Home › News › Local news
Golden Gate fire commission declines cell phone tower fees
STORY TOOLS
RELATED STORIES
More Local news
- Pack of pit bulls attacks Golden Gate woman and her 3 Chihuahuas, killing one dog
- South Florida Watershed Journal: The hare that breaks the camel's back
- Man jailed after alleged attack on mother, daughter in road rage incident
Share and Enjoy [?]
To forfeit fees or not to forfeit fees.
That was the question the Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District Commission finally answered Wednesday night.
In a 3-0 vote, fire commissioners opted to decline a proposed contract by California-based Wireless Capital Partners, which in essence would have had the district sell the revenue stream from the two cellular phone towers on district property for a payment of between $1 million and $1.4 million.
The company would have then received the tower’s revenue for a specific amount of time, ranging from 15 to 40 years.
The proposal first went before fire commissioners at the May 14 meeting, with Wireless Capital Partners representative Jeff Mulrennan giving a brief presentation and answering commissioners’ questions about the contract.
At the time, the fire commission postponed making a decision, until staff could fully review the contract to see how it could affect the district.
Golden Gate Fire Chief Robert Metzger said the district also waited until Collier County Property Appraiser Abe Skinner announced the preliminary numbers for the county’s taxable property before giving an update.
According to Metzger, the Wireless Capital Partners contract was pretty straightforward in terms of what the district’s responsibilities would have been.
“I’m not here to sell you on this concept,” said Metzger, who pointed that while the money could help, how much the district would actually benefit wasn’t a sure thing.
“I’m here to give you the information that we have ... in my mind it’s an unknown gamble.”
In addition, Metzger told commissioners that the district’s preliminary budget is facing an $800,000 shortfall, but that staff is looking at ways to save money and not lose staff.
During the discussion, fire commissioner Dave Stedman said that based on the response from district residents concerning the proposed Alligator Alley lease, that he opposed the contract with Wireless Capital Partners.
Commission chairman Chuck McMahon agreed.
“The census of that group was, ‘It’s not really good business (to lease public property),’” said McMahon before the vote. “Tell those (WCP) people that we respect them coming to us, but no.”
Stedman was also not sold on Wireless Capital Partners’ intentions, citing the gloomy outlook for the wireless communication industry that Mulrennan painted at the May 14 meeting.
“If it is the case, why would they be interested?” Stedman asked.
In other action, the Golden Gate Fire Commission set the preliminary 2008-09 tax rate at $1 per $1,000 of taxable property value and scheduled the district’s budget workshop for 9 a.m. July 22 at Station 73, 14575 Collier Blvd.
For more information, visit www.ggfire.com or call 348-7540.
Comments
This site does not necessarily agree with comments posted below. Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. Break our rules, and we will ban you. No exceptions, no second chances. Read our privacy policy & user agreement.
Now we can only hope some of that wisdom trickles upward to the Legislature and the Governor.
I'm sure the fire board was tempted to erase that budget shortfall with the quick stroke of a pen -- but in this case common sense prevailed.
At the state level, intellectual laziness overlain with short-term thinking begets schemes like the Alligator Alley fire sale -- in essence a highly regressive tax with serious safety implications for the poorer classes of society.
Congratulations to the GGFD Board -- for showing they are made of better stuff than the hucksters in Tallahassee.
#1 Posted by bsdetector on July 10, 2008 at 11:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)
This is a relatively stupid article..what is the present value of the potential revenue stream?...after you sell the cow, you aint got any milk..duh. Since the necessary details are not in the article, the board likely made the correct decision...sorta unlike the Naples contract with the airport authority or the proposed I75 "maintenance" contract to Ft. Laud...
#2 Posted by Trexler on July 11, 2008 at 6:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)
You know in 15-40 years there is likely to be an entirely different technology that will make these towers obsolete, something like the google house to house wireless system so taking the money now might not be such a bad idea.
#3 Posted by kneejerk on July 11, 2008 at 7:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Trexler, you are correct. The total value of the contracts would be in the 6.5 million range and Wireless Capital wanted to pay around 1 million. If someone can show me how that is responsible use of the public's funds and property, please contact me at the department.
#4 Posted by sbirge on July 25, 2008 at 9:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Post your comment
(Requires free registration.)