>> good afternoon, supervisors. i live in district 2. i am a member of the presidio heights residents. this is an important step, a first step in protecting our neighborhoods from these types of industrial facilities. the citizens want to know what is going into their neighborhoods and of well affect their safety. it is crucial that additional

legislation be drafted and introduced as soon as possible on the safety hazards presented by wireless facilities and utility poles as these hazards are not addressed by the legislation before you today. as you can see from the news item i'd is headed back of the projector, back in 2007, wild fires were started in malibu because of wireless antenna equipment. the overloaded and broke in 50 mile an hour winds when they are supposed to withstand a 92 mile an hour wind. developing a new set of rules, governing the wireless equipment.

i think we have to have an inspection here. there is no inspection protocol in place. it is therefore essential that san francisco's the ford and use the powers under the constitution to ensure the wireless facilities installed not present a similar hazards to those that resulted in the malibu wild fires. may i finish a supervisor maxwell: please? -- please? supervisor maxwell: no. thank you. gosh i am here on behalf -- hats off to supervisors mar and campos. this is a critically important step to deal with the serious problem unheard of the proliferating wireless equipment

on utility poles. this legislation is a real important multi-base hit. you have the opportunity to make this legislation a home run. there can't be any doubt about the scope of the problem. let me just show you what i did this weekend as i walked through when st. in a different district- -- one street and a half in a different district. this was one area, about -- [inaudible] i live in this neighborhood. .

[inaudible] the point of this photograph is, this is the kind of equipment that is electrical. this is the context of which other facilities are being put up. here is another facility. this is a good one. the important thing here is that this is almost at high level. -- eye level. [chime] supervisor maxwell: thank you. >> we will be submitting some written suggestions. we are voting on that tomorrow night. it's short and sweet. supervisor maxwell: thank you very much. next speaker, please.

>> good afternoon, supervisors. i want to thank you for being here this afternoon and i want to thank supervisor avalos for sponsoring this legislation. thank you for looking at this issue, everyone. legislation is a great first step, but it needs to be strengthened. they want to put up as many as possible before legislation is

passed. the evidence that you are looking at right now -- it is from the tracking site, and it shows the next three networks. starting in november 2008, they have had 128 permits. you can see that going from 2008 until the present. 97 of those permits are since august 30 of this year. multiplied that by the number of wireless companies that are doing the same thing. we will be having these hideous contractions -- contraptions on

every utility pole in the city. the wireless companies should be required to notify homeowners have our right to now and should have an opportunity to oppose the legislation. supervisor maxwell: thank you. good poitnt at the end. next speaker. >> i think you all carry one of these. most of us do. without a system of wireless communication and internet access that works. we all have dropped calls, you all have had entered access that you can't get on your phones. this legislation is not the

solution. we have some of the worst wireless coverage in the bay area in san francisco. the system in this ordinance is probably illegal, as you have heard. it will perhaps -- i urge the board to consider an alternative to get the departments that are involved to reconvene the wireless telecommunications facilities that have been in place on private property determination's going back to square one, in those pictures, and those were not wireless communications equipment.

those are electrical equipment, telephone equipment, current cable television equipment, old broadband wired equipment. let's not throw everything into the bathtub and say it is part of this wireless growth. if we are going to have the -- i urge you to continue this matter and have the department said down with the parties. thank you.

>> i'm wendy robinson. when i open my front door, this is what i see. [inaudible] just as described, i came home one day, and it was installed. it is monstrous. it is much worse than the pictures of other equipment that we were shown. this is my view from the front door. if you look at it from this

side, [inaudible] it is not only all of these boxes that stick out quite a ways from the poll, -- pole. you've got it sticking out, very large boxes. what they did here, they attach this big, long cage thing to hold the cords. there is an extension on top as well. it does a 24-7, sometimes louder than other times. they are hazardous. you heard about the fire hazard. the realtors have explained to me, and it impacts the houses

surrounding me. if you're wondering why we are having to lay people off, look no further. the revenue impact is going to be tremendous when it is 8 feet. [chime] i think this legislation is a good step in the right direction as has been voiced. i worry about how it will help anyone retroactively that is having to live with a buy -- blight like this. thank you. >> supervisors, first let me state something. we, the city, should have an expert that gives us critical data on the electromagnetic field radio waves that are in

close proximity to the constituents whom the pay their taxes. what we have heard here from the business people is that we can spend millions of dollars, and they do it here in san francisco. what happens in washington, millions of dollars are given to congress people by the lobbyists. they come over here and they tell us, they are discriminating. are they discriminating? who is being discriminated against? the so-called inspectors or advocates, how many poor people

are being affected by radio magnetic waves, by radio waves and in very close proximity. they do not like legislation that by to them in the butt. we need to have stronger legislation to address the situation. there is a way to do it. thank you very much. >> i want to thank you for the legislation.

i want to make sure there is understanding here. so many people who don't have home phones, they just have so funds -- cell phones. i want to know when the permitting of those devices comes up, will they have to stop those devices? does that impact service that those devices were providing? i know most people are in contact with their kids and everybody else that uses those devices. everything under the sun, his xbox is wifi. all of these things -- as much as there is an economy being

produced about it. in that area, it is the underpinning of the economy that is based on. we are not holding things up for years and years. if we are going to have people plant trees, we need to make sure that they take care of them. last but not least, the closest legislation i have heard about this, that is about 90,000 people. there is a million people using these resources. we want to make sure we don't coincidentally impact it in a negative way.

>> i am a resident and homeowner in belleville at terrace. i like to thank the supervisors that are tackling the issue. i want to speak in favor of the legislation for the placement of wireless antenna and supporting apparatus that is needed. they are very real and can impact property values. this is a real installation just west of west portal. it certainly is very visible and it impacts the value of the property there.

the installations as referenced earlier are not unobtrusive. they are typically quite large. this is the t-mobile one. it is basically two sails on top of the mast. this is the bottom part of it. some companies will report that these are baby monitors. you would have to have a baby stroller and was assigned by caterpillar to be able to support it and carry it. it is a very real issue. there was a meeting at the planning commission where they took up this issue and unanimously approved it. there was an individual that is

here today and i will paraphrase this. use of the right of way makes sense because using [chime] using existing clutter is in the streets today, and we are just adding to it. i urge you to support this legislation and these amendments. >> i am somewhat surprised that this thing about the polls and everything, they are cutting down their polls. concerns about the beautification, i appreciate the legislation of the staff.

we have the worst cellphone service around. i guess because we don't have these devices much anymore because everything is underground. everything about it, we have a hard time calling the police. i am hoping you are considering this legislation and consulting in all of the emergency people that need to be involved with this conversation concerning the areas that don't have these devices. it is hard for us to get a phone call. it is not just a poor neighborhood since we started all of this underground, everything is bouncing off of the mountain of the twin peaks,

we lose calls all the time. sometimes they're very important. there are a lot of other considerations that need to be considered when you talk about this cut of legislation. and we try to improve the quality of the cell phones and everything else. most people who don't even have the old phone anymore. it is cheaper to go out and get another one. it is easier. >> before my time starts, i need to ask the procedural question. we received an item -- an e-mail that said this item would be coming back next week. do i understand that this item will be coming back?

supervisor maxwell: if you want clarification, the item will be coming back. >> we received that this morning when they came out with this last draft. supervisor maxwell: yes, your understanding is correct. >> it sounds like your agenda on the thirteenth is very busy, he may consider taking this up in january or some other time. the wireless industry is very interested in using the right of way. i have been trying to figure out ways to work with the city to work with other agencies. both verizon and at&t -- it requires a permit for every

poll. there is a first services wireless facility in every poll. if the work was done by the different departments, you would have aesthetically acceptable facilities. we feel the legislation began to tighten up the legislation. it was introduced to a brand new item in 2010. the working group that met in 2009 has nothing to do with the working group in 2010. we feel they need some additional help. how does it provide for a permit when the state law requires a 10-year permit?

with the dimensions of antennas and radios, that is all regulated by the fcc. how do you allow for facilities that don't have backup? it argues much better than i can. it includes st. anthony's and others. supervisor maxwell: public comment is closed. i believe you have some pictures. you had some photos they wanted to show us. do they show what people are doing in other jurisdictions? you mentioned n.y., i believe?

supervisor avalos. -- avalos: essentially, we are talking about a much smaller box, perhaps it would be in greater number. i am not sure if you have to build more of these boxes, but it is much less conspicuous in the public right of way than the boxes we have seen that our actual telecommunications equipment. i think about the times we have actually regulated industry and a look at regulations, cars, and there was a resistance. this is not regulatory, but we are trying to put standards in place.

the auto-industry resisted. the telecommunications industry has the capacity to build smaller boxes and will resist this as well. we need to make sure that we can set a standard for other municipalities about how we can prevent the proliferation of boxes backlog the public right of way. the radio emissions is a completely separate matter. my enjoyment of the sidewalks is harmed when oecd's boxes of the way they are with a real and difference to what the quality of life is like in san francisco. i think this legislation goes very far to have some accountability about what we're going to put in the public right of way. supervisor maxwell: i remember

we had a big, clunky funds. -- phones. now we have small phones. maybe the boxes can correspond to the size of the phones. to the attorney, don't we regulate boxes? i don't want to say it was at&t, but there were big utility boxes in the right of way. and it seems to me that we have legislation that someone talks about that? the big boxes that were dealing with cable, they could not put it underground? >> it was a ceqa issue for the

at&t boxes. it was through that that really came to the supervisors, and the department of public works and other members have what they call a surface-mounted facilities order. they regulate how companies can place large boxes in public rights of way. it is through the excavation co- head where all the boxes require some sort of excavation to be able to set them and the concrete. there is regulation of those facilities. supervisor maxwell: i have a hard time getting internet consistently.

like anything else, i think we can do it better, and we regulate. and we have an obligation in the city. this is a beautiful city and we are known for our duty. we are known for how gorgeous is and what you can see in our neighborhoods. we have an obligation and responsibility to make sure that we understand that. our tourist dollars depend on our duty. it is about finance and it is about our city and the fact that it is a lovely city. we have to do everything we can to make sure that people respected ha. -- it. w tha is what this is about -- that is what this is about. >> i think the amendment today was substantive. i didn't know