RESPECTMedina Fights to Save Parks@TMobile, #DontCellOurPark

RESPECTMedina Fights to Save Parks
@TMobile, #DontCellOurPark

#RESPECTMedina Wins for Kids

#RESPECTMedina Wins for Kids

July 31, 2015
MEDINA RESIDENTS FILE REPLY: THE NEWLY UNCOVERED EVIDENCE SHOULD BE ADMITTED INTO COURT

July 23, 2015
MEDINA RESIDENTS ASK COURT TO ADMIT IMPORTANT NEWLY-DISCOVERED EVIDENCE. Also, outside the courtroom, curious conflicts of interest, etc., that weren’t disclosed to City Council, or residents, are being researched.

June 23, 2015
MEDINA RESIDENTS OPPOSE THE SECRET "SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT" AMONG T-MOBILE, THE TOWER COMPANY AND THE CITY OF MEDINA

May 11, 2015
The City Council (6-0, Pryde absent) unanimously agreed to rubberstamp the 80-foot cell tower project that was twice denied by the City's own hearing examiner (once on the facts and once on reconsideration), via a contrived "settlement agreement" among T-Mobile, its billion-dollar backed cell tower partner, Independent Towers, and the City. The secret "Settlement Agreement" was entered into without any notice to, and without any participation from, the Medina residents intervenors or any other residents - and with full knowledge that our community group was scheduled to meet with T-Mobile and Independent Towers the very next day, May 12, 2015. Here is their "Settlement Agreement", here is their motion and here is their proposed order). 

April 2015
<This entry added summer 2015; we didn’t know until summer 2015 that T-Mobile’s lease with WSDOT was in effect throughout this whole dispute and T-Mobile could have been using the pole provided by WSDOT in 2011.> Importantly, it was not disclosed to the concerned residents or the Hearing Examiner, or to Judge Lasnik, that, at the time of the July 2014 hearing, at the time of the November 2014 lawsuit, and through April 2015, T-Mobile had an easy and viable option outside the park -- it had a lease with WSDOT and could have stayed on a utility pole in the WSDOT ROW, in accordance with its still-in-effect lease with WSDOT. We understand the lease was terminated in April 2015 once WSDOT discovered that T-Mobile wasn’t using the pole provided by WSDOT in 2011.

January 21, 2015
FEDERAL COURT ORDER GRANTS MEDINA RESIDENTS' MOTION TO INTERVENE, ALLOWING THEM TO DEFEND FAIRWEATHER PARK AGAINST BIG WIRELESS

December 12, 2014
MEDINA RESIDENTS REPLY TO T-MOBILE & BIG WIRELESS' OPPOSITION, EXPLAIN WHY MEDINA RESIDENTS MUST HAVE A SEAT AT THE TABLE IN LIGHT OF CITY'S CONFLICTED ROLES AS LANDLORD VS. AS HEARING EXAMINER. (Note that Medina residents didn’t know, the judge didn’t know, and no one but City Hall, City Council, and the Plaintiffs knew at this time, that on December 2, 2014, T-Mobile, T-Mobile's cell-tower business partner, Independent Towers/Vertical Bridge, and the City of Medina, with support from the City Manager, the City’s Mayor, and the City Council, secretly agreed to "settle" the lawsuit with a 70-foot tower and a 1525-square foot cement equipment bunker.)

December 11, 2014
THE CITY OF MEDINA FILES ANSWER TO T-MOBILE FEDERAL LAWSUIT

December 8, 2014
T-MOBILE & BIG WIRELESS OPPOSE MOTION TO INTERVENE REQUESTED BY RESPECTMEDINA AND MEDINA RESIDENTS

December 2, 2014
<This entry added summer 2015; we didn’t know about December 2, 2014’s “settlement agreement” until summer 2015. Good thing the court granted our motion to intervene!>
Mayor Boyd's emails to residents state that settlement negotiations commenced in February 2015, but that’s not true. Newly discovered secret-until-now records from late 2014 show that T-Mobile, T-Mobile's cell-tower business partner, Independent Towers/Vertical Bridge, and the City of Medina, with support from the City Manager, the City’s Mayor, and the City Council, secretly agreed to "settle" the lawsuit with a 70-foot tower and a 1525-square foot cement equipment bunker on December 2, 2014.>

November 24, 2014
MOTION TO INTERVENE: RESPECTMEDINA AND MEDINA RESIDENTS DEFEND FAIRWEATHER PARK & CITY'S DENIAL OF BIG WIRELESS INDUSTRIAL CELL TOWER APPLICATION, PLUS FILE PROPOSED ANSWER — all prior to the City filing any response at all to the Big Wireless lawsuit

November 12, 2014 (and September 2014)
Big Wireless files retaliatory lawsuit in federal court, instead of working to find a pro-community, pro-business solution (0214-01455-RSL T-Mobile West LLC et al v. The City of Medina, Washington, the Honorable Robert S. Lasnik, presiding).  Amended complaint is here. 

October 10, 2014
MEDINA HEARING EXAMINER DENIES T-MOBILE & BIG WIRELESS MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

September 8, 2014
T-MOBILE & BIG WIRELESS TOWER COMPANY, INDEPENDENT TOWERS, FILE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION, ALLEGING MATERIAL ERRORS OF FACT & LAW

August 2014
LETTER FROM FORMER COUNCIL MEMBER TO CURRENT COUNCIL HIGHLIGHTS STAFF'S MISUNDERSTANDING OF CITY CODE, ASKS COUNCIL TO TAKE ACTION.  ORIGINAL INTENT OF CITY CODE IS IMPORTANT - CLICK HERE.

August 21, 2014
MEDINA HEARING EXAMINER DENIES T-MOBILE & BIG WIRELESS REQUEST FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT INDUSTRIAL CELL TOWER AT FAIRWEATHER PARK

July 16, 2014
Below is the audio from the July 16, 2014 hearing on the requested Special Use Permit, Variance from the required 500-foot set-back, and Variance from the requirement that wireless equipment building be undergrounded, and here are (unofficial) transcripts.here overview here overview

July 16, 2014
Click here to review the detailed comments from Adkins/Harris on why the Special Use Permit and Variances should be denied for failure to comply with the City's Code, including failure to prove need, failure to prove least-intrusive location and least-intrusive type/size of facility, failure to identify and explore any other locations inside and outside the City, and illegal special privilege by seeking a site within an area that is not zoned for wireless.  

Thanks to Steve Preston for his detailed analysis of some of the errors, misunderstandings and omissions in the City Staff's report (his letter starts at page 62).

Note that it was only in May 2015 that we discovered, through a public records request at WSDOT, that, at the time of the hearing (July 2014) and through April 2015, T-Mobile's lease with WSDOT for a utility-pole site in the WSDOT Park & Ride was still in effect and had not expired or been terminated -- WSDOT did not kick T-Mobile out of the Park & Ride; T-Mobile left on its own. The least intrusive alternate location for T-Mobile at the time of the hearing, and at the time it filed a federal lawsuit against the City? The 2011 utility pole that it was still leasing from WSDOT in the WSDOT Park & Ride!