Here in Ossining, NY, we have recently been waging a war against a huge
multi-national, corporation with major environmental implications for the
entire planet.
Without your help, there will be a cellular transmission tower on our high
school in a few weeks. This is a very dangerous development for the
wellbeing of our kids. First, here's some background information to provide
context for the instant struggle:
The world is about to be totally bathed by microwave radiation for the
first time in the (known) history of humanity. This is being done to
"enhance the communications options" of customers of cell-phone providers.
However, there have been numerous allegations made by medical doctors and
other health professionals which claim that serious health consequences,
including leukemia, brain cancer, and/or other serious illnesses, may
result from microwave radiation exposure; hence, the current plans to link
the world with wireless phone networks may have major health implications
for our species. These allegations warrant close study.
Over the past decade, cell-phone use has exploded in the US and throughout
the world. The technology rests upon the use of the microwave spectrum as a
carrier, and incorporates new designs into the old wave patterns which now
utilize digital (i.e., "0" or "off" states and "1" or "on" states) means of
encoding the transmitted material.
It is widely known and proved that microwaves can be used to heat the water
molecules in organic materials. In fact, microwaves have been utilized for
cooking purposes for a long time.
It is also, apparently, acknowledged by all (including the
telecommunications industry, according to published materials) that there
are dangers to living organisms when the tissues of same suffer the thermal
(i.e., heating) effects that can accompany cell-phone usage near the head.
Apparently, there are plans to use satellites over the next couple of years
in order to provide a thorough bath of signal around the planet, in order
to insure complete coverage around the world. However, at present, towers
at a regular interval are needed to accomplish cellular network
installation for providers of cellphone service.
As it now stands, the FCC gave out licenses to various telecommunications
companies for territories that each would be able to serve. Among others,
Sprint, apparently, got a license to provide such "service" to the NY
metropolitan area, and, it seems, they need a site in Ossining for thier
network.
One problem that faces telecommunications companies in the construction of
their networks is that people don't want to be near the towers that are
essential to the operation of the networks, for reasons that range from the
aesthectic impact of the tower designs to concerns over the possible health
effects of the constant bombardment by microwave radiation. Since the
construction of cellular towers is usually within the regulatory purview of
local building or zoning departments and other municipal authorities, our
law provides people an opportunity to discuss the desirability of
installation proposals. However, recent amendments to Federal law
(Telecommunications Act of 1996) apparently proscribe the consideration of
health comcerns in the municipal or state approval process, so these
regulatory hearings are now generally precluded from considering residents'
health concerns. I fact, the mere mentioning of such concerns in the
process can result in court-ordered approval of the application.
Consequently, these concerns have not been, and cannot be, in the current
legal environment, adequately addressed in the consideration of cellular
service build-out applications. This failure to deal with such a
fundamental issue potentially places all people at substantial risk.
Regardless of the limits upon speech that were imposed by the new body of
law, people generally show up, en masse, to object to cell tower proposals
in their neighborhoods at municipal meetings considering such applications.
This is a potentially destabilizing political force in most communities,
since many people are concerned about the potential health dangers of this
technology and, yet, by law, the municipality cannot take those concerns
into account when making a decision on a permit application.
Given this situation, local politicians, seeing their own demise in the
contradiction between the law and the concerns of their own constituents,
have tried to find a way out. Ossining's Town and Village government were
no exception...
Sprint apparently needs to construct a cell tower in Ossining in order to
adequately build out its cellular network in its very important Weschester
County, NY franchise area (Westchester adjoins New York City to the north.)
Residents have been told that Sprint first went to the local municipality
and asked them to assist in finding an acceptable location for the
facility. Sprint, it is alleged, was informed that a moratorium on cellular
tower permits existed in both the Village and Town of Ossining, and,
according to the Superindendent of the Ossining School system, was directed
to the school district. According to a letter by the Ossining Village
Corporation Counsel's office, school district property is not subject to
local zoning.
On September 9, 1998, the Ossining Union Free School District approved a
proposal to lease the rooftop of Ossining High School to Sprint for the
cell tower, at a price of $30k/annum, plus roof repairs, and an escalator
of the greater of 3% or CPI. The term is for 10 years, with an affirmative
obligation upon the district to apply for approval by the NYS Department of
Education for a ten year extension.
Although the board was presented with a package from a telecommunications
advisor that prominently featured the Federal statute proscribing the
consideration of potential health effects, and Assistant Superindendent
Richard Freyman read from this section to concerned parents before the
9/9/98 vote approving the contract was taken, in fact, because this was a
LEASE (i.e., a real estate deal), and not a request for a municipal
approval, a full discussion of the health concerns could be had and
considered. School districts are permitted to consider any facts or
concerns of the community in the disposition of school property; in fact,
they are required to do so. Such a discussion, including a comprehensive
presentation by a local medical doctor, was had prior to the vote. The
Board, which counts no medical doctors among its membership, approved the
lease anyway, discounting the medical evidence presented, without
consulting any medical authority whatsoever before doing so.
According to counsel for the school district, the lease was subject to the
requirements of NYS Education Law Section 403-a, which requires either a
referendum or the approval of the State Commissioner of Education for a
lease of school property for a term in excess of 10 years. The district
submitted the proposal to the Commissioner. Several residents, including
Leslie Plachta, M.D., a local family medical practioner who counts some of
the high school's students among his patients, and Don DeBar, a concerned
local resident, requested that the lease not be approved, with Dr. Plachta
arguing among other things, that the tower presented a potential danger to
the health of the students and staff of the high school, and Mr. DeBar
emphasizing legal and procedural irregularities in the approval of the
contract.
The Commissioner denied the lease as an illegal use of school property for
private gain. Sprint then sued the Commissioner of Education and two of his
deputies both in their official capacities AND INDIVIDUALLY, in the US
District Court, Southern District of New York in White Plains. The NYS
Attorney General, defending the Commissioner and Deputy Commissioners,
moved to have the action dismissed as to the individual defendants. Judge
Barrington Parker, Jr. dismissed the action as to the Commissioner,
individually, but let it stand against the individual Deputy Commissioners.
Apparently (I have only seen this in Lexis, but it was not in the Court
file), there was an adjudication of the primary issue in favor of Sprint,
and the lease was approved by the Commissioner late last summer.
Community outrage began to swell, after DeBar called for a boycott of
Sprint on his local public access show "The Local Scene with Don DeBar",
which airs town-wide. Parents and other concerned residents formed a group
called "Safe Ossining Schools" (SOS) to fight the implementation of the
lease. On Wednesday, 1/19/00, members of the group and other residents
successfully organized a protest outside the School Superindent's office
while the Board and the Administration were in a special meeting with
Sprint and, according to news reports, TEN (!) Sprint lawyers.
Simultaneously, SOS held an informational meeting at Ossining's Trinity,
where over 300 people heard medical experts present evidence on the health
effects of cell towers. Both events got considerable press coverage in the
Metro NY media.
Also last week, a lawsuit was filed by Dr. Plachta and DeBar, under Article
78 of the NYS Civil Practice Laws and Rules, challenging the validity of
the cell tower lease on procedural and environmental grounds.
The following day, the school district issued a press release which claimed
that Sprint was now considering other possible locations in Ossining. On
the same day, two articles appeared in the local Gannett newspaper ("The
Journal News") which dealt with cell towers. The first, about the Ossining
lease, contained a quote from Sprint representative Larry McDonnell to the
effect that Sprint had already looked extensively for an alternate site and
didn't believe one was likely to be found. The other covered opposition to
an unrelated cell tower proposal in nearby Irvington, NY, where, for the
first time, residents turned out to vocally oppose the construction of a
fifth cell tower atop Abbott House. Health effects were cited in the
article as the reason for residents' concerns.
Finally, DeBar last week presented proposed legislation to Assemblywoman
Sandra Galef (D), of the 90th Assembly District ((914) 941-1111), at a
televised public meeting, which legislation would amend the State Education
Law (by adding a new sub-section 7 to Section 403-a) to prohibit the
construction of cell towers on school property and/or schools throughout
the state. He has also sent the proposal to Assemblyman Richard Brodsky
(D), chairman of the Assembly's Environmental committee, as well as (by
e-mail) the entire NYS legislature.
Here is the situation that cell tower opponents now face: There is
apparently an attempt underway to stall the process, which Sprint and/or
the board may be doing in the hope that a pause in their activity will
allow the opposition to dissipate. The district has thus far refused to
take an aggressive public posture with Sprint. Calls by DeBar and others
for the resignation of the board members who voted to approve the deal made
the front page of at least one local weekly. Posters saying "Resign" and
"Boycott Sprint" cover telephone poles all over town.
This week (week of 1/23/00), another local cable show will bring materials
from the demonstration and the informational meeting to a larger area than
that covered by DeBar's show. Also, Pacifica Radio's Democracy Now host Amy
Goodman, who spoke with DeBar by telephone Thursday night, said she was
familiar with the Ossining case already (New York City's Pacifica station
WBAI has aired interviews with Plachta and DeBar), and requested materials
which, hopefully, will reach a national audience sometime in the coming
days. DeBar would like as wide a discussion of the potential dangers of
this technology as possible. He sees it as an EXCELLENT organizing
opportunity for environmentalists, given the efforts of telecommunications
companies to extend their networks to cover the entire inhabited surface of
the planet with a technology that may be fatally unsafe.
Ossining needs help organizing protests against Sprint, statewide. Your
efforts are necessary to the success of this attempt to educate state
residents about the potential dangers of cell towers. Please respond as
soon as possible.
(We'd REALLY like a letters to the editor campaign that seeks legislation
to keep these things off of schools (see my proposal above) and mentions
WHY (the potential health effects).)
Dr. Leslie Plachta can provide you with 2 websites FULL of information -
email him at
[log in to unmask]
THANKS!
Don DeBar
87 Ferris Place
Ossining, NY 10562
914 649-6597
[log in to unmask]
|
