Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Please immediately retract the Board's November 16, 2017 approval of the T-Mobile
telecommunications facility lease or cancel that lease at Blair Local Park. As explained below, we are
concerned that the Planning Board inappropriately authorized: a) the attachment of a wireless antenna
facility to the Commission's stadium light pole (telecommunications monopole), b)the installation of
related ground equipment, and c)the related easements across Blair Local Park, and that d)this would
lead to the misappropriation of Commission funds.
As you will recall, we urged the Board to postpone its hearing on this matter until all relevant
documents, which had been requested through our MPIA requests, had been produced. We also urged
you to send the TFCG application back to the Tower Committee for a review that would comply with
COMCOR02.58E.Ol.OS(b),as is required by the Commission's Administrative Procedures.1 We asserted
that the Commission needed to first receive and evaluate public input as part of the its decision process,
and then submit input concerning the application at the scheduled Tower Committee (TFCG) meeting
via the Commission's designee (Greg Russ), to be in compliance with this Regulation. The Board ignored
our requests.
On Friday (12/15/17), after an excessive delay and multiple follow-ups to your staff, your Senior Counsel
Megan Chung produced the requested Nextel/Sprint lease documents that concerned the original
telecommunications facility at Blair Local Park.2 These documents helped us trace other documents.
When read in conjunction with the original telecommunications facility lease, these documents reveal
what appear to be significant past and present contraventions, and signal upcoming repetition of
inappropriate actions by the Commission.
1
Link to COMCOR02.58E.01.05(b)
http://library.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll?f=jumplink$jumplinkx=Advanced$jumplink vpc=first$jumplink xsl=q
ueryl in k.xslSium plink sel=titl e; path ;content-type; home-title; item-
bookma rk$j um plink d=maryland(comcor)Sjumplink q=ffield%20folio-destination-
name:%2702.58E.02%27J$jumplink md=target-id=JD 02.58E.02; also See Section 4.9:
http://www.montgomeryplanningboard.org/agenda/2014/documents/ltem3Attach1-Policy Telecom-22714.pdf
2
Nextel/Sprint Leaseand LeaseTermination Documents
2
A restrictive covenant has been recorded for Blair Local Park in the Land Records of Montgomery
County, Maryland. 3 This covenant, signed December 1995, designates that this park land was acquired
with State Program Open Space (POS) funds, and the covenant requires that the parcel must be used
only for its intended Project Open Space (POS) purpose. Also pertinent to the Commission's actions, past
and present, the covenant requires that the property must not be leased without the authorizations of
three specified State officials/signatories. No modifications to this covenant have been recorded with
the Land Records of Montgomery County, Maryland.
We have reviewed the State POS Manual to try to understand what the State has required of the
Commission, regarding Blair Local Park.4 The guidance in this manual, combined with the Lease,the
information in the Land Records, information presented by Commission staff at the recent November
16, 2017 hearing, and other information have resulted in our concerns that a variety of past and present
regulatory violations have transpired. And, since Commission staff characterized the subject T-Mobile
telecommunications facility as similar to the previous (Nextel/) Sprint facility at the site, we are
concerned that the deployment would result in additional regulatory violations at Blair Local Park.
a. The Nextel/Sprint Lease,our review of Land Records, and information provided at the
November 16, 2017 hearing demonstrate that in April 1999, the Commission authorized
the following conversions of Blair Local Park without written approvals from the
required State signatories or following other POS land conversion processes:
• The construction of a telecommunications facility monopole that has
significantly greater girth and height than the existing stadium light pole
that it would replace (but which the Leasedeceptively calls as a "stadium
light pole" instead of a telecommunications monopole);
• The attachment of a telecommunications antenna array atop the
monopole;
4
9
Restrictive Covenant for Blair Local Park
Project Open Space Manual: http://dnr.maryland.gov/land/Documents/POS/localposmanual 2006.pdf
3
a. However, Commission budgets and financial reports do not clearly separate out Blair
Local Park telecommunications facilities lease revenues. And the Commission's budget
and financial reports do not clearly designate these funds as restricted to Blair Local
Park: not for the current Blair Local Park use; not for investment in future Local Blair
Park use. The Commission describes its Property Management Activities as:
Lease administration and property management
services for a diverse portfolio of rental property
including buildings, residences, equestrian facilities, agriculture, telecommunications,
and recreation.
b. We are therefore concerned that the Board's November 16, 2017 approval of the T-
Mobile telecommunications facility lease implicitly reauthorizes these revenue
(mis)appropriation practices at Blair Local Park.
The POS documents that we have reviewed suggest that in order to qualify for POS acquisition funding,
the Commission demonstrated that the parcel's characteristics qualified it as a "local park." Thus, it was
hypocritical for Commission staff, post-POS funding, to argue during the recent hearing that this parcel
did not deserve treatment and status of a "local park." We found it furthermore outrageous that the
Commission's legal counsel would advise contorting of the plain-language meaning of the Commission's
Administrative Procedures governing Telecommunications facilities. Section 7.6(f), it being at the
conclusion of the document, and stating that Local Parks "shall not be considered for
5
telecommunications facilities sites," is firm and clear in its requirement.
We are concerned that the Commission has ignored State POS Regulations, County COMCOR
Regulations, and its own Administrative Procedures. We have therefore alerted the appropriate review,
investigative, and enforcement agencies and authorities. So, in addition to providing them a copy of this
letter, we have shared our concerns and asked them for their intervention and assistance. We look
forward to your prompt attention.