From: Don DeBar (914)649-6597
Dated: 1/28/00
Re: OSSINING CELL TOWER CAUSES LOCAL BRUSHFIRES
"NO CELL TOWER RALLY", 2pm 1/29/00 at Ossining High School
___________________________________________________________________
First, from Rockland County, NY, which lies across the Hudson River from
Ossining. This story also has relevance to the issue of environmental
racism.
United Water urged to deny antenna plan
------------------------------------------------------------------------
By AMY TAXIN
COPYRIGHT 2000 The Journal News. All rights reserved.
Publication date: 1/11/2000
SPRING VALLEY --Village residents put pressure yesterday on United Water in
a last-minute attempt to get the company to deny Nextel Communications
permission to build cellular phone antennas on a local water tank.
In a meeting yesterday morning with United Water representatives, Mayor
Allan Thompson presented copies of petitions signed by residents asking the
company to prevent Nextel from using the space on Prospect and Ohio
streets.
Residents fear the radio waves transmitted by cellular antennas could put
their health at risk.
United Water declined to comment on the petitions or the copy of 250
signatures collected by the Rev. Jacques Michel in October and presented to
the village Board of Trustees in opposition to Nextel's application.
The company did, however, verify that it signed a contract with Nextel in
mid-1999 allowing the company to use the space. The water company would
collect payment from Nextel as rent, said Terri Guess, United Water
spokeswoman, but she would not disclose the amount.
Nextel's application to place 12 antennas on top of the water tank has been
controversial in Spring Valley for the past three months. Residents filled
the village boardroom twice in October, calling for the Board of Trustees
to reject the application.
The board, however, is bound by a federal law that prohibits municipalities
from banning cellular towers. According to the 1996 Federal
Telecommunications Act, municipalities have limited influence over where
antennas are placed and how they look.
The Rev. Sidney Buxton distributed the petitions to members of his
congregation, Faith Temple Church of Christ on Bethune Boulevard, in the
hope that the signatures get the water company to pay attention to
residents' fears.
"This is one of the ways we can attack it, letting them know we're not
pleased about it going up there," Buxton said.
Many residents who distributed and signed the petitions thought pressuring
the water company was a good idea, but one that came too late. The board
votes at 8 tonight on Nextel's application. The board has to vote now to
meet a deadline under New York law governing how much time can pass between
a public hearing on a topic and a decision.
"I think it's a little too late in the game to try to make a change," said
Stella Marrs, director of the Martin Luther King Multi-Purpose Center on
Bethune Boulevard.
Nevertheless, Marrs helped pass out petitions and collect signatures
yesterday, adding that "the village can't afford to get sued" if the
village violates the federal law governing placement of cellular antennas.
Thompson said that yesterday's meeting with United Water went well but
refused to disclose its outcome before talking with village trustees. He
and Trustee Margareth Jourdan distributed the petitions to some residents
Friday to help get the campaign against the water company off the ground.
The second story describes our action last week:
Ossining residents protest cell tower
------------------------------------------------------------------------
By ANDREA GREIF
COPYRIGHT 2000 The Journal News. All rights reserved.
Publication date: 1/20/2000
OSSINING -- As school board members met behind closed doors with Sprint PCS
officials last night, more than 300 citizens concerned about plans for a
cellular phone tower atop Ossining High School listened to testimony about
the potential health risks of radiation emissions.
The closed-door meeting between Sprint and the Board of Education was
expected to focus on beginning the bidding process for a contractor to
start work on the tower, said Larry McDonnell, a spokesman for Sprint.
But earlier yesterday, two members of Safe Ossining Schools announced they
had filed papers in state Supreme Court in White Plains seeking to force
termination of the project. The grass-roots group was organized to oppose
the tower, which the school board approved in September 1998. The board
could not terminate the deal after a surge of community opposition.
The legal action, called an Article 78, was made by Dr. Leslie Plachta and
Don DeBerardinis. It claims that the school district and school board acted
outside their authority in granting the lease to Sprint and that the
district failed to comply with state environmental review laws.
McDonnell said he was not aware of the lawsuit but said he doubted it would
be successful.
Before last night's meetings, about 50 parents and students gathered at a
candlelight vigil outside Ossining's Roosevelt Education Center, where the
school board was meeting with Sprint officials.
"Find another site," Connie Hochman said. "We don't want it at the school.
The community doesn't want it."
Later, inside Trinity Church, a pediatrician, a medical science journalist
and a public health professor discussed potential health effects of
cellular tower emissions.
B. Blake Levitt, the journalist, said there was serious contradictory
scientific information and questionable safety standards.
"We should err on the side of caution where children are concerned," she
said. "No safe levels of exposure have ever really been determined."
David Carpenter, a professor at the State University of New York at Albany,
said there was significant evidence that exposure to cell towers is
hazardous to people's health. He said that children exposed to this
technology could be more susceptible to leukemia and brain tumors.
McDonnell reiterated Sprint's position that "no studies have ever found any
harm associated with this technology at all."
A third story, from nearby (to Ossining, NY) Yorktown. It is important to
note that the residents of Yorktown cited the fact that they learned about
potential health hazards from the struggle in Ossining.
New cell tower
planned in Yorktown
Nextel sets sights near Mercy College
by Brian J. Howard for the North County News
Residents will have a chance tomorrow night (Thursday) to hear Nextel
Communications's plans to erect an 80-foot wireless telecommunications
facility near Yorktown's Mercy College campus.
The plan, filed with the town's Building Department in early December, is
the subject of a public hearing before the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA).
Nextel, based in White Plains, is seeking a special permit from the ZBA.
The meeting is set for 8 p.m. at Town Hall.
If approved, the cell tower will be Nextel's third in the town, along with
two others nearby in Putnam Valley and Mount Kisco. The other Nextel
antennae in Yorktown are off Illington Road and Darby Place.
To get the permit they seek, the company's consultants will have to
demonstrate why they should be allowed to vary from certain provisions of
the cell tower law passed by the town last year.
Specifically, the monopole and 200-square-foot equipment shack would not be
built on town property, and the Nextel antennae won't be located with
existing antennae.
The new law requires applicants to try to meet both criteria or show why
they are unable to do so.
"In accordance with Section 300-58(1)(i) of the Zoning Code, Nextel
thoroughly investigated whether the facility could be located on town-owned
lands or attached to an existing building or structure," the company states
in a memo of support filed with the town.
There is no town-owned land nearby that is suitable for the facility, nor
is there an existing facility in that area, Nextel argues.
Federal law requires communications providers like Nextel to fill
geographic gaps in cellular service. The site at Taconic Corporate Park off
Strang Boulevard and Route 202 was chosen to meet that need.
Wendell Lane resident Molly Lichty learned of Nextel's intentions two weeks
ago when she received legal notification of tomorrow's public hearing.
She is concerned with what she perceives is the secretive nature of the
cell tower plan.
Following the raucously controversial proposal to erect an antenna atop
Ossining High School, Lichty cites many of the fears expressed there may
apply to the Yorktown plan.
"They have to notify all the people that are affected, so I assume that I'm
affected," Lichty said. "And I want to know how, when and why.
"I guess I wouldn't have been so upset if I hadn't read all this stuff in
Ossining and all those doctors," she added.
Fears about the health risks from electromagnetic energy emitted by cell
towers tend to closely follow the towers' proliferation in recent years.
Federal law has limited the extent to which local authorities can consider
those fears if the emissions are shown to be within federal limits.
Studies addressing the issue are part of the application submitted to the
town.
"The results of this analysis indicate that the maximum level of RF energy
to which the public may be exposed is below all applicable health and
safety limits," the report maintains.
"Specifically, in all roundly accessible areas surrounding the
installation, the maximum level of RF energy associated with simultaneous
and continuous operation of all proposed transmitters will be less than 0.2
percent of the safety criteria adapted by the Federal Communications
Commission as mandated by the Telecommunications Act of 1996."
The cell tower would be erected on a 1,000-square-foot site near the
intersection of Route 202 and Strang Boulevard. It will stand 430 feet from
the Corporate Park building.
The plan does not meet the setback requirements in the code. The ZBA will
also have to consider whether to permit a 33-foot setback variation. Nextel
will argue that to accommodate the setback requirement they would have to
move the tower closer to a residential property.
A Full Environmental Assessment Form has been filed with the town.
PLEASE ASK WHAT YOU CAN DO TO GET YOUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO PASS THE
FOLLOWING RESOLUTION:
WHEREAS the use of cellular telecommunications technology has exploded in
the past 5 years throughtout the country and much of the world, and
WHEREAS the question of adverse effects upon the ecology of, and all life
upon, planet earth has been raised, and
WHEREAS the state of medical science at this point in time is inconclusive
as to this question, although some research has provided indications of
potential increases in leukemia, brain cancer, impaired learning and memory
function and other adverse effects that may occur in humans, and
WHEREAS a host of medical experts currently agree that, until this
technology is proven safe for humans, a policy of "prudent avoidance"
should be followed in the placement of cellular transmission and relay
towers, particularly with respect to areas with concentrations of children
and adolescents,
and
WHEREAS the community of Ossining, NY, now facing the imminent
implementation of a decision to place a cell tower upon its only high
school, has begun to demand that the tower not be placed there or upon any
other school or place frequented by its children or adolescents, and
WHEREAS the plight of Ossining has pointed to the need for legislation at
the State level in order to prevent any further risk of exposure of other
students, faculty or staff in New York State to a similar risk, and
WHEREAS a member of the Ossining community, Don DeBar, has proposed an
amendment to the NYS Education Law, by adding to Section 403-a thereof a
new subsection 7, to wit:
"7. No school property shall be sold, leased, or otherwise alienated, or
used, for the placement and/or operation of any cellular transmission
and/or relay facilities."
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the __________________
hereby calls upon the Senate and Assembly of the State of New York to pass
such legislation, and upon the Governor of the State of New York to duly
sign the same, and, further, that the Governor direct the Commissioner of
Education to impose a moratorium on the further execution, implementation
and/or consideration of any application to place any such facility upon any
such property over which it has jurisdiction anywhere within this State.
Respectfully submitted by
(YOUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT)
The following editorial was published in the Westchester County wekkly, The
Nort County News, week of 1/26/00:
Editorial
Proposal to ban cell tower
antennas on school grounds
should be taken seriously
Ossining resident Don DeBar is the prototypical outspoken community
activist that makes public officials wince when he steps up to a
microphone.
He's a gadfly who isn't afraid of confrontations, and while he sometimes
gets a little carried away with the passion he has on certain issues, such
as the Ossining waterfront project, he is certainly someone that commands
attention.
His most recent crusade is stopping an antenna for cell phone transmissions
from being erected on the roof of Ossining High School.
One of the organizers of the protest rally last week and a plaintiff in a
lawsuit filed against the Ossining School District, DeBar has also put
together a well-worded proposal for legislation in the state that would ban
cell towers from being placed on school grounds.
It's rather mindboggling that such legislation hasn't already been passed,
and quite admirable that a citizen would take the time and interest to try
to light a fire under state representatives who are well compensated for
adopting laws to protect their constituents.
It is hopeful that DeBar's proposal won't end up in the circular file or
the shredder because it has a great deal of merit.
While it is often argued that there is no concrete evidence that cell
towers increase the risk of certain types of cancer or other health
problems, there is no concrete evidence that it doesn't either.
As a result, leaning on the side of caution, while should children be
placed in potential danger with an antenna hovering over them for seven
hours, five days a week?
Recent amendments to the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 virtually
eliminated any health concerns over cell towers from playing a role in the
decision-making process of where these towers should go.
Municipalities are basically at the mercy of companies such as Sprint and
can do little except suggest where the antennas could be situated.
How ludicrous.
Instead of tying the hands of local officials, the federal government
should make it easier by mandating these antennas not be put anywhere near
schools, churches or apartment buildings.
Uncle Sam should be trying to protect people, not harm them.
Thankfully, there are people such as DeBar who are willing to fight and
make some noise.
Sprint appears to be taking notice.
Maybe state representatives Sandra Galef, Vincent Leibell and Suzi
Oppenheimer and Congresswoman Sue Kelly will be next.
DeBar has already done a lot of their work for them.
|
