The San Ramon Valley Unified School District Board of Education approved earlier this year a proposal to construct a Verizon Wireless cell antenna on the Cal High campus.

Verizon’s antenna will be placed on the northernmost stadium light pole near the visitors’ bleachers, between the track and softball fields.

The lease agreement calls for Verizon to pay $26,400 in rent annually, with a 2 percent annual increase according to the Jan. 12 board meeting minutes. In addition, Verizon will pay $25,000 in exchange for the replaced stadium lights and all construction fees.

The lease will begin with a five-year term that can be renewed up to four times and stretch the district’s agreement with Verizon to as long as 25 years.

School board member Rachel Hurd followed the proposal’s growth since 2011 when AT&T initially asked the district for permission to put up a cell tower.

“The board first discussed the prospect of leasing light pole space to a cellular provider back in 2011,” Hurd said.

Hurd noted that the cellular providers looked at a number of school sites, including San Ramon Valley and Monte Vista high schools, but decided that Cal best served their needs.

“Initially,  AT&T approached the district asking to put the tower up,” Hurd said. “At that point the board decided to be fair to all vendors and put out an RFP [request for proposal] to see if anyone’s interested in doing this. AT&T went through a lot of personnel changes, two years went by, and ultimately, Verizon was the only one who submitted a proposal.”

Some students are indifferent to the hazard it may pose because of improved connection.

“I know in certain areas of the school, I can’t contact my parents,” said junior Carolyn Kim. “The reception here is really bad, so I think [the tower] is OK.”

Other students, especially Verizon users, support the tower in hopes that it will solve the problematic cell phone service on various campus areas.

“It sounds like a good idea if it’ll improve [Verizon] cell phone service for some kids at Cal High,” said sophomore Chris Forsyth. “Signal can be kind of weak in areas like the main building and the field–they don’t have very good cell phone service.”

The district agreed to the proposal as long as Verizon pays for annual testing on the tower’s radio frequency premission levels. Though the board unanimously approved the proposal, Verizon has yet to accept it with this new requirement.

If Verizon does accept the proposal with this modification,  the district stands to make more than $137,000 in rent alone during the first five-year term of the lease. Over 25 years, the district could make more than $500,000.

“The revenue goes to the school district and helps the general fund, which indirectly helps Cal High along with all other school sites,” said Hurd.

Parents argue the negative effects of the tower outweigh any money the district will make.

“Considering how much the district is receiving for the tower, it is not worth the risk [of students’ safety],” said Jacqueline Jamero, the mother of two Cal freshmen.

Several parents openly voiced similar opinions at the Jan. 26 board meeting after the measure’s approval on Jan. 12.

Jamero argued against the antenna’s construction, stating that more research should be done to ensure students’ well-being is not threatened.

“They’re only using one consulting firm to construct the tower and test the safety,” Jamero said. “They didn’t check with another firm for the emission levels. The board didn’t seek another opinion or do enough research.”

Hurd confirmed the board saw Verizon’s presentation by “an independent consultant – a professional engineer – who explained everything very well. We understood [the tower] was totally safe.”

“I suggested that the company charged with annual testing should be a third party agreed on by parent organizations,” said parent Mac Zhu. “It’s a conflict of interests. We need to have an independent third party.”

Verizon’s Executive Director Phillip French is involved in the agreement to build the cell tower at Cal.

He recently worked with the University of Nevada Reno to modify a malfunctioning rooftop cell tower.

The tower appeared as a safety hazard as it “restricted the use and access of the rooftop” and required modification to “correct frequency levels,” according to a December 2015 briefing paper going over suggested reparations.

Gary Black, the district’s assistant superintendent of facilities and operations, did not respond to an email request to be interviewed for this story.

Sathyabama Gururajan, parent to Cal sophomore Eashwar C. Iyer, mentioned that the district had not been timely in notifying parents of the actions leading up to the agreement.

“I didn’t get any heads up or previous information and there was no way to talk about it or express our concerns,” she said. “I heard more about crab feeds and dances and plays than I did about the cell tower in the last few months.”

According to an email sent by the district on Jan. 12, notifications in regard to the proposed construction were sent to those living in a 300-foot radius around the school on two separate occasions: Nov. 12, 2014, and Jan. 5, 2016.

Several students fail to see any threat the radio emissions may pose.

“I think cell phone towers are fairly safe and I trust them,” said senior Leandre Glendenning, who plays for Cal’s varsity softball team on a field near the proposed tower. “I don’t think of them as much of a danger. The real danger comes if they fall or malfunction in some way.”

Hammett & Edison, Inc., the company charged with constructing the tower, released an FAQ sheet in which it addressed common safety concerns about radio frequency emissions.

“There are reported no adverse health effects at exposure levels equal to or below the FCC standard,” according to their site, h-e.com. “Exposure to RF fields below the FCC public limit is allowed 24 hours a day, seven days a week.”

Firm owner Bill Hammett attended the Jan. 12 meeting and mentioned that initial readings were generally 50 percent below the standard set by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

The FCC standard level itself includes a safety margin 50 times lower than the threshold for any dangerous readings, meaning emissions from the tower would be 2,500 times below potentially harmful levels.

“If [parents] are OK with [their] kid carrying a cell phone and putting their cell phone under their pillow, they should be OK with the tower,” Kim said.