Wire Novato’s goal is:


  • Wireless telecommunications facilities are NOT needed in any Novato residential neighborhood.

Thanks to our efforts, we had 2 motions on the agenda at the May 10 council meeting and they both passed!

  1. All new wireless applications on the city’s website. Click here and go to ‘planning project log’ to see them.
  2. Council voted for legal counsel to look into how to deem all future applications incomplete until a more protective, permanent wireless ordinance is passed. The city of Easton in CT, voted to do just that, click here to learn more!

The Problem

Novato’s current temporary wireless ordinance is not sufficiently protective of residents’ safety or property, nor does it ensure public notice and participation, or hold wireless industry accountable for the fire hazards and health hazards wireless telecommunications facilities (WTFs) have been proven to cause. See our current ordinance here.

See Mill Valley’s much better ordinance here.

Novato does not have all WTF sites with antenna strengths posted on the town’s website, nor a current, accurate list of active WTF applications.

The Facts

The only time telecoms have the legal right to place wireless facilities (WTFs) is when there is a significant gap in coverage, which means one cannot make OUTDOOR wireless phone calls. Data streaming is faster, safer, and more private via wired internet.

So called ‘small’ cells, which are still WTFs, emit radiation 24/7. There is substantial documented health consequences, including brain tumors, cancers, heart palpitations to people living/working within 1,640ft of a WTF whether a small cell or cell tower. More info.

AT&T submitted applications to install WTFs in 4 Novato neighborhoods on February 25. Novato residents were not notified. A group of residents formed Wire Novato to inform the public, hold the City accountable for not following the ordinance, and prevent the applications from being deemed complete-by providing substantial evidence that the WTFs were not needed in those locations, and educating the Council and the City on the requirements of our ordinance and of the City’s right to determine placement of WTFs- even with the Telecom Act of 1996.

The Solutions

Now that AT&Ts 4 applications have been automatically withdrawn because they missed the 60-day limit our ordinance has for application resubmission, our goals are as follows:

1. Ensure that Novato drafts a more protective permanent wireless ordinance that is clear and directive enough for the planning division to follow; one that will not allow the installation of WTFs within 1,500 feet of residences and schools, that requires immediate notification of the public– and to do this with the legal guidance from top telecom attorney, Andrew Campanelli.

2. Until we have our new ordinance in place we are working to educate the city (including city attorneys) on how it can declare all applications for so-called “small” Wireless Telecommunications Facilities incomplete until the FCC completes its DC Circuit Court-mandated National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review (as mandated in 2019 and again in 2021) of the entire additional 800,000-to-1.2-million-unit, nationwide roll out of sWTFs. The FCC has not yet done this. Any city can shut down the WTF roll out in their jurisdiction until the FCC completes this court-mandated NEPA work. The City planners and council do not understand this and are not taking action on this. This is why we need top telecom attorneys to guide the city, not city attorneys who have no litigation experience in telecom cases.

3. Utilize Novato’s existing wireless ordinance which calls for independent Radio Frequency Engineers and Legal Consultants to be hired at wireless permittees’ expense. The City is not currently utilizing this valuable avenue to obtain expert legal counsel to improve the ordinance and important RF information on all the current WTFs in Novato.

4. Educate about the benefits of wired internet, and wired telecommunications. Consider community-owned fiber optic broadband, and wired smart meters for water, gas, and electric utilities for public safety and prosperity.


Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTFs) of Any Size or Any “G” Do Not Belong Close to Homes, Schools and Parks.


WE HAVE STOPPED, for now, these Four (4) proposed AT&T Cell Towers, which are much too close to homes IN THESE NEIGHBORHOODS!

On Feb. 25, 2022,AT&T and their agents applied for 4G/5G Wireless Telecommunications Facilities in four locations. Their applications were automatically withdrawn on May 7, due to the requirements of our current wireless ordinance and the vigilance of informed Novato residents.

This is the Antenna AT&T Wants to put NEXT TO Our Homes & Schools

Denki Kogyo Model DKOBDYKDP-7M45F Antenna

FrequenciesQty portsMax Input
Maximum Effective Radiated
Power Capability
1695 – 1880 MHz2 ports100 W86.3100 W x 6.3 x 2 = 1,260 W ERP
1880 – 2180 MHz2 ports100 W8.57.1100 W x 7.1 x 2 = 1,420 W ERP
3400 – 3800 MHz4 ports30 W32.030 W x 2.0 x 4 = 240 W ERP
5150 – 5925 MHz2 ports10 W64.010 W x 4.0 x 2 = 80 W ERP
Total Antenna Capability    3,000 Watts ERP
  • All that is needed for telecommunications service is -85 dBm (about 0.1 Watt ERP)
  • This antenna can output 3000 W ERP / 0.1 W ERP = 30,000x more power than needed . . . WHY?

Below were the proposed locations:

  • Near 625 Arthur St. — in front of Novato High School & 50 ft. from homes
  • On Novato Blvd. directly behind 10 Pico Vista Ave. — 30 ft from homes
  • 1553 S. Novato Blvd. — as close as 60 feet from homes
  • 7123 Redwood Blvd. — as close as 250 feet from homes

Near 625 Arthur St. — in front of Novato High School

On Novato Blvd. directly behind 10 Pico Vista Ave. — as close as 30 feet from homes

1553 S. Novato Blvd. — as close as 60 feet from homes

7123 Redwood Blvd. — as close as 250 feet from homes

Near Address A

City of Novato’s Hands are NOT  Tied!

On Aug 13, 2021, the US Courts of Appeals, DC Circuit ruled in Case 20-1025, Environmental Health Trust, et al. v FCC — a lawsuit that challenged the legality of the FCC’s attempted de facto rule-making, a sneaky maneuver that tried to extend its current RF microwave radiation exposure guidelines to frequencies above 6,000 MHz, without any reasoned decision-making. The judges caught the FCC and remanded FCC Order 19-126 back to the FCC, invalidating the Order.

The DC Circuit judges ruled the following in Case 20-1025:

“. . . we grant the petitions in part and remand to the Commission to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its guidelines adequately protect against harmful effects of exposure to radio-frequency [microwave] radiation. It must, in particular,

  • (i) provide a reasoned explanation for its decision to retain its testing procedures for determining whether cell phones and other portable electronic devices comply with its guidelines,
  • (ii) address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure to RF radiation, the ubiquity of wireless devices, and other technological developments that have occurred since the Commission last updated its guidelines, and
  • (iii) address the impacts of RF radiation on the environment.”

Wireless radio frequency microwave radiation is bioactive and is currently being insufficiently regulated. Therefore, each state or locality can regulate the maximum power output of microwave radiation from wireless infrastructure antennas that reaches any areas that are accessible to human beings and other living organisms, consistent with the 11,000+ pages of peer-reviewed, scientific evidence that Environmental Health Trust and Children’s Health Defense and others plaintiffs placed in the FCC’s public record: Vol-1Vol-2Vol-3Vol-4Vol-5Vol-6Vol-7 Vol-8Vol-9Vol-10Vol-11Vol-12Vol-13Vol-14Vol-15Vol-16Vol-17Vol-18Vol-19Vol-20Vol-21Vol-22Vol-23Vol-24Vol-25Vol-26 and Vol-27.

This page is one of three legs of the stool that establishes local control over the operations of Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTFs); the other two are the US House/Senate Conference Report for the 1996 Telecommunications Act (“1996-Act”) and the stated purpose of the 1996-Act: to promote the safety of life and property.