Presentation at a community meeting to discuss opposition to plans for a cell tower in our neighborhood.

1. NEIGHBORHOOD STRATEGIES & ACTIONS TO
OPPOSE THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER
AT ST. LUKE’S CHURCH
San Miguel – Rudgear Neighborhood Coalition
March 21, 2013

2. Contents
• Background
• Project Description
• Detrimental Impacts
• Contra Costa County Agency Involvement
• Project Proponents & Motivations
• Actions Completed/In-Progress
• Organization & Action Plan

3. Background
• 70’ telecommunications tower at St. Luke’s church
• St. Luke’s and Verizon began discussions 2+ years ago – no notice provided or
input solicited from community
• Verizon submitted land use permit application Feb. 2012 to Contra Costa County
• On March 4 CCC issued a notice to just 22 parcel owners whose properties are
adjacent to the church project
• Permit approval if the applicant conforms to the required mitigations contained in
the Initial Study.
• Deadline for public comment is Friday, April 5
• Public Hearing Monday, April 15 on permit application
Time is limited to influence the outcome of the permit approval
process; a cohesive opposition strategy and tactical plan is essential!

4. Project Description
• 69.5’ tall telecommunications tower at the Northwest corner of the church
property
• Tower height above sea level will be about 340 feet
• Nine 6-foot tall antenna panels (broadcasting 360 degrees) positioned on tower
• Equipment shelter at the base for electrical equipment and a diesel generator
• Electrical power and telecommunications connections to the tower will be
supplied by 630’ underground cable
• A fence will surround the equipment shelter which will be in view above the
height of the fence. Not sure about barbed or razor wire on the top of the fence
• Lighting - shaded to cast downward and used during maintenance activities on
tower facilities
• Attempt to disguise as a fake tree (camouflage trees not on church property!)

5. Detrimental Impacts
Facilities like this are appropriate for industrial parks, freeway right-of-
ways, or remote open space areas. Inappropriate for a residential
neighborhood comprised of low-density single family homes.
There are three detrimental major impacts that will negatively affect our
neighborhood:
1. Aesthetic degradation (visual blight)
2. Potential health hazards from high power radio frequency
transmissions
3. Devaluation of property values

6. Shell Ridge Open Space
Stone Valley Rd (South 680 On-Ramp)

7. Aesthetic Degradation
• A tower of this height and equipment density will be conspicuous to all
line-of-sight property owners despite mitigation efforts to camouflage
its presence.
 The fake tree disguise will be noticeable – especially as artificial
components weather and fade over time
 If non-church owned “camouflage” trees are removed; fake tree will stand
out
 The nine 6’ tall antennas and base facilities will be impossible to disguise
and will be a permanent eyesore
 There will be noise and air pollution from diesel operation during power
outages and during mandatory monthly equipment testing
 There will be disruption to wildlife activity

8. Potential health hazards from high power radio frequency (RF)
transmissions
RF emissions safety is complex and controversial. But our families
(especially our kids) would be better off without exposure to the high
powered RF emissions.
 No description of the intensity of the RF output is in the Initial Study
documents; we don’t know how close this tower’s emissions will be
to the legal maximum. Bigger size & closer = stronger RF
emissions
 Health risk is an “off-the-table” issue for the permit approval
process - yet other proposed tower installations near schools have
been stopped due to child safety concerns
Answer this question: Given a choice, would you want your family
in a home near a massive telecommunications tower?

9. Potential Devaluation of Property Values
Negative aesthetics and uncertain health risks will result in a
negative impact on neighborhood property values.
 The potential financial devaluation needs to be evaluated but an
amount per property in the 10s of thousands of dollars is probably
realistic
 Proximity and severity/clarity of line of sight to the tower will be the
biggest factors for any particular property
 But surrounding homes will also be impacted due to lower
“comps” through home sales activity

10. CCC Agency Involvement
Department of Conservation and Development – Community Development Division
 Completion of the CEQA mandated project checklist and recommendation; identification of
required mitigations to potential project impacts; solicit public input, conduct public hearing; act on
the permit application
 Possible avenues of influence:
 Community opposition (individually & collectively)
 Challenge findings in CEQA project study
 Identify non-conformance with CCC 1998 Telecommunications Policy
 Compare project application with others that were similar and subsequently denied
 Intervention from District IV Supervisor on our behalf
 Identify alternate site locations with less negative impact
 Appeal to CCC Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors
 Cell site alternatives (size, co-location)
 Others?

11. Verizon Wireless (Permit Applicant)
Verizon’s motivation: better signal penetration = more customers, higher revenue and
higher profits.
 Significant resources and resolve to gain permit approval
 Dispassionate about local impact and community concerns
 Possible Vulnerabilities:
 No compelling case for increased wireless signal capacity in the area (area
adequately served by competing carriers) - TBD
 Valid deficiencies in the project plan that are not specifically covered by the Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
 Impact on Corporate image from community outrage and opposition to the project
 Willingness to compromise to achieve objective (increased signal capacity)
 Others?

12. St. Luke’s Church
St. Luke’s motivation is purely financial – the church will receive annual
revenue from the site location lease to Verizon
 The church is struggling financially
 Has already leased steeple space to T-Mobile for antenna installation
Possible Approaches:
 Community pressure – on leadership and members
 Educating church officials on the potential negative impact on the church’s
property value – impacting future sale and development
 Appeal to the central Lutheran Church authority
 Legal action against the church for the financial harm to neighboring properties
 Assisting the church financially
 Others?

13. Actions Completed/In-Progress
Complete
Action Description Complete By
1 Canvass neighborhood property owners (door-to-door) visits. Sign petitions, March 21
assess involvement interest, community meeting participation
2 Engage CCC Planner, Richard Norris, for clarification on the permit approval March 12
process and Project Study content/findings. Review plan revisions submitted
by the applicant. Identify potential areas of opposition points (still working)
3 Engage St. Luke’s Church (Pastor and Council). Inform them of March 13
neighborhood opposition, explore willingness to stop the project, explore
alternatives and points of compromise
4 Conduct face-to-face meetings with CCC officials (e.g. Supervisor Mitchoff) March 25
5 Conduct meeting with neighborhood property owners to gain alignment on March 21
opposition support, strategies and tactics
6 Conduct special studies with subject matter expert support as necessary April 1
(examples: property value impact analysis, wildlife analysis, fire risk &
prevention, site security)
7 Submit written comments and supporting documentation to County on the April 5
adequacy of the Initial Study/MND
8 Send letters of opposition and collected petitions to all relevant parties April 5
9 Prepare for April 15 public hearing – ID speakers, content, supporting April 14
documentation
10 MASS ATTENDANCE & MANY SPEAKERS AT THE PUBLIC HEARING!!!! April 15

14. Action Plan/Organization
Focus Areas Key Activities
CCC Permit Process • Challenges to MND
• Identify conflicts with CCC code and policies
• Letters of opposition
• Public hearing attendance
Pressure on Church • Official letter requesting termination of project
• Signage
• On-site protest (Easter?)
• Letter/Email campaign
Community Involvement • Social networking
• Contact public officials
• Media involvement
Legal • Determination of need & scope
• Financial requirements
• Identify potential resources

15. Key St. Luke’s Decision Maker – Bill Messana
CFO Consultant, Walnut Creek,
CA
CFO consulting and advisory services to
early stage and emerging growth
Church Council President companies
Contact:
Bill Messana, CPA
Walnut Creek, CA
(925)788-3356
bill@messanacfo.com