Sonoma

Before you read the details about the Verizon Close Proximity Microwave Radiation Antenna Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (CPMRA-WTFs) proposed to be installed on the PG&E Utility Poles in Sonoma, CA, please complete the SO-Form that places your comments in favor of or in opposition to this project into the Sonoma public record and then please return to this page.

Sonoma West Times OpEd

The Ugly Attack On Our Beautiful City

Applications for ten powerful 4G and 5G cell towers — three in commercial zones (around 150 feet from homes), seven in residential zones (as close as 25 feet to homes) are being reviewed by Sonoma. These Close Proximity Microwave Radiating Antennas (CPMRAs), misleadingly called “Small Cells”, are targeting PG&E utility poles in the public rights-of-way and are unnecessarily large, ugly, obtrusive and hazardous.

On Thu, Nov 8th at 6:30 pm, the Planning Commission will review three applications for utility poles at 500 5th St. W, near Sonoma Market; 453 2nd St. W, near 7/11; and 574 1st St. W, near Sonoma Key Shop. There are residences near each of these poles. The seven applications for residential zones have been temporarily "frozen", but they could be "unfrozen" by March, 2019.

Testimony About ADA Violations of Three Close Proximity Microwave Radiation Antennas (CPMRAs) in Sonoma, CA

We are being told by wireless carriers that CPMRAs are needed in public rights-of-way, but they are not. Verizon itself says that 4G and 5G antennas can, instead, be installed on current macro towers (https://youtu.be/FwAsr1pC13Q), which is far better because CPMRAs within 500 feet of homes create hazards: reduced safety, privacy and property values (http://mystreetmychoice.com).

Many people are unaware that 4G and 5G Wireless technology has been inadequately tested for safety. Tens of thousands of peer reviewed scientific studies prove that exposures to wireless radiation causes neurological illness, DNA damage, heart problems, reduced fertility, melatonin and other hormone suppression and increased rates of cancer. It is therefore, not surprising that CPMRAs reduce property values. A homeowner in Sonoma is suffering a loss of $150,000 or more due to a planned cell tower only 28 feet from his house.

The harms from placing industrial equipment in residential areas are why Gov. Brown vetoed SB.649, the state’s Streamline Small Cell Bill, in October, 2017. CA Cities, including Monterey, Hillsborough, Mill Valley, Ross, San Anselmo, Petaluma and Sebastopol have already rebuffed Verizon and passed local wireless and zoning ordinances to protect their residents. Sonoma needs to do the same by no later than Oct 22, 2018 — before the FCC Report and Order, WT Docket 17-79, becomes official.

The FCC is attempting massive overreach to preempt nearly all local authority over the siting of Wireless Telecommunications Facilities, but the US Conference of Mayors has already written that "they will seek relief in federal court to overturn this unprecedented overreach by the FCC". The Federal bill to oppose is S 3157, "the STREAMLINE Small Cell Deployment Act", which has not yet passed, but would enable such FCC overreach. Write and call US Senators and House Members now!

It is, therefore, critically important that Sonoma residents make efforts — in a big way — right now, if you wish to protect your safety, privacy and property values. October is the key month. We need large numbers of Sonomans to show up at the Planning Commission and City Council meetings — this month. We need you to recruit neighbors and write/call Sonoma Council members, Planning Commissioners and city staff (see details: http://mystreetmychoice.com/sonoma.html).

November 8th Planning Commission Meeting on Verizon Commercial Small Cell Towers

The City is currently reviewing the Verizon small cell applications and supporting materials for the three commercial sites which are now pending and as part of this review has requested additional information bearing upon technical, aesthetic, and design elements of the proposed facilities and support equipment be provided by Verizon to City staff and its technical consultant. Verizon has indicated that it will take additional time to provide the information that is being requested.

Due to these circumstances, the August 30th Planning Commission hearing on the three commercial applications is being postponed to a date that is not yet certain. Notice to the public of the new hearing date will be provided when one has been obtained.

Verizon and the City will be modifying the timeline agreement based on this change in meeting dates.


Please Attend the City of Sonoma Planning Commission Hearing That Will Consider Verizon Applications For Three (3) Close Proximity Microwave Radiation Antenna – Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (CPMRA-WTFs) — Installed as close as 100 to 200 Feet from Sonoma Residences!

  • Meeting:   City of Sonoma Planning Commission Meeting
  • When:   November 8, 2018
  • Where:   Community Meeting Room, 177 First Street West, Sonoma, CA
  • What’s at stake:   The Planning Commissioners will make the findings to either deny or approve installation of three Close Proximity Microwave Radiation Antenna – Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (3 CPMRA-WTFs) on Utility Poles, that are as close as 100 to 200 feet from residences: Verizon-006, Verizon-007 and Verizon-012
  • What You Can Do:   Go to the My Street, My Choice! Sonoma page that lists next steps and instructions on how to enter evidence to oppose these CPMRA-WTFs into the City of Sonoma public record
  • Agreement:   2018-0809-Sonoma-Verizon-Tolling-Agreement
  • Modifications:   2018-0829-Verizon-Sonoma-Modifications

Contents: The Players | Shot Clock | Public Record | Incomplete Applications | No Significant Gap In Verizon Coverage | Applications 006, 007 and 012

2018-0809 Sonoma, CA: Public Comments re:Distances From Small Cells to Residences
2018-0616 Sonoma, CA: No Significant Gap in Verizon Coverage
2018-0808 Sonoma, CA: Distances From Small Cells to Residences

The Players Involved

A 6/22/18 Review of the Sonoma, CA Public Record Uncovered the Truth, Reported Below

  1. Verizon Wireless: Verizon is a huge Telecommunications firm with $126 billion in 2017 consolidated revenues that is being forced to accept a multibillion dollar settlement with the State of New York due to fraud in halting the installation of FTTP (fiber-optic to the premises) and cross-subsidizing: using State Public Telecom Utility funds to build out its private 4G/5G Wireless Networks. In Sonoma, Verizon Wireless is listed as the Applicant/Lessee on these 10 CPMRA-WTF applications.
  2. The CBR Group: according to their web site, the CBR Group claims “to provide small cell, DAS, and wireless solutions across Northern California and Nevada.” In Sonoma, CBR is acting as Co-Applicant and Agent for Verizon Wireless on these 10 CPMRA-WTF applications.
  3. Pacific Gas & Electric: There is a 2016 CPUC ruling that forces PG&E to allow CPMRA-WTFs on certain PG&E utility poles. This is not, however, the whole story. A city can still protect residents’ neighborhoods by revising its Municipal Code Zoning Regulations, including separate Zoning Regulations for the public rights-of-way, as advocated by The Center for Municipal Solutions (Call Rusty Monroe at 518-573-8842).
No One From Verizon or the CBR Group Has Responded . . . From June 22 Through August 9
The CBR Group Inc.
841 Arnold Dr, Suite A
Martinez, CA 94553
http://thecbrgroup.com/contactus/
925-CBR-GROUP (out-of-service)
925-227-4768 (also out-of-service)
925-227-4767 (also out-of-service)

CBR Management
President Christy Beltran, 415-806-2323
christy@thecbrgroup.com)
Calls/emails on 6/22/18 and 6/26/18 remain unreturned.

CBR Engineering
Matt Freedman, 925-798-2100
matt@thecbrgroup.com
Left message with a woman; no call back

Verizon Wireless
2785 Mitchell Dr., Building 9
Walnut Creek, CA 94598
Sharon Myl, 914-582-8356 (voicemail full all day)
sharon.myl@verizonwireless.com

Verizon Construction
Dennis, 707-514-5700
dennis@siteservicesllc.net
We reached Dennis; he left Site Services LLC, two years ago

Verizon RF Engineer
Benjamin Santamaria, 925-239-9186

Only got fast busy signal every time we called
benjamin.santamaria@verizonwireless.com

The Shot Clock for Reviewing and Processing Applications For Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTFs)

What is a Shot Clock?

Anyone one who has watched the Golden State Warriors play basketball understands that the NBA plays under the constraint of a 24-second shot clock: Team A has 24 seconds in which to take a shot and hit the rim of the opposing team’s basket. If that doesn’t happen in time, Team A forfeits the ball to Team B. The Telecom lobbyists borrowed that idea and inserted it into their own 4G/5G densification play book, as an FCC “deemed approved” tactic:

  • “In the 2009 Declaratory Ruling, the Federal Communications Commission interpreted a ‘reasonable period of time’ under Section 332(c)(7)(B)(ii) to be 90 days for processing collocation applications, and 150 days for processing applications other than collocations.” [Note: collocations are existing Wireless Telecommunications Facilities]
  • “The Federal Communications Commission clarified that the presumptive deadlines for acting on siting applications could be extended beyond 90 or 150 days by mutual consent, and that such an agreement would toll the commencement of the 30-day period for filing suit.”
  • “We also note that DAS and small-cell deployments that involve installation of new poles will trigger the 150-day time period for new construction.”

The FCC Shot Clock was formalized into CA State law by Assembly Bill 57.

CA Assembly Bill 57 — Telecommunications: wireless telecommunication facilities.

Original text here | Emphases in bold or red are mine. | The following is the final Bill text that was enrolled on 8/31/15 and chaptered on 10/9/15

We, of course, testified against the heinous bill, AB.57:

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION 1. Section 65964.1 is added to the Government Code, to read:

65964.1.

(a) A collocation or siting application for a wireless telecommunications facility, as defined in Section 65850.6, shall be deemed approved if all of the following occur:

   (1) The city or county fails to approve or disapprove the application within a reasonable period of time in accordance with the time periods and procedures established by applicable FCC decisions. The reasonable period of time may be tolled to accommodate timely requests for information required to complete the application or may be extended by mutual agreement between the applicant and the local government, consistent with applicable FCC decisions.

   (2) The applicant has provided all public notices regarding the application that the applicant is required to provide under applicable laws consistent with the public notice requirements for the application.

   (3)

      (A) The applicant has provided notice to the city or county that the reasonable time period has lapsed and that the application is deemed approved pursuant to this section.

      (B) Within 30 days of the notice provided pursuant to subparagraph (A), the city or county may seek judicial review of the operation of this section on the application.

(b) This section does not apply to eligible facilities requests.

(c) The Legislature finds and declares that a wireless telecommunications facility has a significant economic impact in California and is not a municipal affair as that term is used in Section 5 of Article XI of the California Constitution, but is a matter of statewide concern.

(d) As used in this section, the following terms have the following meanings:

   (1) “Applicable FCC decisions” means In re Petition for Declaratory Ruling, 24 FCC Rcd. 13994 (2009) and In the Matter of Acceleration of Broadband Deployment by Improving Wireless Facilities Siting Policies, Report and Order, 29 FCC Rcd. 12865 (2014).

   (2) “Eligible facilities request” has the same meaning as in Section 1455 of Title 47 of the United States Code.

(e) Except as provided in subdivision (a), nothing in this section limits or affects the authority of a city or county over decisions regarding the placement, construction, and modification of a wireless telecommunications facility.

(f) Due to the unique duties and infrastructure requirements for the swift and effective deployment of firefighters, this section does not apply to a collocation or siting application for a wireless telecommunications facility where the project is proposed for placement on fire department facilities.

Shot Clock: Where Things Stand Sonoma, as of 8/09/18:

Prior to 6/16/18, the only way one could review information about the Verizon/CBR Group CPMRA-WTF applications was to know to ask for these files, which were hidden in the Planning Department’s filing cabinets. In contrast, cities such as Palo Alto and Piedmont are fully transparent: Palo Alto and Piedmont city staffs immediately place all relevant information for any Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTF) on their city web sites.

The City of Sonoma staff finally placed scans of these files on a City of Sonoma web page on 6/16/18 — a full year after receiving the first applications which means that all evidence of public notice occurred after every 150-day shot clock had already expired on each application.

The 6/26/18 CBR Group public outreach meeting failed because there was no effective marketing, so no one showed up. The Planning Commission review of CPMRA-WTF applications 007, 007 and 012 is now scheduled for Date tbd in September, 2018.



Contents: Deception | Shot Clock | Public Record | Incomplete Applications | No Significant Gap In Verizon Coverage | Applications 006, 007 and 012

Sonoma CPMRA-WTF Timeline

The Timeline for Processing Ten CPMRA-WTF Applications Shows Many Holes in the Process . . .

  • 6/16/17 — Goodison: "initial [Verizon CPMRA-WTF] applications were received on June 16, [2017], while subsequent sites have been applied for since that time."
  • 6/27/17 — Two (2) Verizon/CBR Group applications stamped received by Sonoma
  • 9/01/17 — Four (4) Verizon/CBR Group applications stamped received by Sonoma
  • 9/12/17 — One (1) Verizon/CBR Group application stamped received by Sonoma
  • 9/28/17 — One (1) Verizon/CBR Group application stamped received by Sonoma
  • 10/03/17 — One (1) Verizon/CBR Group application stamped received by Sonoma
  • 10/08/17Fires in Sonoma County
  • 10/10/17 — One (1) Verizon/CBR Group application stamped received by Sonoma
  • ??/??/?? — City of Sonoma’s proof of notice to Sonoma residents? When? (missing from the files)
  • 3/10/18five months of inactivity designed to allow the shot clocks to expire
  • 3/19/18 — Email from Sonoma Resident to Assistant Planning Director Rob Gjestland re: shot clock (quoted below)
  • 3/19/18 — Email from Planning Director David Goodison to a Sonoma Resident re: shot clock (quoted below)
  • 3/22/18 — Phone call with David Goodison
  • 3/22/18 — Public comments at a Planning Commission meeting: https://youtu.be/PNmMKOr12f4?t=13m20s
  • 4/13/18 — Email from Rob Gjestland re: reviewing Verizon/CBR Group CPMRA-WTF application files
  • 4/16/18 — Review of Verizon/CBR Group CPMRA-WTF application files (in paper form)
  • 4/16/18 — Discussion with Rob Gjestland re: need for Community meeting where the Public has the same presence/opportunity as the applicant to present information — we discussed that if Verizon/CBR Group rents private space for the outreach meeting, then they control the content and it becomes one-sided propaganda event. Note: The City of Sonoma ignored this warning; Verizon/CBR Group rented space from the private Community Center (276 East Napa St.), instead of the city giving the public equal presence/opportunity by donating public space for the 6/26/18 alleged outreach meeting, but with no effective marketing for this meeting that was held at the same time as the Sonoma Farmer’s market, no one (other than Verizon/CBR staff and contractors) attended this sham outreach meeting.
  • 4/16/18 — Public comments at a City Council meeting: https://youtu.be/Kn5__226XcU?t=4m38s
  • 4/25/18 — Hey, Neighbor! Radio Show recorded on KSVY, 91.3 FM — discussing shot clock implications (quoted below)
  • 6/14/18 — Call with Planning Director David Goodison re: shot clock
  • 6/15/18 — Last day for Rob Gjestland’s employment
  • 6/16/18CPMRA-WTF application files were finally posted on the City of Sonoma web page
  • 6/21/18First Verizon/CBR Group outreach notice given to Sonoma residents — notice given only to residents living within 200 feet of tagged CPMRA-WTFs. The notice did not reach all of the affected residents, which are those living within 1,500 feet of the CPMRA-WTF (see photo above and details below).
  • 6/22/18 — Meeting with Planning Director David Goodison re: incomplete applications, insufficient notice for outreach meetings and critical need for shot clock tolling agreement
  • 6/22/18 — Review of information posted on City of Sonoma web page
  • 6/22/18 — Call to CBR Group, informing them that the CPMRA-WTF applications are incomplete (no return call, of course)
  • 6/25/18 — Sonoma California Public Records Act Request for all communications to/from City of Sonoma and Wireless Carriers from 1/1/16 to the present
  • 6/26/18 — Scheduled Verizon/CBR Group outreach meeting (a token effort, given the incomplete applications, the late and insufficient notice, no advertising in local media and the private venue, which all points to propaganda). This 6/26/18 outreach meeting failed because no Sonoma residents attended.
  • Date TBD — scheduled Planning Commission Review of Applications for Nodes 006, 007 and 012 — awaiting more information from Verizon/CBR Group.


Contents: Deception | Shot Clock | Public Record | Incomplete Applications | No Significant Gap In Verizon Coverage | Applications 006, 007 and 012

Sonoma Public Record

>>> On March 19, 2018, Sonoma resident wrote to Rob Gjestland:

Emphases in red are mine.

Hello Mr Gjestland-

Kindly reply with the date(s) that your department received Verizon Wireless Corporation’s request to install 5G cell towers at, I believe, eleven locations in the City of Sonoma.

I understand there is a “Shot Clock” wherein the City can review and approve or deny the request;
that should the “Shot Clock” expire, then Verizon can install these devices with or without approval by the Planning Department.

I will be attending the City Council meeting tonight, March 19, and formally proposing the Council put this issue on the official calendar for public discussion; specifically requesting that public town hall meetings be scheduled for the residents and other concerned citizens to attend presentations by Verizon Wireless, PG&E (upon whose poles some of the devices may be installed), the City of Sonoma Planning Department, the Sonoma Fire Department (who is exempt from having to install any of these devices…see attachment below), and representatives from Sonoma Valley Hospital plus any other entities involved with this issue.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

[Sonoma Resident]

>>> On March 19, 2018, David Goodison davidg@sonomacity.org wrote to Sonoma resident:

Emphases in red are mine.

Dear Mr. [_________],

The initial [Verizon Close Proximity Microwave Radiation Antenna – Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (CPMRA-WTF)] applications were received on June 16, [2017], while subsequent sites have been applied for since that time.

In October [2017], the applicants, working on behalf of Verizon, requested that the applications be put on hold, due to the fires.

Since that time, the preliminary review process has restarted. However, the City has requested additional information prior to making a finding of completeness for the majority of the applications. We have also asked the applicants to provide us with a proposal for neighbor outreach in advance of any hearing by the City of Sonoma Planning Commission.

The applicants have agreed that their proposal will be subject to Planning Commission review and they have not invoked the “shot clock.”

Planning staff still in the process of:

  1. Reviewing [the applications] for completeness, and
  2. Developing recommendations to address various issues, including visual compatibility, especially in residential areas.

Once we are satisfied that we have a complete proposal, public outreach will be required, including targeted notice to property owners and residents in the vicinity of proposed facilities.

Thanks,

David Goodison
Planning Director
Town of Sonoma

>>> From the March 25, 2018 Hey, Neighbor! Radio Show:

"The good news is that we have talked to the Sonoma planning staff and they do realize that if there is ever to be a public meeting about this project, it’s really important to not fall for the trick of allowing Verizon to rent the space and run the meeting. Verizon should be just one of the participants in the meeting; the public should be there with their own subject matter experts. Essentially, this will then be a pitch of competing ideas: is this a good idea for the community? Verizon state your case. Is this a bad idea for the community? Public, state your case. So the meeting participants can actually learn from both sides. That’s not how they run those meetings. Generally, Verizon rents a room and they throw people out of the room."

Let’s unpack this a bit to better understand the words highlighted in red, above:

1. The Sonoma City Council needs to put the mishandling of these CPMRA-WTF applications on the official calendar for public discussion — a public town hall meeting or study session — separate from the approval process hearings — that provides equal opportunities for participation by all stakeholders.

  • A careful reading of City of Sonoma’s 2020 General Plan and Municipal Code shows that the Verizon CPMRA-WTFs applications for residential areas are inconsistent with both the General Plan and the City’s Municipal Wireless Code (see Chapter 19.10 Zones and Allowable Uses and Chapter 5.32: Telecommunications Facility and Antenna Criteria)
  • The City of Sonoma needs to schedule a future public town hall meeting or study session, not unlike Santa Rosa’s 3/6/16 Study Session and 6/5/18 Study Session, which resulted in an interruption of the CPMRA-WTF installations in Santa Rosa.

2. Goodison: “The CBR Group, on behalf of Verizon, requested that the applications be put on hold.”

  • On the surface, this sounds great, given the community’s need to respond to the October, 2017 fires throughout Sonoma county, but unless the CBR Group and Verizon executed a letter with the City of Sonoma to toll the shot clock, this is a disingenuous request and statement.
  • While the applications were put on hold, Verizon accrued significant benefit: running out the 150-day shot clock!
  • All parties could restore good faith by executing such a letter . . . but we are still waiting . . . still no response from Verizon.

3. Goodison:“The CBR Group will complete neighbor outreach, in advance of any hearing by the City of Sonoma Planning Commission.”

  • Mission NOT accomplished! There has been no effective outreach, through 6/27/18.
  • The 6/26/18 at 6:30 pm Verizon/CBR Group "so-called" Community Outreach event at 276 East Napa St. was a token effort and a total failure: not a single Sonoma resident responded to the late, insufficient notice and crossed the threshold into the meeting hosted by Verizon/CBR Group. We set up tables at both the front and back doors of the Sonoma Community Center and greeted everyone who entered the building from 6:15 pm to 8:30 pm. Every person who entered the building during that time was attending the WikiMedia event, the main event scheduled at the Sonoma Community Center that evening.
  • We also inspected the Verizon “sign in” sheet twice, once at 7:15 pm and again at 8:15 pm. We verified that no one had placed their name on the visitor list. We did not attend the meeting itself, knowing that we would not get answers to our questions from the Verizon/CBR personnel staffing the meeting.
  • We know we would not get answers because when Rahda Sharma, the Senior Real Estate Manager for Verizon Wireless in Northern California, ventured outside to the sidewalk to greet people in the public right-of-way, she refused to answer our reasonable questions about Verizon’s CPMRA-WTF projects in Northern California — after hearing the questions, she only stared at us blankly and said she would not answer our questions. This is the antithesis to outreach and evidence of Verizon’s disdain for the communities they are impacting so significantly by installing CPMRA-WTFs — 15 to 50 feet from homes..
  • When I mentioned to a Verizon manager in the hallwawy of the Community Center on 6/26/18 that the low turn out was due, in part, to Tuesdays being a a night when the Farmer’s market events are held at Sonoma Plaza, he mentioned that Verizon worked out the date in concert with the City of Sonoma Planning Department. For the needed future public town hall meeting or study session, it is advisable to schedule an evening meeting that does not compete with the Farmer’s Market events.

4. Goodison: “Verizon has not invoked the ‘shot clock.'”

  • The Sonoma Planning Department is being played by Verizon: the statement that Verizon has "not invoked the ‘shot clock’" is not reassuring. Unless Verizon formalizes — in a signed agreement — that they won’t invoke the shot clock, Verizon could invoke the shot clock for these 10 CPMRA-WTF applications — at any time.

5. Goodison: “Once the City of Sonoma Planning Director is satisfied that we have a complete proposal, then outreach is required and the Planning Commission will hear the matter.”

  • This begs the obvious question: "Are the Verizon CPMRA-WTF applications complete?" Our reading of the files on 6/22/18 proves that the applications are still substantially incomplete:

    1. The applications lack any substantial evidence that proves that any Significant Gap in Verizon Coverage exists anywhere where Verizon wants to install these CPMRA-WTFs. On 6/16/18, Sonoma residents used substantial evidence to prove that there is NO SIGNIFICANT GAP in Verizon coverage in these targeted areas, so no local preemption of local authority can be invoked by Verizon.
    2. The applications have no independent, metered RF microwave radiation exposure analysis to establish the required baseline of RF microwave radiation exposures to which to compare the incremental RF microwave radiation exposures from these proposed CPMRA-WTFs.
    3. The applications lack any credible alternate location analyses because the applications do not consider the obvious least intrusive means that would close any alleged gap in Verizon coverage: co-locating additional antennas on existing macro towers and installing antennas on water towers, further away from homes.
  • As the City of Sonoma has not completed sufficient due diligence on these applications and has made no formal declaration of application completeness/incompleteness, the City needs to do both before scheduling the Sonoma Planning Commission to hear the matter.

CPMRA-WTF Planning Commission Hearing Date Was Rescheduled From 7/12/18 to either 8/9/18 or 8/23/18

Despite the City of Sonoma mailing the following yellow form and posting the following red signs on PG&E Utility poles . . .

. . . we learned on 6/27/18 around 9:15 am from David Goodison, Sonoma’s Planning Director, that the Planning Commission Hearing date will be moved to Thu 8/9/18 or Thu 8/23/18. We expect revised notices to be mailed out and posted within a week to avoid any unnecessary confusion.


Contents: Deception | Shot Clock | Public Record | Incomplete Applications | No Significant Gap In Verizon Coverage | Applications 006, 007 and 012

Verizon CPMRA-WTF Applications: Incomplete by Any Reasonable Measure

Two (2) Actual Commercial Applications To Be Reviewed at Planning Commission

See the site photos for applications 006 and 012 below, taken on 6/22/18 and 6/26/18.

  • Link to 2017-0627-S-006-Full-Submittal-500-Fifth-W-1.pdf (shot clock ended on 11/24/17); the address on the application matches the address of the tagged pole: see pole | map.
  • Link to 2017-0901-S-012-Full-Submittal-574-First-W.pdf (shot clock ended on 1/29/18); the address on the application matches the address of the tagged pole: see pole | map.


One (1) Alleged Commercial Application To Be Reviewed at Planning Commission

See the site photos for application 007 below, taken on 6/22/18 and 6/26/18.

There are four poles tagged with red notice posters along two blocks of 2nd Street West, just north of West Napa Street. The pole that David Goodison believes is being targeted by Verizon is the one in front of 453 2nd Street West, in front of the Tax Service office that is being run out of a house. Importantly, there are residences across the street and for the entire stretch from 453 to 463 2nd Street West, the vague address listed on the CPMRA-WTF application.

The house numbers decrease as you walk north, leading to the following disconnect:

  • The application states the pole targeted by Verizon is near 463 to 453 2nd St. West (roughly from the 7-11 store on West Napa St. to Taxpertise), which looks like a commercial area.
  • The poles tagged with red notice posters, however, are on four poles from 453 to 424 2nd St. West 424 (roughly from the Taxpertise to the Spain Street), which is definitely a residential area.
453 Second Street West, Sonoma, CA

The Verizon-targeted pole is on the sidewalk just to the left of this residence being used as a tax preparation office. Does anyone live in this building?

  • Link to 2017-1003-S-007-Full-Submittal-453-463-Second-W.pdf (shot clock ended on 3/2/18); the address on the application does not match the address of some of these tagged poles: see pole | map.

Is this discrepancy just pole-tagging errors or intentional deceptions by Verizon/CBR Group? You be the judge. The tagged poles are in residential areas or directly adjacent to residential areas.


Seven (7) Residential Applications

  1. Link to 2017-0627-S-002-Full-Submittal-677-725-Verano.pdf (shot clock ended on 11/24/17); the pole is not yet tagged: see pole | map | video.
  2. Link to 2017-0901-S-008-Full-Submittal-246-E-Napa.pdf (shot clock ended on 1/29/18); the pole is not yet tagged: see pole | map | video.
  3. Link to 2017-0901-S-014-Full-Submittal-681-First-W.pdf (shot clock ended on 1/29/18); the pole is not yet tagged: see pole | map | video.
  4. Link to 2017-0901-S-016-Full-Submittal-20120-20130-Fifth-w.pdf (shot clock ended on 1/29/18); the pole is not yet tagged: see pole | map | video.
  5. Link to 2017-0912-S-017-Full-Submittal-332-342-Arroyo.pdf (shot clock ended on 2/9/18); the pole is not yet tagged: see pole | map | video.
  6. Link to 2017-0928-S-004-Full-Submittal-503-Mariano.pdf (shot clock ended on 2/25/18); the pole is not yet tagged: see pole | map | video.
  7. Link to 2017-1010-S-011-Full-Submittal-205-Perkins.pdf (shot clock ended on 3/9/18); the pole is not yet tagged: see pole | map | video.



Contents: Deception | Shot Clock | Public Record | Incomplete Applications | No Significant Gap In Verizon Coverage | Applications 006, 007 and 012

Substantial Evidence that Proves No Significant Gap In Verizon Coverage

. . . anywhere in Sonoma, CA where Verizon wishes to install these CPMRA-WTF cell phone towers.

Verizon Must Prove With Substantial Written Evidence That There is a Significant Gap in Verizon Coverage in Order to Proceed; Since Verizon has not proved this, the City of Sonoma Can and Should Deny These Applications

  • The coverage maps provided by Verizon do not qualify as substantial evidence. The projections are based on proprietary data (which cannot be verified) and are purely fictional projections based on Verizon’s business goals — not the standards of our current Telecommunications laws. The maps are not based on actual RF microwave radiation measurements, as they must be in order to qualify as substantial evidence.
  • Significant Gap in Coverage and Least Intrusive Means to close a proven gap in coverage are defined by the United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit in METROPCS v. The CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO (http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1406360.html): the ability to make a call (a Telecommunications Services). Full stop.
  • In Metro PCS v. San Franciso, there is no mention of in-building vs. outdoor calling, no mention of capacity, no mention of data transfers — just the ability to make a call. Verizon’s desire for improved data service falls under Information Services — which does not qualify for preemption of local authority under the 1996 Telecommunications Act.
  • Verizon cannot preempt local authority, once Verizon Telecommunications Services are not being prohibited in Sonoma — which is the case in Sonoma. The 6/16/18 video, above, proves that Verizon Telecommunications Service is not being prohibited because the video shows there is measurable RF microwave radiation everywhere Verizon wishes to build these CPMRA-WTFs and the video shows that residents can make calls on the Verizon network at each targeted location. This is substantial evidence that proves NO SIGNIFICANT GAP in Verizon coverage, which is a key finding the City can make to deny these CPMRA-WTF applications.
  • In addition, the video above and photos below show that CPMRA-WTFs on utility poles are not the least intrusive means to close any alleged significant gaps in coverage. The City of Sonoma can and should force Verizon to evaluate co-locating WTFs on existing macro towers, on water tanks and other public and private properties at least 1,500 feet away from homes.

Photo Essay: Three Verizon CPMRA-WTFs Proposed for Commercial Areas?

Two of the Three targeted poles are in Commercial Areas; the third pole is directly adjacent to residences.

A. Verizon-006 CPMRA-WTF at 500 Fifth Street West, Sonoma, CA

PG&E Utility Pole at Corner of Fifth Street West and West Napa Street

This is the only tagged pole, which clearly communicates which pole is being targeted by Verizon.

 

Facing Southeast: Commercial Intersection at West Napa and 5th St. West

This is clearly a commercial area with strip malls on three of the four corners.

 

Facing Southwest: West Napa Street

This is clearly a commercial area with strip malls on three of the four corners.

 

Facing West: Sonoma Market

This is clearly a commercial area with strip malls on three of the four corners.

 

Facing North: Strip mall

This is clearly a commercial area with strip malls on three of the four corners.


 

Facing Northeast: Blue House Used as Office Building

Certain residences in Sonoma have been converted into offices in commercial areas.


 

Facing East: Wells Fargo bank

The fourth corner is for a bank branch office.


 

There is sufficient RF microwave radiation on this corner to place calls on Verizon, proving, once again,
there is NO SIGNIFICANT GAP in Verizon coverage — even on this commercial corner.

Facing North Facing East Facing South Facing West
340 µW/m² 390 µW/m² 460 µW/m² 220 µW/m²

  • µW/m² = microWatts per square meter; a microWatt is a millionth of a Watt and represents a rate of exposure, not total exposure over time.
  • The screen of the HF-38B meter shows peak RF/MW radiation readings in µW/m². Applying the correction factor for the high-speed, pulsed, digital signals of 4G/LTE, the peak levels of 4G/LTE RF/MW radiation are 10x higher than what appears on screen, per the GigaHertz Solutions’ product manual and product video.

B. Verizon-012 CPMRA-WTF at 574 First Street West, Sonoma, CA

PG&E Utility Pole in front of a Yellow House on First Street West

This notice poster is difficult to read, but it is the only one on the street, which communicates which pole is being targeted by Verizon.

 

574 First Street West: A two-lot parcel, with a business in front and a residence behind it.

The CPMRA-WTF on this pole would be about 50 feet from and in direct line with the second story windows of this building.

 

574 First Street West: sidewalk to the residence in the rear

This shows a wheelchair accessible side-entrance to the yellow building, as well as the grey residence in the back portion of the lot.

 

574 First Street West: residence behind the yellow commercial building

This home would face high RF microwave radiation exposures from the CPMRA-WTF installed at the curb,
because it is only 250 feet from the curb; the second story windows and decks would face the highest RF microwave radiation exposures.

 

Facing Northeast from the pole at 574 First St. West

There are most likely both offices and residences across the street.

 

Facing Southeast from the pole at 574 First St. West

There are most likely both offices and residences across the street.

 

Facing Southeast from the pole

A business across the street.

 

Facing Northeast from the pole

Another business across the street.

 

There is sufficient RF microwave radiation on First Street West to make a call on Verizon, proving, once again,
there is NO SIGNIFICANT GAP in Verizon coverage — in this commercial area.

Facing North Facing East Facing South Facing West
4,200 µW/m² (this screen shows
milliWatts per square meter)
1,040 µW/m² 510 µW/m² 970 µW/m²

  • µW/m² = microWatts per square meter; a microWatt is a millionth of a Watt and represents a rate of exposure, not total exposure over time.
  • The screen of the HF-38B meter shows peak RF/MW radiation readings in µW/m². Applying the correction factor for the high-speed, pulsed, digital signals of 4G/LTE, the peak levels of 4G/LTE RF/MW radiation are 10x higher than what appears on screen, per the GigaHertz Solutions’ product manual and product video.

C. Verizon-007 CPMRA-WTF at 463 to 453 2nd St. West, Sonoma, CA

The four red public notice posters on this street are confusing because the actual pole being targeted by Verizon is not clearly marked or stated on the notices. After a call to David Goodison, we believe, but are not certain, that the targeted pole is in front of Taxpertise. Please understand that all over California, there is ample evidence of Verizon perpetrating bait and switch scams — applying for one pole location and then installing a CPMRA-WTF on a different pole in the neighborhood. One has to watch Verizon like a hawk.

Sign in front of 453 Second Street West

The pole in front of this building might be the targeted pole; does anyone live in this building?

The house numbers decrease as you walk north, leading to the following disconnect:

  • The application states the pole targeted by Verizon is near 463 to 453 2nd St. West (roughly from the 7-11 store on West Napa St. to Taxpertise), which looks like a commercial area.
  • The poles tagged with red notice posters, however, are on four poles from 453 to 424 2nd St. West 424 (roughly from the Taxpertise to the Spain Street), which is definitely a residential area.

 

Pole A: Notice Poster on a pole near the 7-11 store

This is best pole on 2nd St. West on which to install the CPRMRA-WTF because it is the one furthest from the residences.

 

Facing Southeast from Pole A: Corner of 2nd St. West and West Napa St.

This shows that the corner is commercial: a 7-11 and a Union 76 Gas Station.

 

Facing West from Pole A: also commercial

This bank is across from Pole A.

 

Pole B: Notice Poster on a pole that is further north on 2nd St. West

This pole is in front of a residence.

 

Facing East from Pole B:

This is definitely a residence.

 

Facing West from Pole B:

This is definitely a residence.

Pole C: Notice Poster on a pole in front of 453 2nd St. West

This is the pole just to the left of Taxpertise.

 

Facing Southeast from Pole C: residential

This is the same residence as shown above.

 

Facing Northeast from Pole C: also residential

Everything north of Taxpertise is definitely residential.

 

Facing Northeast from Pole C: still residential

Everything north of Taxpertise is definitely residential.

 

Pole D: Notice Poster on a pole in front of 424 2nd St. West

This pole is absolutely in a residential area.

 

Facing Southwest from Pole D: residential

The main living floor of this house is on the second floor, which makes it
in direct line of RF microwave radiation exposures from the proposed CPMRA-WTF.

 

Facing Southwest, looking at Pole D: residential

This is the same house as shown above
showing how close the targeted pole is to the residences.

 

Facing Northeast, looking at Pole D: residential

Shows how close the targeted pole is to the residences.

 

Facing Southeast from Pole D: residential

This view shows residential for as far as one can see.

 

Facing Northwest, looking at Pole D: the Solution

Real alternate site analyses need to consider WTF locations much further from residences,
such as on the water towers in the distance.

 

There is sufficient RF microwave radiation on First Street West to make a call on Verizon, proving, once again,
there is NO SIGNIFICANT GAP in Verizon coverage — in this residential area
.

Facing North Facing East Facing South Facing West
300 µW/m² 190 µW/m² 120 µW/m² 320 µW/m²

  • µW/m² = microWatts per square meter; a microWatt is a millionth of a Watt and represents a rate of exposure, not total exposure over time.
  • The screen of the HF-38B meter shows peak RF/MW radiation readings in µW/m². Applying the correction factor for the high-speed, pulsed, digital signals of 4G/LTE, the peak levels of 4G/LTE RF/MW radiation are 10x higher than what appears on screen, per the GigaHertz Solutions’ product manual and product video.