AgdaPkt 2011-07-11 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

6.1.1. - Page 8 This is an advanced copy of a Grand Jury report that will be publicly released on May 19, 2011. Penal Code section 933.05 (f) prohibits any officer, agency, department, or governing body of a public agency from disclosing any contents of the report prior to the public release of this report. 7. Five cities which have cell towers on public property are not charging service providers for land use three cities do not currently have cell towers located on public property. 20 Conclusions The 2011 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury concludes that: The County and most cities have governing policies and/or ordinances that prescribe cell tower installations. Having an ordinance in place does not reduce the likelihood of public opposition to a cell tower application. The County and cities need to balance public desire for improved wireless reception with local - concerns regarding health, aesthetics, and property values while recognizing the rights of service providers under federal law. The County and cities which have cell towers located on public property should establish lease agreements with service providers to generate revenue to the general fund. The County and cities have varying cell tower application fees for recouping staff costs in processing these often complex applications and use permits. There is no standard way of ensuring that cell towers are maintained or removed when they are no longer used or the permit expires. Cities which do not already have maintenance and removal provisions required of service providers may be responsible for cell tower maintenance and/or removal on public property. Educating the public about applicable governmental regulations may help to alleviate some of the angst generated by cell tower installations. Recommendations The 2011 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury recommends to the County Board of Supervisors and the City Councils of all cities in San Mateo County the following: 1. Review and revise, if needed, the current fee structure to recoup staff costs for processing cell tower applications; 2. Negotiate lease agreements for future installations on public land that generate revenue or other tangible benefit to the community; 19 Daly City, East Palo Alto, Half Moon Bay, Portola Valley, and Woodside have cell towers on public property and do not receive revenue for land use. 20 Atherton, Cohna, and Pacifica do not currently have cell towers located on public property.