The City of White Salmon is considering leasing land to a U.S. Cellular subsidiary on a city-owned parcel on N.W. Strawberry Mountain Road. If approved, the lease would net the city $900 per month in rent in the first year of the contract. The catch? It would open up the possibility for a cell tower to be installed on the lot.
Initially on the agenda for the Aug. 19 city council meeting was a motion for Mayor Marla Keethler to sign a proposed contract leasing parcel #03102427000500 to Oregon RSA#2, a subsidiary of U.S. Cellular, and granting an easement with fees paid by Oregon RSA #2 to the City of White Salmon. A term of 12 months with an option to renew, the contract would net the city $900 in monthly rent and over $1,000 in administrative fees. City councilors agreed unanimously to table the discussion during the meeting, citing concerns of timing and fairness to concerned parties.
The proposal does not interfere with the city’s future plans to construct a larger water reservoir on the site, according to an agenda memo.
Neighbors to the property being considered for the lease option wrote into public comment their concerns with the proposal. Chief among them is the concern for the process the proposal has undergone. Homeowners on N.W. Strawberry Mountain Road assert there had been no communication or notification about the proposal or the meeting that the discussion was to initially take place. They also claim a cell tower installed on the nearby lot would impact their health and lower property values.
City staff clarified in response to inaccurate information in the public comment section that the lease would not automatically allow the lessee to install a cell tower on the parcel. A lessee would still have to go through the land use process, which would require a public hearing.
“It’s not a lease, it’s an option to lease. It gives the respective lessee an opportunity to secure entitlements, meaning they would have to go through the city’s land use process, including before the planning commission, any of the requirements that the code imposes on this kind of land use still would have to happen,” said City Attorney Ken Woodrich.
“All this does at this point is gives the cell tower provider an opportunity to explore whether this is beneficial, but it doesn’t necessarily mean this will happen,” Woodrich continued.
Woodrich also said he had concerns about a discussion occurring without an action. “If council is still potentially in the loop to be an appellate body, it would be very potentially prejudicial to the applicant.
“We need to be careful about what the record would be if later there is an appeal,” said Woodrich.
City staff asked that the agenda item be removed from the meeting due to confusion on part of city staff and concerned parties on when the discussion would occur. While Councilor Ashley Post initially argued in favor of keeping the discussion on the table, councilors still voted unanimously to take the agenda item off the table.
During the meeting, Keethler suggested that the city will review the land use code related to permitting cell towers.
“I think that there is an opportunity for the current council to review this ordinance as written and determine if this is the type of process and the way that we want this procedure to unfold. Currently it is being followed by the standing code that we have,” Keethler said.
By press time, a City Operations Committee meeting had been scheduled for Tuesday, Sept 1 with a discussion on land use related to cell towers on the agenda. A city council meeting agenda for Wednesday, Sept. 2 did not have an agenda item related to the topic.
Keethler told Columbia Gorge News that the purpose of the City Ops Committee meeting is to “evaluate, and consider if an alternative approach for such projects on public land should be considered. Specifically, if it is logical to have the lease option as the initial step before the latter steps that actually vet out viability and public sentiment of the project itself.”
Keethler acknowledged that the process seemed misleading to residents who mistook the proposal as an ultimate decision to install a cell tower. She said the process outlined in the White Salmon Municipal Code refers to actions taken on private property.
“What sets this one apart is the fact that it’s city-owned, public property ... On private property the process as outlined makes more sense, to initiate evaluation by the city and community once the property owner has made their personal decision of considering an arrangement with an entity for a tower,” Keethler said.
“Regardless of the code evaluation, it was clear that the city did not effectively communicate the process to the public, which has also been addressed,” Keethler said.
Currently, the lease is on hold until the code review is complete, said Keethler.
Commented