PREAMBLE: The Board of Trustees of Cedar Lane Unitarian Universalist Church (the Church), being guided by the principles of our faith, take the following action regarding T-Mobile's proposal to build and operate a cellular telephone tower on church property.
WHEREAS: Since T-Mobile's proposal 10 months ago to build a cell tower on the Church's property first came before the Board, the Board and its appointed Cell Tower Study Group undertook many actions to assess the matter and arrive at a final decision. The proposal was discussed at the April 19, 2009, Annual Congregational Meeting; presentations were made to several church groups; input was solicited from members; the Study Group undertook a broad search of the scientific and general literature to examine health issues, economics, property aesthetics and values, regulatory requirements, and other churches' experiences. On September 15, the Board adopted procedures for further examination of the proposal including notifying neighbors and seeking their input and engaging in broad communications with The Church members to gauge their reactions. A web link, open to the public, was created on the church website to post relevant documents generated by the church, neighbors and process. Two congregational meetings were held to directly discuss the proposal (November 1 and 22, 2009), followed by two meetings with neighborhood leaders by Board members and our senior minister. An open meeting then was conducted January 11, 2010 with about 200 neighbors to hear their views.
WHEREAS: Based on these actions, the Board of Trustees adopts the following findings and recommendations of the Cell Tower Study Group:
1. Health Concerns: The health and safety of the church and neighboring community have been a paramount concern which has been pursued diligently. While there is apprehension regarding radio frequency radiation, research was convincing that no authoritative study would caution against construction and operation of this cell tower. This determination was based on the conclusions of American Cancer Society, America Medical Association, American National Standards Institute, Federal Communications Commission, Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, National Cancer Institute, International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, and World Health Organization. For example, the American Cancer Society finds that, "While high levels of radiofrequency waves can cause a warming of tissues, cellular phone towers do not yield exposure at levels sufficient to cause this effect. There is no evidence in published scientific reports that cell phone towers cause any other health problems.... Cell phone antennas or towers are unlikely to cause cancer." Moreover, the planned power output of the proposed tower (a) would be three to four orders of magnitude lower than the limits established by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission, (b) can be set to less than the controversially-ambitious benchmark recommended by the Bioiniative Report published by tower adversaries, (c) would aid 911 emergency calls for T-Mobile users, (d) would lower radiowave exposure to T-Mobile users (phones transmit lower power to nearer antennae), and (e) could lower radiowave exposure to people living near current towers (more towers mean lower emissions from each tower).
2. Aesthetics: The proposed tower would be a 130-foot monopole colored to blend in with the surroundings and topped by a brown, glass fiber cylinder housing the antennas; thus, the antennas would not be visible. The electronic equipment, including batteries to power the cells in case of electricity outages, would be enclosed in a small area with fencing matching the exterior of the church's other structures. Research did not discover any studies to indicate that property values of the church or surrounding area would be diminished.
3. Economics: The lease payment initially proposed by T-Mobile of $18,000 per year would be approximately 2% of the church's annual budget and would likely not be available until FY 2012-2013 at the earliest. Revenue from the tower could be used to further the work of the Church including social justice, community outreach, youth programs, and continuing to make our facility available to the non-profit public and various groups.
4. Congregational Views: No vote of congregants was taken at the two congregational meetings. Views presented were mixed with some opposition views strongly stated. A review of written and oral comments to the Study Group might indicate a majority support for the proposal, but no strong consensus has yet formed to proceed with the proposed tower.
5. Neighborhood Views: The two meetings with neighbors held by Board members and our senior minister showed strong opposition to the tower proposal. A petition presented to Rev. Fritts December 9, 2009 had signatures from 258 people opposing the tower. While some neighbors have written in support of the tower, many more neighbors who live near the church have stated their opposition to placing a cell tower on the church's property. The recent open meeting with neighbors was a show of force of opposition to the tower. Thirty or more speakers delivered their opposition views and it appears that all of the 200 or so neighbors attending oppose the proposed tower. The discussions indicate a clear need for the Church to work on its relationships with its neighbors.
WHEREAS: From the beginning of this process, the Board and Study Group established a benchmark that this matter could not proceed without input from and broad support of the congregation and church neighbors. Out of respect to and in the interest of harmonious relations with our neighbors, the Board of Trustees makes the following decision.
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED: The Board of Trustees hereby determines that it will not call a congregational meeting to vote on the cell tower proposal, and will not proceed to negotiate a lease with T-Mobile or any other carrier to place a cell tower on our property. The Board Chair shall take steps to so notify the congregation, the neighbors, and T-Mobile.
This action is taken on this 17th day of January, 2010.
| [Parkwood Home] | [Printable Page] | [Print] |