Health risk concerns prompt demonstators to oppose expansion
By Steve Geissinger, MEDIANEWS

SACRAMENTO — Loretta Lynch, former chairwoman of the state Public Utilities Commission, led a protest Wednesday in San Francisco against an industry-backed bill that would relax local-government control over cell-phone towers.

In Sacramento, the bill — opposed by many cities and counties — was poised to gain final legislative approval on its way to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's desk.

Lynch and other Bay Area protesters, including such groups as the Novato-based Council on Wireless Technology Impacts, decried expansion of towers without local and environmental oversight, as well as assessment of health risks from microwave radiation.

"It takes away both the right to regulate co-location — adding wireless antennas on or adjacent to existing wireless antenna sites — and other local rights to regulate cellular antenna permits, removals, and locations," said Nan Wishner of Cell Tower Free Albany.

"The thrust of the message today is requesting that the governor veto the bill or defer action until a research review on health effects of wireless exposure can be done," she said.

Schwarzenegger has not taken a position on the measure.

A spokesman for the author, Sen. Christine Kehoe, D-San Diego, said her measure would streamline future siting of the transmission towers needed to serve growing usage of cell phones, without removing much local control.

Kehoe spokesman Brian Weinberger says "it creates a new planning process" in order to help wireless communication firms and customers alike.

But cities and counties — including Santa Cruz and Marin
 

— oppose the measure because the local governments say they would lose much of their regulation over siting, terms, expansion and removal of what many view as unsightly cellular communications towers.

The bill was sponsored by T-Mobile and is backed by several cell-phone companies.

Beginning Jan. 1, the bill would prohibit cities and counties from limiting wireless communication facilities to sites owned by certain parties.

It would force local governments to issue at least 10-year permits in most cases, as well as ban cities and counties from requiring an escrow deposit to cover the cost of eventual removal of towers or gear atop buildings or water tanks.

The bill would allow telecommunications companies to add equipment to facilities approved after Jan. 1, with only administrative review by officials, as long as the expansion was envisioned as a possibility in the original permit approved by officials in a public hearing.

Those on both sides of the bill said other states are closely watching the outcome of this battle.

Contact Steve Geissinger at sgeissinger@angnewspapers.com.