Sunday, November 3, 2019

Dear Councilmembers Riemer, Albornoz and Rice on the Cell Tower Zoning

Read a letter below from a Montgomery County citizen sent the Council about the new cell tower law reminding the Council about their own legal filings. Will the Montgomery County Council stick to their morals and values? Will they protect the children of Montgomery County?  

Dear Councilmembers Riemer, Albornoz and Rice,

I was disappointed to see your bulletins on a new ZTA that will put cell towers as close as 30 feet from our homes and families.  I am especially disappointed to see the reference to the American Cancer Society website as a resource for residents wishing to learn about health issues associated with radiofrequency radiation.   

References to scientific studies such as the Bioinitiative Report from 2012 and the International Appeal of scientists on RF dangers in 2015 are far more relevant and provide information on non-thermal effects of RF exposure (other than cancers) that Montgomery County residents should know about.  BUT YOU KNOW THIS.

“[t]hese and other studies examine a number of RF-related risks, such as carcinogenicity, DNA damage and genotoxicity, reproductive impacts (e.g. low sperm counts), and neurologic effects (e.g. behavioral issues in children).  They also identify adverse physiological mechanisms that could be triggered by RF exposures and cause non-thermal effects, such as stimulating cell proliferation, altering cell membrane function, and modulating synthesis of proteins involved in inflammatory and immunologic processes.” 

Opening up lampposts and utility poles to a massive roll-out of small cell towers within our communities and near our children could pose grave risks that cannot easily be undone – BUT YOU KNOW THIS TOO.

“If the new 5G environment, in fact, poses health risks, any prior rollout of 5G will have potentially injured citizens of Montgomery County and other municipalities, including sensitive populations like children, that cannot be undone. Such a result would be unconscionable.”  [emphasis added]


While I agree with these two quotes, they are not my words – THEY ARE YOURS AS REPRESENTATIVES OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY.  They are from your Federal Court challenge to the FCC which is still pending – see pages 13 and 55 of the petition.  I very much appreciate the fight that Montgomery County has taken on in this regard.  This is a cause well worth the effort and one which many communities should be concerned about.  Please do not send a different message to the residents here – the message that you are cowering to the wireless industry and putting their interests above those of Montgomery County residents.   The ZTA represents a complete about-face of the County’s views on this topic as well as its views as stated in the challenges of which County is a member through the “Smart Communities.”

Further, in regard to your Bulletins’ promotion of “batch application” processes to allow the wireless industry to inundate our communities with cell towers, please keep in mind the Tower Committee of Montgomery County’s past practices on applications generally and batch applications in particular.  You are right to say that once cell towers are deployed “[they] cannot be undone.”   

The attached photo is one of six cell towers on a 1.5 mil stretch of Traviliah Road in Rockville Maryland that were allowed to go up by the Tower Committee.  The application the Committee received failed to reflect that this one was 15 feet from where children play at a school although it is the requisite 30 feet from a bricks and mortar structure.  
See it here

I think you are all familiar from prior ZTA meetings on cell towers the tower that was allowed to remain at the Brickyard Road house in Potomac, MD.  A tower placed in a completely wrong location.  
(See Brickyward road cell tower below. Do you want this to be your house? ) 
 

From 1997 through September of 2018, the Tower Committee approved 99.4% of the 3,451 applications for towers, new antennas, or other additions and adjustments to cell towers.  Either (a) this is the most efficient committee there is, (b) the applications received were flawless and complete, or (c) there are insufficient resources, capacity or knowledge to complete a thoughtful review of the applications coming into the Tower Committee.   

I think the answer is (c) – you should check into it. You should consider whether the Committee should include representatives of our communities and schools if you are going to place cell towers near homes  now. 

Finally, mentioned in Mr. Riemer’s bulletin titled “Five Point Plan to Power Up Montgomery Count” / Step 4 is a reference to “leveraging the tech resources we already have – some of the world’s most powerful research institutions – NIH, National Cancer Institute, … NOAA, climate science … that’s just a sampling.”

Please understand some of the views on 5G put forth by NIH and NOAA as you reach out to partner with them:




I look forward to hearing from the Council as to how it came to the conclusion that placing equipment that produces a substance categorized as a Class 2B human carcinogen 30 – 60 feet from families and schools is an appropriate, reasonable, and responsible approach for Montgomery County residents’ property values, safety and health.

If this footage was not established with property values, safety and health of residents in mind but was selected as a convenience to the wireless industry because the vast majority of existing telephone poles and lamp posts are within this range, I would be interested in hearing that from the Council. If this is the case then, with all due respect, it certainly seems to me that you are acting with the interest of the industry in mind and not those of residents whom you represent.

Thank you,
XXX
Resident of Montgomery County  

Read the Montgomery County Petition to the FCC here. 
Read the The Berkshire-Litchfield Environmental Council  Amicus Brief for Montgomery County Maryland. 

Councilmembers Riemer, Albornoz and Rice have introduced a proposal that would allow cell towers 30 from our homes. Please communicate your thoughts to them and to all the other Councilmembers  about to vote on this issue. 
Councilmember Riemer twitter Facebook
Councilmember Albornoz twitter facebook 
Councilmemember Rice twitter Facebook 

Montgomery County is about to vote on 5G cell towers in our front yards!

The latest effort by Councilman Hans Reimer is a new zoning law that will allow:
  • Cell towers can be 30 feet from homes. 
  • Cell towers can be 60 feet from homes with no public hearing or notice. 
  • Street lights and utility poles will go up 6 to 15 feet higher. 
  • The cell tower committees review period is reduced to 20 days. 
  • Minimal aesthetic standards 
  • No limit on how large all the electrical cabinets can be. 
  • Each electrical cabinet can be 12 cubic feet but you can have as many as companies want. 
  • Hearing examiner can allow cell antennas 30 feet. 
Please see information about the ZTA 19-07 at Montgomery County website here. 
Please see the press release by Councilman Hans Riemer who is pushing industry friendly zoning fr the forth time. "Councilmembers introduce zoning proposal to legalize small-scale equipment for 5g wireless"

Did you know that Cities in California are enacting protective ordinances? 
For example, Los Altos CA passed an ordinance that bans these antennas in neighborhoods, : no small cells in residential neighborhoods, no small cells within 500 feet of schools, 500 foot setback for multi-family residences in commercial districts. 
Why isn't Montgomery County enacting similar protections? 

Here is what you can do now.

First: Plan to be at the November 19, 2019 Hearing on the ZTA 19:07 . Sign up to testify, get a babysitter, let go! Click here for more information. 

Then 1. Talk to your neighbors about 5G. Here are some resources to learn more

2. Call and email the Council. Connect with them on Twitter and Facebook. Set up meetings in person with staff  to express your opinion. They need to hear from residents today.

Gabe Albornoz 240-777-7959

Andrew Friedson 240-777-7828

Evan Glass 240-777-7966

Tom Hucker 240-777-7960


Sidney Katz 240-777-7906 Councilmember.Katz@montgomerycountymd.gov 

Nancy Navarro 240-777-7968 Councilmember.Navarro@montgomerycountymd.gov 






Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)