Kennesaw City Council members speak out against cell tower proposal
by Noreen Cochran
March 02, 2013 11:55 PM | 2999 views | 2 2 comments | 7 7 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Cell towers could cast their 10-story shadows over more homes in Kennesaw if a new bill makes it through the Georgia Legislature.

The City Council vowed during a work session last week to fight the Mobile Broadband Infrastructure Leads to Development Act, a telecommunications bill introduced by a Cobb lawmaker.

If it passes, cellphone companies would be able to leapfrog the public hearings and zoning meetings currently required before new cell towers can be approved.

City Councilman Bill Thrash said it could wrest control from local governments.

“This really infringes on home rule,” he said.

Their weapons will be an official resolution condemning the act, to be read at Monday’s regular meeting, and phone calls to the Cobb delegation to put the brakes on it.

“This really undermines your zoning-enabling authority,” said Kennesaw Zoning Administrator Darryl Simmons. “That means if they even go over the height restrictions that we have, it takes placement and distance from residential out of our hands.”

Simmons said the law would hamstring the city right down to its communications.

“We can’t even review it, based on the wording,” he said.

City Councilman Bruce Jenkins said there would be a 150-day window. If it closes, the cell tower is automatically approved.

“It has what you call a ‘shot clock.’ If at any point in time you even entertain something, you don’t have to say yes or no, or if you contact them, the clock starts,” he said.

The bill, sponsored by six legislators including Rep. Don Parsons of northeast Cobb, is being reviewed in a House of Representatives committee.

“They’ve gone back through two or three reviews of this thing, and it keeps gaining ground,” Jenkins said.

Mayor Mark Mathews said the Atlanta Regional Commission came out against it, after he “put it on their radar.”

An organized response supported by other cities like Atlanta and Acworth may stop the juggernaut, Simmons said.

Otherwise, he said, the city doesn’t have tools with which to fight back.

“The one thing we have as a backdrop is McCollum Airport. That’s the only thing we can get them on, the FAA thing. That’s height. That doesn’t protect the residents. It takes it out of our hands totally,” Simmons said.

Jenkins said cell companies can also control the rents charged by local governments when cell towers are built on public land.

“The one thing it does, too, is on fees — it sets a fee,” Jenkins said. “It overrides any kind of fees that we want charged.”

Parson said those fears are unfounded.

“It in no way takes home rule away. Anyone who says that hasn’t read the bill,” he said.

Parsons said he took the bill out of the Rules Committee, which decides which bills go to the floor for a vote, to tweak it Friday.

“I decided I would go ahead and address some issues and take out some things that might be confusing,” he said.

“We had information that mirrored FCC regulations regarding existing towers, that you could do certain things and not go through the whole zoning process if it didn’t change the size of the tower. I took that out.”

Parsons also refuted wresting control of rental fees from local governments.

“If the cell tower goes on public property, then they pay a market rate based on fair market value,” he said.

Cell companies support the bill, as do chambers of commerce and other economic development agencies, he said.

“There is a real need to get this cellular service and bandwidth out there,” he said, noting he has a video about the bill on his website, www.donparsons.org.

Parsons said he expected the bill to be passed before Thursday, which is Crossover Day in the General Assembly, when bills must be passed in one chamber to be considered by the other.
Comments
(2)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
Ole Man
|
March 04, 2013
I survived 50 years without a cell phone, my grandchildren can not imagine life without a smart phone. I expect cell phones are here to stay.

The low power of cell phones required close proximity to cell towers to provide the uninterrupted service customers demand.

That does not mean the right of property owners (public or private) should be negated. Home rule should not be violated. This "bought and paid for" legislation should be defeated.
anonymous
|
March 03, 2013
Don Parson's opponent in the last election, JoEllen Smith, was right about his influence and the people who've purchased his services in the legislature.

He no longer works for the idiot constituents who elected him. He works for the special interests.

YOU GO Bill Thrash and others on the city councils. This legislation stinks like a skunk in Don Parson's driveway.
*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, and spam will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides