The Wireless Industry is sneaky and always obfuscate data to get what they want. Tonight the School Board looked really bad. Honestly what do they expect when people are now stuck for 25 years with this ugly cancer producing equipment.
The parents need to understand that State and Federal laws make that cell site a CO-LOCATION opportunity. Depending on how the City defines Co-Location the entire Maintenance yard could be used to place more cell sites. The City of Pasadena's Ordinance defines it very broadly making it a pro wireless Ordinance. The state mandates co-location so once you place one cell tower then you have to legally give EQUAL ACCESS to all the wireless companies. Only the original wireless company for a cell tower has to file a permit application. All other wireless companies can co-locate on the same pole without any public notification.
If I had been notified of the proposed cell tower I would have DISAPPROVED of the building of any cell site on any SMUSD campus. Once SMUSD signed the cell tower lease, it allowed cell tower proliferation at the campuses that have a cell tower because of a California state law that requires co-location on existing cell towers. It is the law that you have to allow EQUAL ACCESS to all Wireless carriers.
I don't want my property value to decline because SMUSD has become less desirable because of a real or even perceived danger to the students of SMUSD from RF emissions emitted from the cell towers thus stigmatizing the schools and ultimately negatively impacting my property value. I would like to see the current cell sites dismantled and taken away so that the SMUSD CAMPUSES CAN BE CELL TOWER FREE.