Re: Cell phone tower leases

Never been in your situation but got some ideas from thinking about it
if I ever got approached.

Is it a cell phone company that has approached you or a company that
will build the tower and then lease to providers? If it a single cell
phone company try to get language in the lease that they must make the
tower available to other providers. This may be required by zoning
laws. Either way make sure you get more for each additional provider
added to the tower.

Make sure there is some protection for you for any damage to your
property they may cause while putting the tower up or working on it.

See that they assume all liability associated with the tower.

Make sure you are protected if there is a problem such as the tower
coming down.

Try to get protection from any legal action against the tower.

Maybe include free cell phone usage in the lease.

Strongly consider getting a lawyer to look at the lease and negotiate
your side.

Don Bruder <dakidd@xxxxxxxxx> pontificated wisely that:

>In article <_IMGe.7052$q23.1312587@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> "Northern Trader" <North-tradeRE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Been approach by company that wants to put tower on hill behind my pasture.
>> NEone got experience with this and what should be paid/what to look out for?
>> I know its an eyesore, but really hurting bad after the beef border closure
>> crap the americans pulled & could use the extra $$$.
>> Now i'll shut up and listen.
>>
>>
>
>Take their initial offer of what they''d be willing to pay monthly for
>the privilege of using your land, multiply it by somewhere between 50
>and 100, depending on yout mood, and hand it back to them as a
>counteroffer.
>
>If they're coming to you, they want it bad. Make them pay like they want
>it *REALLY* bad, or tell them to get lost.
>
>
>If they're still interested, add another $1000/month of "access fees", a
>$2500 per occurrence "gate opening fee" for when they have to get to the
>tower, and figure out something to call the arbitrary wad of money youll
>bill them from time to time "just because', same way they do their
>customers.
>
>If you're gonna give, might as well get something back in the process...
>
>
>All kidding aside, though, they tend to be severe *PRICKS*, so unless
>you're in so much financial bind that you're already teetering on the
>edge of selling the land to keep yourself in groceries, I'd say that you
>need to *RUN*, not walk, away from this "deal".
>
>And make *ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN* that there's an airtight "At the
>termination of the agreement, the land will be put back to its former
>condition with all costs of such restoration falling solely on the
>company, regardless of how/why the agreement terminates" clause, or I
>guarantee you're screwed for life.
>
>--
>Don Bruder - dakidd@xxxxxxxxx - New Email policy in effect as of Feb. 21, 2004.
>Short form: I'm trashing EVERY E-mail that doesn't contain a password in the
>subject unless it comes from a "whitelisted" (pre-approved by me) address.
>See <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd/main/contact.html> for full details.

Kevin Miller
zvyyre11@xxxxxxxxxxxx (rot13)

.