OVERVIEW

The Federal government is once again trying to strip away local authority over cell towers siting. Senators John Thune (R-SD) and Brian Schatz (D-HI) introduced the STREAMLINE Small Cell Deployment Act (S.3157)

S.3157  is an effort to make Congressional law consistent with recent FCC actions. In 2017 and 2018, Telecom managed to get the FCC to pass sweeping regulations that strip municipalities of local zoning rights and greatly cut back environmental and historic reviews. Now Telecom seeks to tighten up Section 704 of the 1996 Telecommunications Act (TCA) as it’s inconsistent with these new FCC rulings.

For a detailed look at how S.3157 would alter Section 704 of the 1996 Telecommunications Act, stripping municipalities and the public of our rights, please see:
http://scientists4wiredtech.com/legislation/2018-streamline-small-cell-deployment-act-s3157/

Here’s a simple description and easy template to take action to oppose S.3157.
http://emfsafetynetwork.org/take-action-to-stop-5g-senate-bill-s-3157/

Overview of S.3157 written by the National League of Cities
https://www.nlc.org/article/federal-advocacy-update-week-of-july-10-2018#Cell

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

SENATORS INTRODUCE PREEMPTIVE SMALL CELL DEPLOYMENT BILL

Angelina Panettieri, 202-626-3196

On June 29, Senators John Thune (R-SD) and Brian Schatz (D-HI) introduced the Streamlining The Rapid Evolution And Modernization of Leading-edge Infrastructure Necessary to Enhance (STREAMLINE) Small Cell Deployment Act (S. 3157). The bill is focused, much like the recent FCC rulemaking efforts, on limiting the actions local governments can take on small cell wireless facility siting in an effort to make deployments cheaper, faster, and more consistent across jurisdictions.

However, while the FCC’s statutory authority to take these actions is debatable and can be more easily challenged in court, congressional action to limit local authority would be permanently damaging. The bill would severely limit the ability of local governments in states without preemptive state small cell laws to govern wireless siting and would complicate implementation of new small cell laws in states that have passed them.

Despite urging from NLC and other local government advocates during the bill’s drafting phase, many preemptive provisions remain in the bill. Senator Thune said that he intends to hold a hearing on this bill by the end of the month. We need local leaders to send your Members of Congress a letter today urging opposition to this harmful legislation.

In addition to preempting local authority, the bill would make some major changes to current federal requirements for small cell siting by carving out a new category of “small personal wireless facilities” with new requirements, separate from existing wireless siting law:

  • It would limit local consideration of small personal wireless facilities (defined as “a personal wireless service facility in which each antenna is not more than 3 cubic feet in volume; and does not include a wireline backhaul facility”) to “objective and reasonable” “structural engineering standards based on generally applicable codes; safety requirements; or aesthetic or concealment requirements.”
  • Modifies the application shot clock to be 60 days for collocations, and 90 days for new sites. Cities would have ten days to notify applicants in writing if their application is incomplete. The bill also explicitly prohibits moratoria/tolling to lengthen these shot clocks.
  • Special shot clock carveouts for small cities, defined as fewer than 50,000 residents:
  1. 90 days for collocations if the provider has filed 50 or fewer applications in a 30-day period, or 120 days if the provider has filed more than 50 applications in 30 days.
  2. 120 days for new sites if the provider has filed 50 or fewer applications in a 30-day period, or 150 days if the provider has filed more than 50 applications in 30 days.
  • Allows local governments to request a one-time 30-day waiver from the FCC.
  • Includes a deemed granted provision for applications not acted upon by the local government in the stated period.
  • Limits “fees,” which the bill defines as “a fee to consider an application for the placement, construction, or modification of a small personal wireless facility, or to use a right-of-way or a facility in a right-of-way owned or managed by the State or local government for the placement, construction, or modification of a small personal wireless facility.” This would include not only application fees but also recurring rents for usage of public property.
  • Fees must be “competitively neutral, technology neutral, and nondiscriminatory; publicly disclosed; and based on actual and direct costs.” This would eliminate market-based rents for small cell facility installations.
  • Finally, the bill orders a GAO study on broadband deployment on tribal land.

The bill does not provide for the grandfathering of any extant agreements between cities and providers or tower companies, and it would appear to preclude agreements such as those recently struck by the City of San Jose, Calif. with AT&T and Verizon lauded by Commissioner Rosenworcel as an example other local governments could use.

Cities should contact their Members of Congress, particularly those who sit on the Senate Commerce Committee, and urge opposition to the bill.

https://www.nlc.org/article/federal-advocacy-update-week-of-july-10-2018#Cell

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/3157/text?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22S.3157%22%5D%7D&r=1

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

TAKE ACTION

Here’s an easy way to take action. NLC will send a letter directly to your representatives in Congress for you.

At this link, you will need to insert your zip code (and your full address if your postal zone is split between jurisdictions), and then the letter template will appear with a message to legislators generated by the National League of Cities (NLC).

PLEASE NOTE: Instead of using their letter, which has statements of support for small cells, either

  1. copy and paste the following words into their letter template
  2. copy and paste the sample letter given beneath these instructions, or
  3. craft your own letter.
Text to copy and paste into letter template

http://advocacy.nlc.org/nlc/app/onestep-write-a-letter?0&engagementId=487075

As a constituent, I am writing to express my opposition to the “Streamlining The Rapid Evolution And Modernization of Leading-edge Infrastructure Necessary to Enhance (STREAMLINE) Small Cell Deployment Act” (S. 3157).

S. 3157 is similar to a California bill (SB 649) which would have created a state mandated system of cell towers and eliminated local review and safety oversight. SB 649 was opposed by 300 cities, 47 counties and over 100 community, planning, health, environment and justice organizations. SB 649 was vetoed SB 649 by Governor Brown on October 15, 2017.

The threat of public and environmental harm from wireless radiation is real and growing. Local control is needed to ensure community safety, welfare and compliance with federal, state, and local laws.

Peer-reviewed published science shows wireless radiation harms public health and nature. Health effects include: fatigue, headaches, sleep problems, anxiety, ringing in the ears, heart problems, learning and memory disorders, increased cancer risk, and more. Children, the ill, and the elderly are more vulnerable.

International independent scientists are calling for biologically-based public exposure standards and reducing wireless radiation.

S. 3157 represents a direct affront to traditionally-held local authority. S. 3157 introduces an unnecessary, one-size-fits-all preemption of local jurisdiction. The bill also imposes unfair and inappropriate timelines on local governments.

For more information see this joint letter to Congress asking you to oppose any and all bills related to 5G and wireless radiation expansion: http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Letter-to-Congress-2017-1.pdf

Thank you!

Another possible letter to copy and paste into the NLC template

http://advocacy.nlc.org/nlc/app/onestep-write-a-letter?0&engagementId=487075

As a community leader and constituent, I hereby express my strong opposition to the “Streamlining The Rapid Evolution And Modernization of Leading-edge Infrastructure Necessary to Enhance (STREAMLINE) Small Cell Deployment Act” (S. 3157). This Bill represents a direct affront to traditionally held local authority.  If passed, it would complicate rather than simplify national efforts to expedite infrastructure deployment by mucking up state and local processes.  My community shares Congress’s apparent goal of ensuring efficient, safe, and appropriate deployment of broadband technology — largely fiber optics. However, S.3157 is not a good way to achieve this goal. Indeed, it is fraught with problems.  Despite encouraging “technology-neutral” infrastructure, the Bill is heavily weighted toward Wireless installations over Fiber to the Premises (FTTP). The latter is energy-efficient, safe, secure, reliable and fast broadband — a solution that can easily add Wi-Fi calling for in-building coverage.  However, default wireless is not a solution: it produces enormous energy waste with unreliable service. Most importantly, it imposes degradation to living organisms, particularly pollinating insects, birds and other wildlife, with immediate as well as short- and long-term impairments of human brain, heart, and immune function and disease and early death therefrom.

S.3157 would complicate the existing efforts by state and local governments to deploy the most appropriate broadband infrastructure for their communities. Some US states have passed legislation specifically addressing the deployment of broadband infrastructure, and the local governments in those states are busy implementing new ordinances and procedures to comply with those changes. This unnecessary federal bill, questionable under the Tenth Amendment in its impositions upon State and local governments, requires a poorly conceived, one-size-fits-all preemption of those well-meaning, detailed, in-process municipality efforts. Instead of helping local communities, it enriches wireless companies to the detriment of companies offering wired solutions. S.3157 would force expensive, new wireless deployments, when FTTP is most effective and in many cases in place, ready to be connected.

S.3157 imposes unfair timelines on local governments. The shot clocks proposed by S.3157 are draconian: considerably shorter than those the federal government applied to itself in the bipartisan MOBILE NOW Act. The reduced size-per-installation of so-called “small cell” infrastructure, which is in fact of considerably large overall, does not translate to a reduced procedural burden on local governments. Municipalities must still review each site individually to ensure it meets the local jurisdiction’s requirements and needs. Further, the limited extension for small jurisdictions and bulk requests of typically over fifty simultaneous applications does not address these resource challenges for states and local governments.

Finally, limiting fees and rates to direct and actual costs is an extreme overreach by the federal government. Municipalities negotiate with providers to ensure appropriate compensation to taxpayers for private, profit-generating use of public property and to incentivize development that benefits community residents. In some cases, state constitutions’ prohibitions on gifts to private entities prohibit cities from assessing less than a fair market value for rental of public property. When cities are prohibited from controlling these rates, they are forced to subsidize private development, at the cost of other critical local services such as road maintenance and public safety. Such overreach could devolve into judiciary challenge that is best averted now.

For these reasons, I am opposed to S. 3157 and urge you to oppose it. Local governments need time and flexibility to ensure that the broadband infrastructure most appropriate to each locality is deployed not just quickly, but safely and correctly, in communities throughout the nation.

Contacting representatives directly

Please also consider calling your federal legislators. You can use this link to find contact information for all U.S. Senators and U.S. Representatives.
https://www.usa.gov/elected-officials

Here’s a link where you can enter your postal zip code to find out who your representatives are:
https://whoismyrepresentative.com/

With thanks to the website https://zero5g.com, here is another excellent portal for contacting your federal representatives.
https://zero5g.com/take-action-usa/

 

Here are two Letters to the Editor re S.3157

Here are two short Letters to the Editor sent to the home-state newspapers of Sen. John Thune and Sen. Brian Schatz (South Dakota and Hawai’i respectively). Please note the modified and apt title of the Bill, “Streamline Cancer Bill”.

Sen. Thune’s “Streamline Cancer” bill
Sen. Thune’s S.3157 allows 4G/5G “small cell” towers in front of homes and schools in the public’s right-of-way, stripping much of the regulatory authority from communities.
This flood of “small cell” towers – every 2-20 homes – is reckless. Sen. Thune ignores decades of research showing biological disruption and harm from this radiation. The U.S. National Toxicology Program found it causes cancer after only two years of exposure. Children are especially vulnerable, as are bees, birds, and trees. Thune ignores this and over 230 scientists and physicians who called on the EU and the UN in 2017 to halt 5G, saying wireless radiation is a serious public health hazard.
California communities are rallying against these “small cells”, putting up yard signs, banners, organizing protests, and addressing hearings to stop them. Verizon’s plan to put a “small cell” at the Pacific Grove High School was called “unacceptable” and “appalling” by the principal. SB 649 allowing these throughout California was vetoed after widespread opposition.
Sen. Thune wants a Congressional hearing on the bill this month. The National League of Cities opposes this horrible bill. Stop S.3157.
Nina Beety
Monterey, California
Sen. Schatz’ “Streamline Cancer” bill
Sen. Schatz’ S.3157 allows 4G/5G cell towers in front of homes and schools in the public’s right-of-way, stripping away local authority.
Sen. Schatz ignores decades of research showing biological harm from this radiation. The U.S. National Toxicology Program results show cancer after two years’ exposure. Children are especially vulnerable, as are bees, birds, and trees. Over 230 scientists and physicians called on the EU and UN in 2017 to halt 5G, saying wireless radiation is a serious public health hazard. Schatz ignores this.
California communities are rallying against these “small cells”, putting up yard signs, organizing protests, and addressing hearings to stop them. Verizon’s plan to put a “small cell” at a high school was called “unacceptable” and “appalling” by the principal. California SB 649 was vetoed after widespread opposition.
Co-author Thune plans a hearing this month. The National League of Cities opposes this horrible bill. Stop S.3157.
Nina Beety
Monterey, California

 

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

 

4G/5G  Small Cell Antennas – United States 

California • Florida • Kentucky • Maryland • Michigan • New York • Ohio • New Jersey • Louisiana • Texas • Rhode Island • New Mexico • Iowa

 

#BILLS  #SB649  #SB331   #S19  #Bill C-648  #S3157