HomeMy WebLinkAboutCORRESPONDENCE - PRESENTATIONSalas, Diana
From: Scott Davidson <sdavidson949@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, May 18, 2020 4:29 PM
To: eComment
Subject: Scott Davidson - Public Comment for Special Presentation 1 - 5/19/2020
Council Members,
I would like to express my concern about the installation of the 5G wireless utility equipment within our
neighborhoods. While I am not opposed to the expansion of communication carrier services, the proposals for
equipment within the neighborhoods is extremely large and unsightly. In our historic neighborhoods these
installations would significantly detract from the beauty of our neighborhoods, which currently contribute to
increased tax dollars via higher home values.
To date all wireless communications equipment have mostly been limited to major streets, but these projects
appear to encroach within the communities for the first time. We must strive to promote the beautification of
Santa Ana, and one way of doing this is by requiring aesthetically pleasing communications equipment within
the neighborhoods, if indeed they are necessary.
I urge you to halt the installation of the proposed wireless communication equipment in the Wilshire Square and
Heninger Park Neighborhoods and work with the vendors to require an aesthetically pleasing design for utility
poles within the neighborhood boundaries, ideally designs that are representative of the history of our
neighborhoods.
Thank you in advance for your consideration and your contributions toward making Santa Ana a beautiful place
to live.
Regards,
Scott Davidson
1146 S Ross Street
Salas, Diana
From: Q <nelsonq@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, May 18, 2020 4:40 PM
To: eComment
Subject: 5G Wireless Antennas Wilshire Square
Hello,
I live in Wilshire Square and we were notified about the antenna that will be placed in front of our house. From
the information given, it seems it will be very unsightly and an eye sore to our corner. From an economical
standpoint I see a risk in the value of our property going down. First because it will be "ugly" and very
noticeable. Because it will be noticeable, it might scare potential buyers who may assume some health
implications from the installations. I know there's no proven scientific facts to support health concerns, but
potential buyers might not be knowledgeable in the matter. From this standpoint, will homeowners be
compensated or have a say in the look of the new antennas? Personally, we would not benefit from the
installation. To take advantage of said technology, we would need to subscribe to premium packages and have
phones that support this feature. Both of which we do not currently have. For said reasons, this does not benefit
us and could potentially hurt us instead.
Regards,
Concerned Owner
Salas, Diana
From: Personal <alxhillenbrand@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2020 1:27 AM
To: eComment
Subject: Public Comment for Agenda Item: SPECIAL PRESENTATION Wireless Telecommunication
Facilities
Attachments: EHT-City Ordinances -Small Cells.pdf; SG_What-You-Need-to-Know.pdf
Dear Santa Ana City Council,
It is with great concern that I write today expressing my opposition to the installation of new 5G cellular towers
in the City of Santa Ana. Currently, there are no scientific studies proving that this new technology poses no
risk to human health. While I believe a moratorium on 5G towers is the safest answer, I do understand that
federal law prohibits such a moratorium based on health concerns. Therefore I ask that you join the dozens of
cities around the nation who recognize the lack of adequate safety studies and have therefore enacted legislation
to protect their citizens through zoning safeguards.
Various municipalities and safeguards are listed in the attached document from the Environmental Health Trust
titled "EHT-City Ordinances -Small Cells". Below are the most basic safeguards that I petition the council to
implement immediately. I feel that these safeguards will at the very least protect families and children while
residing at home and in schools.
Installation of small cells on public utility easements in residential neighborhoods is prohibited
500 foot setbacks for small cells for multi -family residences in commercial districts
500 foot separation from schools
1500 foot separation between nodes
I also petition the Council to call upon state and federal legislators to halt 5G installations until health risks are
evaluated by sound science. The current authorization for deploying these 5G systems comes from the federal
level and stems from the 1996 Telecommunications Act. This act declared wireless technologies to be safe and
prohibits local governments from denying construction permits of wireless infrastructure based on health
concerns. 5G systems are "small cell" and must be deployed by the hundreds, block by block, street pole by
street pole. These cells will reside outside the windows of children's bedrooms as they sleep, in playgrounds,
and in school yards. They will reside outside of the offices and shops of workers. They will emit
electromagnetic energy at a scale never seen before, and this will happen everyday 24/7. We must convince
ourselves that government studies conducted over 24 years ago cannot and should not serve as justification for
the safety of these new cutting edge systems.
I want to take a moment and explain that 5G technology is not an incremental step beyond 4G, rather it is a
significantly large step. It is stepping from an energy intensity range between 1-8 GigaHertz, into a range
between 28-60 GigaHertz (with some deployments up to 300 Ghz). Allow me to draw an analogy to sunbathing.
Imagine 4G as your normal routine, say 1 hour at the beach and you are OK. Now imagine 5G as your new
routine, where you are going to sunbathe instead for 7.5 hours. Would you safely assume that because you
sunbathed for an hour and were fine, that you will be fine sunbathing for 7.5 hours? This is the concern with
5G. It is vastly more intense than the 4G systems we have been using.
I understand as City Council members you have an obligation to protect the health of residents, but you also
have an obligation to follow through with federal laws and statues. An outright moratorium may not be
politically possible, but with enough courage, I believe the council can pass these most basic zoning safeguards.
Once again I ask that you join the brave public servants across the country who are taking a stand in protecting
their residents from this untested technology and its rapid deployment. Please also read through the attached
fact sheet titled "5G What You Need to Know".
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Alex Hillenbrand
Santa Ana resident and concerned father of three.
USA City Ordinances to Limit and Control Wireless
Facilities Small Cells in Rights of Ways
By Environment Health Trust - ehtrust.org
Original Source: https://ehtrust.org/usa-city-ordinances-to-limit-and-control-wireless-facilities-small-cells-in-
rights-of-ways/
LOCAL GOVERNMENT POLICIES & ORDINANCES TO REGULATE AND CONTROL WIRELESS
FACILITIES SMALL CELLS
From coast to coast local governments are taking action to protect their communities from the unfettered
deployment of 4G and 5G "small cell" wireless facilities. Several cities are passing ordinances that strictly limit
the buildout. Many policymakers as "What are other cities doing?"
This page is a compilation of top examples of what cities are doing to protect their communities. For each city
we provide a short synopsis along with a link to download the ordinance or policy. Scroll down to see the City
and policy.
Local ordinances note various purposes such as preserving visual character, protecting environmental resources,
and protecting residents against adverse health effects. They take a variety of approaches, such as prohibiting
small cells in certain areas, creating application and recertification fees and imposing aesthetic and
administrative requirements. Some combine several of these approaches.
Importantly, federal pre-emption has been exaggerated. Local governments do have authority to impose
procedural requirements for example. Please consider these two useful documents that came out of the efforts in
Montgomery County Maryland by the law office of Mark C. Del Bianco and which clarify what localities can
and cannot do in terms of requirements for companies.
Examples of areas addressed in these ordinances
LOCATION
• Prohibiting small cell installations in residential areas, certain streets, etc
• Requiring installations to be a certain distance away from residences, schools, hospitals, and/or other
installations
• Specifying that installations must be relocated if/when they would interfere with a public project
AESTHETICS / ENVIRONMENT
• Aesthetic, design, and noise requirements such as colocation, camouflage, height and light limits, etc.
ADMINISTRATIVE / LEGAL
• Requiring that residents who will be within a certain distance of an installation be notified
• Instating automatic time limits for permits
• Requiring annual recertification fees
• Requiring permittees to defend and indemnify the city from any liabilities arising from permits and the
installation, operation and maintenance of small cell installations
i Reserving the right to hire independent consultants at the applicant's expense
OTHER
Appointing a committee to study the viability of a fiber optic network
EXAMPLES OF POLICIES & ORDINANCES
Note: These were compiled from EHT research of various sources and a special thank you to Physicians for
Safe TechnOlOQy, My Streets My Choice and Last Tree Laws for their extensive resources. Please contact EHT
to add your Cities information.
Petaluma, California: Ordinance of the City Council of Petaluma
Protect environmental resources; protect residents against adverse health effects
Protect visual character; don't create visual blight
Protect environmental resources; protect residents against adverse health effects
Commercial or industrial zones
Antennas must connect to an already existing utility pole that can support its weight.
Servicing wires must be installed within the width of the existing utility.
All ground -mounted equipment not to be installed inside the pole must be undergrounded, flush to the
ground, within three (3) feet of the utility pole.
Dedicated power source to be installed and metered separately.
1,500 feet minimum between each Small Cell facility.
No Small Cell shall be within 200 feet of any residence.
a An encroachment permit must be obtained for any work in the right-of-way.
Petaluma California: Ordinance of the City Council of Petaluma PDF
Fairfax, California: Urgency Ordinance to Establish New Regulations for Wireless Telecommunications
Facilities; Ad hoc committee to study viability of fiber network
Ordinance modeled after Mill Valley's:
• Small cells prohibited in residential zones
1500 feet separation
City to study citywide fiberoptic cable network.
Fairfax California: Urgency Ordinance No 819 to Establish New Regulations for Wireless
Telecommunications Facilities
News: Maria Independent Journal Fairfax to study fiber-optic broadband amid protest against 5G
Warren Connecticut
This policy defines adequate coverage and adequate capacity. It details that it was designed "to locate towers
and/or antennas in a manner which protects property values, as well as the general safety, health, welfare and
quality of life of the citizens of Warren and all those who visit this community, minimize the total number and
height of towers throughout Warren, and provide standards and requirements for the regulation, placement,
design, appearance, construction, monitoring, modification and removal of telecommunications facilities and
towers."
"Coverage is considered to be "adequate" within that area surrounding a Base Station where the
predicted or measured median field strength of the transmitted signal is such that the majority of the
time, transceivers properly installed and operated will be able to communicate with the base station. In
the case of cellular communications in a rural environment like Warren, this would be a signal strength
of at least -90 dBm for at least 75% of the coverage area. It is acceptable for there to be holes within the
area of Adequate Coverage where the signal is less than -90 dBm, as long as the signal regains its
strength to greater than -90 dBm further away from the Base Station."
"Capacity is considered to be "adequate" if the Grade of Service (GOS) is p.05 or better for median
traffic levels offered during the typical busy hour, as assessed by direct measurement of the Personal
Wireless Service Facility in question."
Burlington, Massachusetts: Town of Burlington Policy Applications for Small Cell Wireless Installations,
October 22, 2018
Small Cell Committee drafted policy with annual recertification fees. Verizon withdrew its application,
concerned by the precedent it would set and questioning its legality. (BCATTV)
The Town of Burlington Policy /Application for Small Cell Wireless Installations ap roved by the Burlington
Board of Selectmen on October 22, 2018 PDF.
NEWS: Verizon Drops Small Cell Wireless Booster Application in Face of Fees, October 23, 2018
Booneville, Arkansas, September 2018
Proposed Ordinance would limit cell towers to 250 ft max; industrial zones
News Stories
Cell tower ordinance read for first time at council meeting, Sept 5, 2018
Mill Valley, California: Urgency Ordinance No 18, September 6, 2018
• New or updated facilities prohibited in residential zones. Commercial only.
• Facilities installed on poles in public right of way must be 1,500 feet apart
• Design, noise standards
• Facilities in public right of way that would interfere with future projects / improvements must be
relocated
• Promptly remove facilities when no longer needed; replace with smaller facilities as feasible
• Defend and indemnify the City
Mill Valley, California: Urgency Ordinance No 18, September 6 2018 PDF
News Stories
Tech Crunch" Bay Area Blocks 5G Deployment Over Cancer Concerns
Maria Post Mill Valley Council Adopts Wireless Ordinance Protects Community
5
San Ansehno, California Council Policy
• People within 300 feet of proposed antenna will be notified
• Town is entitled to employ independent consultant at applicant's expense to evaluate exceptions
San Anselmo, California PDF
Ross Valley, California: Wireless Telecommunications Facilities
• Modeled after Mill Valley's
• Adopted regulations prohibit facilities in residential and downtown zoning district.
• Facilities proposed in the public right-of-way subject to separate design criteria.
• Limits height and width of facilities to a minimum necessary for property function.
• Maximum height of 24 feet above the height of the existing utility pole and 7 feet above a street light
standard.
• Requires equipment to be placed underground.
Ross Valley, California: Wireless Telecommunications Facilities PDF
News Stories
https://www.marinij.coml20l8/10/271ross-valley-officials-work-to-tighten-5g-antenna-nilesl
Danville, California: Proposed Ordinance No. 2018-07: Wireless Communication Facilities
• Aesthetic requirements (design guidelines may be developed and amended from time to time to clarify
aesthetic and public safety goals and standards)
• Utilities must be underground to extent feasible. "Meters, panels, disconnect switches and other
associated improvements must be placed in inconspicuous locations to the extent possible".
• Permits valid for initial period of 10 years max
• "Where feasible, the location of wireless communication facilities shall be encouraged to be located on
publicly owned or controlled property or right-of-way."
• Would allow small cells in residential districts:
—"All facilities shall be substantially screened from the view of surrounding properties and the public view or
collocated with existing facilities or structures so as not to create substantial additional visual, noise, or thermal
impacts. "
—Property owners within 300 ft of proposed site must be notified
Danville California: Ordinance No. 2018-07 Wireless Communications Facilities PDF
Other Links
hq://mystreetmychoice.com/danville.html
http•//scientists4wiredtech cotn/danville/municipal-wireless-code/
Sebastopol, California: City Council Agenda Item Report and Urgency Ordinance (Recommended)
1l
• Purpose: Institute a moratorium on applications for small cells in the public right-of-way until adoption
of a permanent ordinance
Previous regulations on telecommunications facilities (according to the recommended urgency ordinance, these
did not anticipate 5G and do not address installation of telecommunications facilities in the right-of-way):
Purpose: Protect visual character, inhabitants, environmental resources
Cannot be located in any required yard setback area
Facilities within 400 feet of residential areas, schools, churches, hospitals etc must comply with NIER
standards
Minor facilities must be 75 feet away from a "residential dwelling unit" except I single family residence
on the property where it is located
Other Links
Pittsfield, Massachusetts: Proposed Section: Wireless Communications Facilities
• Telecom company must prove prefered site/existing structure does not work
• Above ground aesthetic requirements
• Sound and light restrictions with emphasis on industry proving compliance
Pittsfield, Massachusetts: Proposed Section: Wireless Communications Facilities PDF
Hempstead, New York: Wireless Communications Facilities
• Requires a special use permit for cell towers that encourages location of new wireless facilities so as to
minimize their impact on historically sensitive areas around residences, schools, houses of worship,
day-care centers. Seven consideration factors are listed in order from more to least preferred, with
existing towers being most preferred and new towers in residential zones least preferred.
• Prohibits towers from exceeding a height that permits it to operate without artificial lighting
• Allows the town to hire consultants and do inspections
• Set a fee schedule of $500 per pole
• Requires a 4 foot warning sign on the pole
• Utilities at wireless installations should be underground when possible
Hempstead, New York: Wireless Communications Facilities Ordinance eCode Chapter 142
Other Links
ht!ps://mdsafetech.org/coll-tower-and-city-ordinance
https://hempsteadny_goy/permits-and-applications/wireless-telecom-ordinance
Mason, Ohio: Zoning Ordinance — Wireless Communications Systems
• No small cells in residential areas or within 100 feet of property used for residential use
• Small cells must be 2000 feet apart (unless colocated)
• Small cells are between 20-30 ft high (may be able to exceed 30 ft if colocated)
• Every attempt shall be made to locate small cells on existing structures; if not available, within public
right of way
• All related equipment should be underground or wholly contained so not visible
• Each facility shall consist of no more than 1 antenna/user and capable of providing communication for at
least 2 users
Mason Ohio Zoning Ordinance PDF
Sonoma, California: Report and Urgency Ordinance
On Nov 5, 2018 Sonoma approved their 5G urgency ordinance.
"Based on the foregoing, the City Council finds and determines that the immediate preservation of the public
health, safety and welfare requires that this Ordinance be enacted as an urgency ordinance pursuant to
Government Code Section 36937(b), and take effect immediately upon adoption. Therefore, this Ordinance is
necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, safety and welfare and its urgency is
hereby declared."
The City also has a Small Cell Tower page.
Sonoma California Ordinance on 5G PDF
San Rafael, California: City Council Report
San Rafael California: December 2018 Documentation for City Action on 12/18/2018
This document also reviews other Cities 5G small cell policies.
News stories
San Rafael Calif Officials Work to Tighten 5G Regulation
Lancaster, Pennsylvania: Zoning Changes via Ordinance 9-2016
• City Council rushed through zoning changes to declare many streets off limits to new poles (said they
could be much taller than existing ones)
• Public Utility Commission stripped Mobilitie and other distributed -antenna companies of utility status,
meaning that they would not get any more "certificates of public convenience" in Pennsylvania.
Lancaster Pennsylvania Ordinance No. 9-2016 PDF
News Stories
• http://www.philly.com/phillyibusiness/comeast/philly-and-suburbs-brace-for-attack-of-the-small-cells-
20170601. html? arc404=true
• http://www.govtech.com/dc/articles/Philadelphia-Braces-For-Small-Cell-Futtire.httnl
!j
Holyoke, MA: Initial Request
• Draft policy $500 fee for city inspection of rooftop poles/roofs every 2 years
• Holyoke has submitted an order from councilor Bartley Roman to limit equipment and require $500
apiece per small cell—$500 may exceed FCC limits. At -large councilor Rebecca Lisi, on behalf of a
Holyoke resident, recently submitted to the town lawyer a copy of the ordinance drafted by Pittsfield.
Information from https://www.lasttreclaws.com/ordinances.html
OTHER ACTIONS
Monterey, California: Verizon's application denied
Commissioners overruled staff and voted 7-0 to deny telecom giant Verizon's small cell application
Small Cell Towers nixed in 7-hour Monterey Planning Commission
Los Angeles, California: Deal with Verizon; letter from Mayor to FCC
News Stories
LA Times: 5G service rolls out — but not without controversy
San Jose, California: Negotiated agreement
"officials made improved access to areas with low internet participation a precondition for reducing
fees... agreement set tiered costs per network node installation, with lower fees for companies deploying more
nodes. Along with this incentive, three companies pledged to contribute a total of $24 million over the next
decade to a digital inclusion fund." GovTech
News Stories
September 2018 The Future of 5G: The Bitter Battle for Local Control
Note: These were compiled from EHT research of various sources and a special thank you to Physicians for
Safe Technology My Streets My Choice and Last Tree Laws for their extensive resources. Please contact EHT
to add your Cities information.
What You Need To Know About
SG Wireless and "Small" Cells
"We recommend a moratorium on the roll -out of the fifth generation, SG, for telecommunication until
potential hazards for human health and the environment have been fully investigated by scientists
independentfrom industry ...RF-EMF has been proven to be harmful for humans and the environment."
— 2017 SG Scientific Appeal (signed by more than 200 scientists and doctors from 35 countries)
The radiation from small cells is not small: Wireless antennas emit microwaves — non -ionizing radiofrequency radiation
— and essentially function as cell towers. Each installation can have over a thousand antennas that are transmitting
simultaneously.
Millions of small cells to be built in front yards: The Federal Communications Commission estimates that millions of these
wireless transmitters will be built in our rights -of -way, directly in front of our homes.
5G will add to — not replace — our current wireless technology: SG will not only utilize current 3G and 4G wireless
frequencies already in use but also add higher frequency — submillimeter and millimeter waves — in order to transmit data at
superfast speeds.
Community authority is overruled: Communities are being stripped of their right to make decisions about this new
technology. "Streamlining" means almost automatic approval. Public notice and public hearings are being eliminated. Even if
every homeowner on the block opposes the antennas on their street, the opposition will be disregarded.
Scientists worldwide are calling for a halt to the 5G Roll -out: Over 200 scientists and doctors issued a declaration calling
for a moratorium on the increase of SG cell antennas citing human health effects and impacts to wildlife.
Read the 2017 Scientific Appeal on 5G To the European Commission
Read the 2015 EMF Scientist Appeal to the United Nations
Read Letters From Dozens of Scientists on Health Risks of 5G
Cumulative daily radiation exposure poses serious public health risks: Peer reviewed, published science indicates
that exposures to wireless radiation can increase cancer risk, alter brain development and damage sperm. Most people
are unaware that wireless technology was never tested for long-term safety, that children are more vulnerable and that the
accumulated scientific evidence shows harm.
Decreased property values: Studies show property values drop up to 20% on homes near cell towers. Would you buy a home
with a mini cell tower in the yard? Read research showing decreased property value from cell towers near homes.
Microwave antennas in front yards present several worker and public safety issues: Unions have already filed comments
that workers were injured, unaware they were working near transmitting antennas. How will HVAC workers, window washers,
and tree cutters be protected? The heavy large equipment cabinets mounted on poles along our sidewalks also present new
hazards. Cars run into utility poles, often, what then? US Dept of Labor letters on cell tower safety
Fiber is the safe alternative: Worldwide, many regions are investing in wired fiberoptic connections which are are safer,
faster, more reliable, provide greater capacity, and are more cyber-secure. Read "Re -Inventing Wires: The Future of Landlines
and Networks," by the National Institute for Science, Law & Public Policy
www.ehtrust.org
All text in this document in blue is hyperlinked to resources for more information.
Please also see hiC.ps.%,Lehnustore/fictcheet-needlst7,pw_.5sma11-cells-sr�en re^,nollcw_rlidi� for additional resources.
q9
KEY RESEARCH AND REPORTS
5G Frequencies Are Absorbed Into the Skin
Physicists found that the higher millimeter frequencies intended for SG use are
preferentially absorbed into the sweat duct at much higher rates than other organ
tissues. Read two published studies "The Modeling of the Absorbance of the SubTllz
Radiation by Human Skin:'The human skin as a sub THz receiver - Does SG pose a
danger to it or not? Patti Ben-Ishai, PhD Lecture.
5G Frequencies Are Used As Weapons
Millimeter frequencies have the capacity to cause a severe burning sensation in the
skin and are used by the U.S. Department of Defense in crowd control guns called
Active Denial Systems.
Landmark US National Toxicology Program (NTP) Study Finds "Clear Evidence
of Cancer" and DNA Damage
The NTP studies found male rats exposed for two years to cell phone radiation
developed significantly increased ghomas (brain cancer) and schwann cell tumors,
the very same types of tumors increased in long-term human cell phone users. NIH/
NTP presentation on DNA results states "exposure to RFR has the potential to induce
measurable DNA damage under certain exposure conditions:' Press Coverage,
Peer Review Report
Cell Tower Radiation is Linked To Damage in Henan Blood
A published study compared people living close and far from cell antennas and found
people living closer to cellular antennas had changes in blood that predicts cancer
development. Read Zodiansiama et al, 2017. Read a Compilation of Research on Cell
Tower Radiation
Published Scientific Review on 5G Finds Adverse Effects
Scientific literature documents evidence of nonthermal cellular damage from wireless
radiation used in telecommunications to DNA integrity, cellular membranes, gene
expression, protein synthesis, neuronal function, the blood brain barrier, melatonin
production, sperm damage and immune dysfunction. Russell 2018
Cellular Radiation Negatively Impacts Birds and Bees
Published research finds the frequencies alter bird navigation and disturb honeybee
colonies. Research on EMF and Bees. Research on Wildlife
RESOURCES
Research on 5G and Cell Tower Radiation
A SG Wireless Future: Will it give us a smart nation or contribute to an unhealthy
one?" Santa Clara Medical Association Bulletin, Cindy Russell MD, 2017
Letters by Scientists in Opposition To 56 Research on Cell Tower Radiation, 2017
Biological Effects from Exposure to Electromagnetic Radiation Emitted by Cell Tower
Base Stations and Other Antenna Arrays, Levitt and Lai, 2010
Radiofrequency radiation injures trees around mobile phone base stations,
Waldmami-Selsam et al., 2016
Department of Interior Letter on the Impact of Cell Towers on Migratory Birds, Willie
R. Taylor Director, Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance, 2014
Anthropogenic radfofrequency electromagnetic fields as an emerging threat to wildlife
orientation, Balntori, 2015
Briefing Memorandum On The Impacts from Thermal and Non -thermal
Non -ionizing Radiation to Birds and Other Wildlife, Manville, 2016
Database of Worldwide International Policy To Reduce EMF
Youtube Scientific Videos on 5G
TAKE ACTION
Contact local, state and federal elected officials in person.
Share this information with your friends, family and community.
Ask for government policy that reduces RFR exposure to the public.
Citizens in all states must organize and take action to halt
legislation that increases cell antennas in neighborhoods.
LEARN MORE
Federal Legislation To Know
OS States With Streamlining Bills
5G Small Cell Antennas'Fo Be Placed On:
• Street lights
• Trashcans
• Utility pales
• Bus stops
• Sides of buildings
5 Reasons Why Small Cells Are Not Small
• Increased radiation near homes
• Refrigerator -sized equipment cabinet
• Drop in property values
• Taller poles
• Fixtures weigh hundreds of pounds.
Crown Castle's 201610-K Annual Report says:
"If radio frequency emissions from wireless handsets
or equipment on our wireless infrastructure are
demonstrated to cause negative health effects, potential
future claims could adversely affect our operations,
costs or revenues... We currently do not maintain any
significant insurance with respect to these matters."
.Read warnings from Crown Castle, Verizon and other
wireless companies.
The American Academy of Pediatrics says:
'An Egyptian study confirmed concerns that living
nearby mobile phone base stations increased the risk for
developing:
• Headaches
• Memory problems
• Dizziness
• Depression
• Sleep problems'
AAP on Cell Towers
Letter from oncologist Lennart Hardell MD &
Colleagues: "There is a substantial body of evidence
that this technology is harmful to humans and the
environment. The 5G millimeter wave is known to heat
the eyes, skin and testes Of particular concern are the
most vulnerable among us — the unborn, children, the
infirm, the elderly and the disabled. It is also expected that
populations of bees and birds will drastically decline."
2017 Scientific Letter
Peer Reviewed Research Studies on Radic frequency
Radiation Have Found:
• Headaches
• Sperm damage
• Altered brain development
• Depression
• Neurological symptoms
• Hormone changes
• Memory problems
• Sleep problems
• Cancer
Science:
Biolnitiative 2012 Report by Independent Scientists
Dr. Moskowitz, University of California at Berkeley
Dr. Lennnart Harrell Orebro University Sweden
The Baby Safe Project
Whatis5g.info
Physicians for Safe Technology
Environmental Health Trust 5G Resources
ENVIRONMENTAL
www.ehtrust.org HEALTH TRUST
Salas, Diana
From:
Salvador Diaz <diazsal@me.com>
Sent:
Tuesday, May 19, 2020 7:23 AM
To:
eComment
Subject:
5G Antennas
To whom it may concern:
I would like to request that if the City of Santa Ana is planning in approving the installation of the 5G Antennas
throughout Wilshire Square neighborhood please consider the following.
•Insure the Safety of the home owners and residents are number one priority.
•From am aesthetics standpoint please insure that they are not unsightly. We already have way to many power cable
running overhead and they don't look very appealing.
•Will the neighborhood benefit when it comes to revenue. How much can we expect to receive to put the funds in use
to help continue in improving the overall curb appeal of our Wilshire Square Streets.
That's all and I appreciate you taking my comments and concern in consideration.
Best regards,
Sal Diaz
1139 S Birch
Santa Ana Ca 92707
Sent from my Phone
Salas, Diana
From: alisonyouung <alisonyouung@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2020 11:56 AM
To: eComment
Subject: 5/19/20 Public Works Presentation at Council Meeting
Attachments: 20200519_112542.jpg; 20200519_112526jpg
Mayor and Council Members;
I respectfully request that the Council delay any action on approval for the proposed 5G antenna
upgrades to be presented by Public Works at tonight's Council meeting until the public has been
given more information and an opportunity to provide input.
I have attached below photos of an existing installation at Parton and Richland in Santa Ana. As a
resident and as past president of the Santa Ana Historical Preservation Society I have strong
concerns about the aesthetic impact on neighborhoods, and questions on how income generated by
the agreement will be used. The pandemic has curtailed the ability of the public to weigh in on these
projects. Please delay decisions until the community is better able to review and respond. Thank
you.
Alison Young, 1102 S Ross, Santa Ana
Seat from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
5
iu
i
'� WP
nhv!.iAw
4ildrit<..
Salas, Diana
From: Lisa Alviso <engrlisa1 @yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2020 9:40 AM
To: eComment
Subject: Public Comment for Special Presentation 1
My name is Lisa Alviso and I live in Wilshire Square. I'm am emailing to express my strong opposition to the placement
of the 5G wireless equipment in our neighborhood. These are historical neighborhoods and from the diagrams I've seen
the poles and equipment are going to be very detrimental to the aesthetics of our neighborhoods. I also understand this
is only one provider and I'm sure others will want to follow with their equipment if this is allowed. Please DO NOT allow
these poles to be placed in this neighborhood! I'm sure there are other routes and/or methods of transmitting. Thank
you.
Sent from my iPad
I
Salas, Diana
From: timrush@bhhscaprops.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2020 11:01 AM
To: eComment
Subject: Your council meeting of 5/19/20 Public Works presentation
RE; Utility Pole 5-G upgrades
Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council;
This evening your public works department is to make a presentation regarding the installation of 5-G Antenna upgrades
around our city. I look forward to the hearing and learning more about this proposal. From what I have been told at
this point I must tell you that I am very disturbed.........
It is my understanding that there are to be.....
1. At least one upgrade per block
2. The city is to receive on the order of $50,000 per pole
3. These will be installed not just in neighborhoods but on many traffic signal poles and street light standards.
4. As far as I can tell based upon a cursory level of conversation with neighborhood leaders.....no input has been
asked.
In looking at the pole "upgrades" (that is a misnomer if I ever heard one!) at Richland and Parton ...... OMG this is a
Frankenstein/erector set of a utility pole. To impose this level of visual offense to every block in the city
is unimaginable. Keep in mind the Federal Government already has assaulted every neighborhood by mandating that
we cannot interfere or restrict the installation of the God awful satellite dishes (on some houses and apartment
buildings as many as four, five, even a dozen. So now we get more of this visual blight??
Why are we not demanding faux palm trees or pine trees to hide them? How much of this money will be given back to
local neighborhoods to offset this visual blight by doing park, parkway or other permanent aesthetic improvements??
This needs further study and input from Comm -Link, neighborhood leaders, HRC, Planning commissions.
Irvine looks clean and neat because they care about the aesthetics of their city......... we need to pay attention to ours.
Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully,
Tim Rush
Historic Wilshire Square
7
Salas, Diana
From: Ricki Older <faolder2013@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2020 1:46 PM
To: eComment
Subject: Wireless blight
Our city was wise enough in 1928 to put the electrical wires for our street lighting underground for a beautiful
neighborhood. Surely we are wise enough in 2020 to realize that type of wiring and equipment on our main
streets are incredibly distasteful visually.
Think carefully about how we want to bring something that will be with us for the next 50 years. Many of the
older neighborhoods at least have Street poles in the backyards so the blight does not have to be in the public
vision.
I request that you plan another option than what you have put before us so far. It is unattractive and demeaning
to our neighborhoods.
Respectfully submitted past president Wilshire Square neighborhood President and ETAC boardmember
Salas, Diana
From: Luis Echeveste <luiseinsurance@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2020 2:25 PM
To: eComment
Subject: Luis Echeveste Public Comment for Special Presentation 1
My and my spouse electing to move into this beautiful historic neighborhood was for the most part because it
was historical and when you walls or drive through their roads you feel a sense of history and value in the
preservation of how time was before our society was hit by all the intrusive technology.
I understand our business and loves heavily rely on technology and communication but when it intrudes on
what you value most when you get home and walk your dog and take the family for a stroll and see how your
once pristine untouched neighborhood is violated with such invasive aesthetically unappealing towers that break
my heart to see be erected in our community.
I for one would prefer not having any of these towers placed in our neighborhood to begin with.
-If there are alternative locals in other parts of Santa Ana that would serve its purpose but be placed in area of
commerce and be in sync with the specifications Santa Ana would be pleased with please consider
-Has there been any alternative spots along busier streets where these towers may be placed and reach its target
consumers?
Will there be any consideration to re -design so that is in line with Historic Santa Ana's style?
-Or is there any existing poles that equipment may be mounted in a way that looks to be difficult for the casual
eye to notice?
-I read in an article that 5G towers do not have the same range as their 3g or 4g counterparts and have to be
placed several hundred feet apart - if that is the case are you planning to line the streets with more towers in the
future?
Luis A. Echeveste
Resident of Wilshire Square
Salas, Diana
From: Irma Jauregui <irmapj@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2020 2:56 PM
To: eComment
Subject: 5G wireless antennas is Wilshire Square
Dear Mayor and Councilmembers
We have received the information from Verizon as to the locations and possible views of this equipment.
My family, immediate neighbors and myself are very concerned and not in favor at all of having them so close to our
homes, as close as our bedrooms windows in my case, for several reasons I'll mention below; 1. Possible harmful health
Low frequency electromagnetic radiation emissions.
2. Earthquake or fire hazards
3. Unsightly equipment in our historic neighborhood intrusion on street and homes views 4. Although not easy to
measure at this time, but as a realtor, equipment that is unsightly can affect and lower property values, especially if it's
so close to homes that it makes that area undesirable.
5. If 1 company is allowed to do this, then how can we say no to the many others that eventually will apply? It's the
broken window effect with equipment inundating our residential neighborhoods! Please have them reconsider
locations and designs.
I know that technology has to be updated to help consumers, but I hope and I'm sure that if they can find a way to
install them on the commercial corridors at edges of our neighborhoods, with designs that incorporate the character of
our streets, the residents would feel much more secure and supportive of changes going forward With much respect,
Irma P Jauregui Wilshire Square resident and past president of Wilshire Square Neighborhood Assn.
Sent from my iPad
io
Sales, Diana
From: Ginelle Hardy <ginelleann@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 4:08 AM
To: eComment
Subject: Fwd: SPECIAL PRESENTATION Wireless Telecommunication Facilities
Begin forwarded message:
From: Ginelle Hardy <ginelleann(a)gmail.com>
Subject: RE: SPECIAL PRESENTATION Wireless Telecommunication Facilities
Date: May 20, 2020 at 12:06:10 AM PDT
To: Miguel Pulido <mpulido(a)santa-ana.orq>, Juan Villegas <jvillegas(a)santa-ana.orq>,
"Penaloza, David" <dpenaloza(cr�.santa-ana.org>, Vince Sarmiento
<VSarmiento@santa-ana.orq>, Jose Solorio <JSolorio(a)_santa-ana.orq>, Phil Bacerra
<philbacerra(@gmail.com>, ciglesias(a santa-ana.org
Cc: Nabil Saba <Nsaba .santa-ana.orq>, "Gomez, Pedro" <PGomez(a)santa-ana.org>,
Margarita Macedonio <MMacedonioosanta-ana.orq>
May 19, 2020
Mayor and City Council members;
After this evenings City Council Meeting's SPECIAL PRESENTATION Wireless
Telecommunication Facilities — Background and Permitting Guidelines - Public
Works Agency, I would like to ask that a more in depth presentation with public input
be conducted in the near future, if not at the next council meeting. Many good points
and questions were brought up that need to be addressed and answered.
I would especially like to see the following concerns addressed pertaining to some of
the issues raised this evening:
I. As a home owner with a utility pole owned by SCE behind my
house and a locked gate, I have no interest in allowing any
company, except SCE, access to or installing equipment on the
pole in my yard.
2. Installation of telecommunication equipment on street lights, instead of utility
poles, needs a lot of clarification. Street lights located in neighborhoods (regardless of
age, design or style) are an architectural element making telecommunication
equipment mounted on street lights in neighborhoods or boundaries
of neighborhoods not a welcome alternative to it being installed on City owned utility
poles.
3. Identifying gaps in service is a good idea and may be helpful to identify where
installations are needed allowing for in advance planning and input in the placement
of telecommunication equipment. This way there may be an avenue to prevent
unsightly wireless telecommunication equipment from being installed near or in front
of a historic house or building that is listed on Santa Ana Register of
Historic Properties!
4. I agree that looking at what other cities are doing with the intent of finding "best
practices" to adapt for use in Santa Ana is a good idea and would be a prudent move.
6. If the City is making money from fees paid to install telecommunication equipment
on City owned utility poles I would think that $ money should be used to
fund installation of WI-FI on new street lights as promised (or not). Cost should
be disclosed and if and when WI-FI installations have been or will be made this
information should also be made public.
6. Not just one or another neighborhood is being affected
by unsightly teleCOMIAIUniCatlOn equipment. Historic Heninger Park is also
negatively impacted by the above ground installation of telecommunication
equipment including additional utility pole arms, nodes, handles, pull boxes,
antennas, etc. I believe all neighborhoods should be treated equally - a vocal
neighborhood is speaking out for those who may feel powerless to fight
against installations of ugly wireless telecommunication equipment in front of their
house, on their block or in their neighborhood. - Let's make sure what happens in all
neighborhoods is the same, if one neighborhood can
avoid unsightly equipment installations, then those practices should be applied in all
neighborhoods City wide!
Thank you for your time and help in this matter.
Sincerely,
Ginelle Hardy
Historic Heninger Park, President
ginelleannggmai.com