Thursday, October 8, 2009

Wireless water meters / Hang on to your land line phones / Attack of the Antennas

Rethink meter replacement plan

Posted By Ron Beckett, Simcoe

Our local council has done it again. Those who read the insert in their recent utilities bill may have noticed that yet another portion of our utilities has been subcontracted to a private company in the form of a "Water Meter Replacement Master Plan."

The notice is innocently worded to sound as innocuous as possible, unless one actually takes the time to read it. It lists a number of "inconveniences" that we will experience as a result of this plan, such as the fact that "you may see an increase in your monthly water consumption due to these new meters."

Also, don't insult us by assuring that "Norfolk County will pay for the purchase and installation" as if the county is some independent self-sustained entity. The wireless meters should raise far greater concerns than that.

Two years ago, a large group of local citizens devoted considerable time and expense to securing international experts attesting to the health hazards of prolonged exposure to radiofrequency radiation. The council made it clear that it valued economics over the health of its citizens, and showed little concern for citizens who suffered from electro hypersensitivity (EHS). Becoming increasingly more widespread, this debilitating condition results from exposure to everyday sources of radiofrequency radiation such as cell phone masts and other wireless devices.

Perhaps most annoying is the attempt to veil their actions by feigning an environmental concern. Discarding hundreds of thousands of perfectly well functioning meters with newly manufactured devices is hardly a gesture of environmental responsibility.

As always, council has taken its advice from those making the sale instead of from independent scientific authorities. It is not surprising that the company attests to the safety of these meters, just as the telecommunications companies attest to the safety of their devices.

While the meters surely do fall within Canadian safety standards, there is no mention of the fact that Canadian standards are among the most permissive in the world. There is also no consideration of the fact that the consideration is given to a single meter and not the effects of it when combined with other forms of radiation present in the homes. This would include cellular masts in the district, wireless Internet, and the newly Ontario mandated "smart meters," which are far from smart, but instead will equip every household in the province with the equivalent of their own cell tower.

Consider also the interaction of all of these devices in crowded residential areas and imagine what an environment is being created for everyone, most of all those already suffering from the disability.

As state after state in the U.S. sanctions "EHS awareness months," our county continues to provide us with increasingly greater sources of electromagnetic frequency exposure.

Let your council know that you are happy with your meters as they are.


The Troy Record (, Serving Troy and its surrounding communities


Pulse of the People: Oct. 8

Thursday, October 8, 2009

For The Record

Reasons for concern

Hang on to your land line phones. Herb Denenberg in an article for The Bulletin says: "The great cell phone cover-up may be coming to an end. A new report may finally wake the public up to the brain cancer risks of cell phones and force necessary preventive measures.

"A new report, endorsed by a prestigious group of international scientists, finds that there's a risk of brain tumors from cell phone use, that industry studies underestimate this risk, and that children have much greater risk than adults. The report, therefore sends a message to four billion users worldwide and to the $4 billion cell phone industry that they may be facing the same kind of bad news that first burst on the scene for the tobacco industry."

Mr. Denenberg was elected to the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences, and co-authored major legislation.

He goes on to point out that the cancer threat has been recognized by some scientists for decades. Cell phones emit electromagnetic radiation — more specifically, radio frequency radiation which can damage the DNA and lead to cancers or other medical problems.

The study focused on cell phones but cordless phones, talkies, ham radio transmitters, and baby monitors also are sources of radiation.

The report entitled "Cell phones and Brain Tumors: 15 reasons for Concert; Science, Spin and the Truth behind enterphone," can be read at and will be updated. The report lists eight simple steps to substantially reduce your or your children's exposure to cell phone radiation.

If you are concerned about electromagnetic radiation coming from cell phones or cell towers there is also more information from

Martha Winsten



Photo by Paul Wellman

Attack of the Antennas

Proposed Wireless Antennas — Some Near Schools and Homes — Have Citizens in Uproar

By Matt Kettmann

Thursday, October 8, 2009

The rise of smartphones is bringing with it an onslaught of antennas, as more than 100 wireless data-supporting devices are being proposed throughout southern Santa Barbara County, from the sandy streets of Carpinteria to the student 'hoods in Isla Vista. But since the small devices would mostly be installed on existing utility poles and because the company installing them, San Jose's NextG Networks, is considered a public utility by the state, there's very little public review required and limited means of appealing them once approved. That seemingly secretive ease — fueled by fears that the antennas might emit a dangerous form of electromagnetic field (EMF) radiation — is riling some residents, though it's likely that only a fraction of people who live, work, or play near a proposed antenna have any idea about it.

Particularly vocal are parents of children at Montecito Union School, where a letter-writing campaign is in full swing to oppose a new antenna across the street from the playground. "We feel it is wrong and insidious to be able to do this," said Sarah Wilson, a neighbor of the school whose four-year-old will be attending next year. "We all want cell phones and good signals, but there are safer places they can put them rather than in areas densely populated by children. … Until the scientists, who have been questioning levels of EMF since 1996, say, 'No problem, we think this is completely safe,' then we feel it's wrong to put our children's health at risk."

Then there's a neighborhood in eastern Goleta, where one man woke up to find an antenna proposed for a pole a mere 25 feet from his bedroom on Los Verdes Drive. Yuri Zelez, a family therapist by day, spent last Saturday gathering more than 35 signatures in opposition and spoke out against it on Tuesday before the County Board of Supervisors. "We're trying everything we can to stop this from happening," said Zelez, who was told by county staffers that the antenna was a "done deal" and that it would be installed within three weeks. "I'm not against technology, but why put it in the residential neighborhood? We're talking about constant contact — I am going to be bombarded by this 24 hours a day, seven days a week."

Because of the uproar, the Board of Supervisors will be discussing the 39 antennas proposed for the county in a public forum on October 20. But in the cities of Santa Barbara (70 antennas proposed, though most sent back with a request that the control box be put underground), Carpinteria (seven proposed), and Goleta (19 proposed and "pretty much in the bag" according to one planning official), the antennas march forward with citizens mostly unaware. Not that there is much that could be done anyway. NextG's public utility status grants numerous exemptions because its technology is deemed an "essential service," and the technology is governed by the Federal Communications Commission, the sole governmental entity tasked with setting public health and safety standards for such devices. So despite EMF concerns, official appeals cannot be based on health, only on aesthetics and evidence that further coverage is unwarranted.

"We can't go beyond FCC regulations. We're preempted in that regard," said county planner Dave Ward, who's helped process these applications and requested that NextG at least show its technology does comply. "As you can imagine, it's frustrating for the public to hear that the level of review is focused on aesthetics. I don't think we've been able to satisfactorily satisfy their concerns." Although the technology and placement of antennas on existing utility poles is new, Ward says they're covered under the county's wireless telecommunications ordinance. "It's not something we've seen in the past, but it does fit within our ordinance," said Ward, who explained that county policy requires a sign marking each proposed antenna and that residents within 300 feet of a site be notified.

"People can go out there and say EMF doesn't hurt, but we have firsthand experience which shows that, in all likelihood, it does. We don't want to go down that road again."

Being handcuffed by FCC regulations doesn't sit well with Montecito's Cindy Feinberg, whose son is at Montecito Union and whose daughter is ready to start next year. Years ago, Feinberg fought to have electrical wires moved away from the campus after high EMF levels allegedly triggered a "cancer cluster" at the school in which six kids got lymphoma or leukemia from 1981 to 1988, a rate five times more than normal. "It's a sore issue with us," said Feinberg. "People can go out there and say EMF doesn't hurt, but we have firsthand experience which shows that, in all likelihood, it does. We don't want to go down that road again." Feinberg and Wilson believe that the technological advances have outpaced the ability of the FCC to safely regulate them, and say standards are stricter in Europe and Australia. "I'm worried that it's going to be like cigarette smoking in the '50s and '60s, when everyone thought it was fine and that they wouldn't let us do it if it was bad for us," said Wilson. "It's going to be the cigarette smoking of the 21st century." Echoed Feinberg, "It's like the tobacco industry all over again. We're just basically being guinea pigs."

NextG's spokesperson Sharon James was emailed questions on Monday and had not replied as of Wednesday's press deadline despite repeated inquiries. In general, NextG uses the two- to three-foot-tall, omni-directional "whip" antennas and accompanying control boxes — referred to collectively as "nodes" — to establish wireless networks in a selected community and then leases the coverage to big cellular companies such as AT&T. The company has successfully created similar networks in other parts of the country, and James has repeatedly cited San Diego as a successful California community network in her meetings with county planners.

But one place where NextG hasn't been successful is Long Island, New York, where a wave of outrage occurred when the company proposed 170 antennas throughout the 22 communities that make up the Town of Hempstead. According to a September 10 story in Newsday, the community of Merrick filed a $100-million lawsuit against the company because property values would be driven down by the perceived health risk. NextG then ceased negotiations with the town government, explaining to one resident that the money they would have used to re-site some of the controversial antennas now had to be spent on legal defense.

The property value argument is also starting to be mentioned in Montecito, home to some of the country's priciest real estate. "It may affect the price of your house — it does in Europe," said Wilson, who speaks with a British accent. "Certainly, you don't buy a house with an antenna overlooking your yard."

Whatever the opposition, there may be some hope. About two years ago, Montecito resident Don Miller successfully led a letter-writing charge to block the construction of a cellular tower near Cold Spring School. "We made so much of a fuss that they just dropped it," recalled Miller. But he's acutely aware that the fight is different this time. "NextG is listed as a public utility company, so the review process is very limited," he explained. "It's almost like the electric company coming in and stringing a new wire. It's scary."