"Somebody Loan Me a Dime Lady"
Sprint Cell Tower atop High School
Will Hide Behind the Flag
By Don DeBar
OSSINING, NY - Here in the Hudson River village that houses the infamous
Sing Sing prison, hundreds of residents have recently joined with activists
who have been engaged in a 17 month fight with Sprint, the multinational
telecommunications giant. The outcome of the battle, residents claim, may
have major environmental implications for the entire planet.
If the efforts of organizers fail, within weeks there will be a Sprint
cellular transmission tower hidden in a "stealth" flag pole on top of
Ossining's only high school. Parents call this a very dangerous development
for the future well-being of students and staff. The following background
information is intended to provide context for, and a history of, one
community's struggle against the placement of the tower on their school:
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.
If telecommunications companies have their way, the world will soon 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. 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, to insure complete coverage
around the world. However, at present, towers at regular intervals of two
to six miles are needed to accomplish cellular network installation for
providers of cell-phone service.
However, medical doctors and other health professionals claim that studies
indicate possibly serious health consequences, including leukemia, brain
cancer, and/or other illnesses, may result from microwave radiation
exposure; hence, the current plans to link the world with wireless phone
networks may well have major health implications for our species. These
allegations warrant close study.
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 body
(e.g., the ear or head).
As it now stands, the FCC gave out licenses to various the
telecommunications companies for the 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 their network.
One problem that telecommunications companies face 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
aesthetic 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 once provided people a limited opportunity to discuss the desirability
of installation proposals.
However, recent amendments to Federal law (Telecommunications Act of 1996)
apparently proscribe the consideration of health concerns in the municipal
or state approval process. Thus, these regulatory hearings are now
generally precluded from considering residents' health concerns. In fact,
the mere mentioning of such concerns in the process can result in a
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, concerned residents have begun showing up at municipal meetings to
object, en masse, to cell tower proposals in their neighborhoods. Here and
there, they are becoming a potent political force in the community. Since
residents are learning 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, many local
politicians around the country see their own political lives at risk.
Ossining's Town and Village government are no exception; residents claim
that they chose their careers over the health and safety of children.
Sprint apparently needs to construct a cell tower in Ossining in order to
adequately build out its cellular network in its very important Westchester
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 Superintendent 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 Superintendent
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 mere municipal
construction 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 extensive medical evidence presented before
them, 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 practitioner 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. US
District Judge Barrington Parker, Jr. dismissed the action as to the
Commissioner, individually, but let it stand against the individual Deputy
Commissioners. Apparently (found on a search of Lexis, but not in the Court
file when examined recently), 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, accompanied by DeBar's call for a boycott
of Sprint on his local public access show "The Local Scene with Don DeBar".
Parents and other concerned residents soon formed a group called "Safe
Ossining Schools" (SOS) to fight the implementation of the lease.
On Wednesday, 1/19/00, members of SOS and other residents successfully
organized a protest outside the school district Superintendent'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
Church, 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 news 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, environmental and medical grounds.
The following day (1/20/00), 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 subsection 7 to Section 403-a) to prohibit the
construction of cell towers on school property and/or schools throughout
the state. Galef promised to review it. DeBar 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.
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
newspaper. Posters saying "Resign" and "Boycott Sprint" cover telephone
poles all over town.
Cell tower opponents now suspect that an attempt is underway to stall,
which Sprint and/or the board may be doing in the hope that a pause in
their activity will cause opposition to dissipate. A planned rally in
front of the high school at 2pm on Saturday, 1/29/00, and aggressive state-
and nationwide calls to organize, are intended to maintain momentum, and to
educate as many people as possible to the dangers that accompany cell phone
technology.
This week (week of 1/23/00), another local cable show will bring materials
from last week's demonstration and informational meeting to a regional
audience. 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 to see as wide a discussion of the potential dangers of
this technology as possible. He views 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 ultimately prove to be fatally
unsafe.
Dr. Leslie Plachta can provide the addresses of 2 web sites FULL of cell
tower medical information - e-mail him at [log in to unmask]
January 24, 2000
Don DeBar
87 Ferris Place
Ossining, NY 10562
914 649-6597
[log in to unmask]
|
