City council members were highly critical of an industry effort to end a wireless moratorium at yesterday’s council meeting. In response to a staff request and support from Glendale citizens, the council voted to extend the current moratorium to allow time for crafting a state-of-the-art wireless ordinance.
Laura Friedman informed one California Wireless Association rep that he obviously hadn’t followed the issue in Glendale for long, that the council members’ job was to represent city residents, and that he had totally ignored the issue of local control.
Dave Weaver ridiculed the industry’s exaggerated public safety claims, and complained that the correspondence city council received from them was not at all relevant to the issues at hand.
John Drayman and Frank Quintero both praised community experts’ efforts to educate themselves and the city, in contrast to the wireless industry spokespeople. Drayman said he was waiting for industry “participation that has something to do with the reality at hand…I’m not hearing anything to refute the comments made by the public.”
Ara Najarian brought up an important point (which, again, the wireless industry reps did not address at all): the Federal Communications Commission, the U.S. Congress, updated scientific studies, the court system (including the U.S. Supreme Court which has the Sprint v. County of San Diego case before it now), and state of California rules and regulations all have an impact on local siting and control over wireless facilities.
The clear conclusion I’ve drawn from Glendale city council comments and other hearings I’ve attended in Southern California: The wireless industry needs to learn to work with communities to find appropriate sites for wireless facilities.
Pingback: Wireless Industry Attorney Disregards Public Concerns, Promotes Misleading Documentation, Asks for Los Angeles County Approval "Because of the Law" | Sunroom Desk