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.