They 
believe every person represents one million voters.  Your presence 
will count.  Southwest has cheap flights if you book NOW 866-281-8464 
<tel:866-281-8464>. Hotwire has hotels for $50/night 800-845-4026 
<tel:800-845-4026>.  Sacramento is very easy to navigate.  *WE NEED 
YOU THERE. BOOK NOW*. Last committee Analyst only documented hundreds 
of calls and emails as "Several" individuals oppose in her analysis. 
You need to come to hearing to make a difference. Come a day or two 
early to personally lobby members of the committee as I am going to do. 
Let me know if you are coming by email.
 >
 > *Email in your opposition to AB57 to brian.weinberger at sen.ca.gov 
<http://sen.ca.gov> AND anton.favorini-csorba at sen.ca.gov 
<http://sen.ca.gov> by this Wed at 5 pm to be officially included in the 
bill's committee analysis and to be officially recorded as IN 
OPPOSITION*. If you are part of any group please include the name of 
the group you are calling from because they will list group names 
separately (stoplacelltowers for instance).
 >
 > Call and email all 7 senators that sit on this tiny committee. The 
office number and aide handling this issue are listed below. Call and 
Email. But calling and emailing are not enough; *please come to the 
hearing*. *They expect you to come if you care about opposing the 
legislation enough*.
 >
 > > Governance & Finance Committee Members:
 > > Senator Robert M. Hertzberg (Chair) Van Nuys, CA
Phone: (916) 651-4018 <tel:%28916%29%20651-4018>-
elizabeth.bojorquez at sen.ca.gov <http://sen.ca.gov> staffer
 >
 > Governance and Finance Committee Office- 916-651-4119 <tel:916-651-4119>
Analyst-Anton Favorini-Csorba and Brian Weinberger; room 408 in Capitol. 
brian.weinberger at sen.ca.gov <http://sen.ca.gov> AND 
anton.favorini-csorba at sen.ca.gov <http://sen.ca.gov>
 >
 > > Senator Janet Nguyen (pronounced Win) (Vice Chair)
Santa Ana Phone: 916.651.4034 <tel:916.651.4034>Â
Brandon.ebeck at sen.ca.gov <http://sen.ca.gov> staffer
Â
 > > Senator Jim Beall San Jose, Cupertino, Los Gatos, etc
Phone: (916) 651-4015 <tel:%28916%29%20651-4015>
sarah.larson at sen.ca.gov <http://sen.ca.gov> staffer
Â
 > > Senator Ed Hernandez-West Covina-
Phone: (916) 651-4022 <tel:%28916%29%20651-4022>
susan.reyes at sen.ca.gov <http://sen.ca.gov> staffer
Â
 > > Senator Ricardo Lara-Long Beach-
Phone: (916) 651-4033 <tel:%28916%29%20651-4033>
megan.baier at sen.ca.gov <http://sen.ca.gov> staffer
Â
 > > Senator John M. W. Moorlach-Irvine-
Phone: 916.651.4037 <tel:916.651.4037>
victoria.stewart at sen.ca.gov <http://sen.ca.gov> staffer
Â
 > > Senator Fran Pavley-Calabasas-
Phone: (916) 651-4027 <tel:%28916%29%20651-4027>
Andrei.gribakov at sen.ca.gov <http://sen.ca.gov>Â Â Â staffer
 >
 > Some points you can make if you like: Oppose AB57
 > -Facilitates placement of cell transmitters and it decreases property 
values
 > -They are an eye sore and clutter up the landscape and disfigure 
buildings they are on
 > -FCC itself refuses to grant this type of automatic approval and the 
state should refuse as well.
 > -Many cities and counties oppose including Los Angeles and San 
Francisco that passed a resolution against AB57-taking away little 
control local govts have to protect vulnerable residents
 > -Not a good idea to pass with outstanding questions about the health 
and safety of wireless transmitters-Need real safety standards to be 
updated now 30 years out of date. No safety buffer set for cell towers 
or transmitters. Proliferating World Helath Organization Class 2B 
Carcinogen.
 >
 > Background:
 >
 > AB57: This bill would provide that a colocation or siting application 
for a wireless telecommunications facility is deemed approved, if the 
city or county fails to approve or disapprove the application within the 
time periods established by the commission and all required public 
notices have been provided regarding the application.
 >
 > Specifically AB 57, as amended, Quirk. Telecommunications: wireless 
telecommunication facilities.
 > Existing law requires a city, including a charter city, or county to 
administratively approve an application for a collocation facility on or 
immediately adjacent to a wireless telecommunications collocation 
facility, as defined, through the issuance of a building permit or a 
nondiscretionary permit, as specified. Existing law prohibits a city or 
county from taking certain actions as a condition of approval of an 
application for a permit for construction or reconstruction for a 
development project for a wireless telecommunications facility.
 >
 > Under existing federal law, the Federal Communications Commission 
issued a ruling establishing reasonable time periods within which a 
local government is required to act on a colocation or siting 
application for a wireless telecommunications facility.
 >
 > This bill would provide that a colocation or siting application for a 
wireless telecommunications facility is deemed approved, if the city or 
county fails to approve or disapprove the application within the time 
periods established by the commission and all required public notices 
have been provided regarding the application.
 >
 > THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
 >
 > SECTION 1.
 >
 >Â Section 65964.1 is added to the Government Code, to read:
 >
 > 65964.1.
 >
 >Â (a) A colocation or siting application for a wireless 
telecommunications facility, as defined in Section 65850.6, shall be 
deemed approved if both of the following occur:
 >
 > (1) The city or county fails to approve or disapprove the application 
within the time periods established by the Federal Communications 
Commission in In re Petition for Declaratory Ruling, 24 FCC Rcd. 13994 
(2009).
 >
 > (2) All public notices regarding the application have been provided 
consistent with the public notice requirements for the application.
 >
 > (b) The Legislature finds and declares that a wireless 
telecommunications facility has a significant economic impact in 
California and is not a municipal affair as that term is used in Section 
5 of Article XI of the California Constitution, but is a matter of 
statewide concern.
 >
 > Thanks for all you do to protect our rights and do what is right.Â
Â
Kevin MottusÂ
kmottus at gmail.com <http://gmail.com>


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ecological Wisdom ~ Grassroots Democracy ~ Social Justice
Nonviolence ~ Decentralization ~ Community-based Economics
Feminism/Post-Patriarchal Values ~ Respect for Diversity
Personal & Global Responsibility ~ Sustainability/Future Focus
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cagreens.org/pipermail/sosfbay-discuss_lists.cagreens.org/attachments/20150701/c9100ec6/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
cal-forum mailing list
cal-forum at lists.cagreens.org
http://lists.cagreens.org/listinfo/cal-forum_lists.cagreens.org

More information about the sosfbay-discuss mailing list