[Analog – BC Hydro – BCUC – Behaviour (ADHD, Autism) – Children – CPUC (Michael R. Peevey) – CWTA Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association – Deborah Kopald Intervenor Questions – Dennis Noble Letter to Editor re Freedom Mobile (Shaw) Monopole Cell Tower Construction in Langford – Doctor Toril Jelter – EHS / ES Microwave Sickness – EMF – EMR – FCM Federation of Canadian Municipalities – FortisBC – Health Canada Safety Code 6 – ISED Telecommunication Antenna & Cell Tower Siting Protocol – NYSEG – Opt-out – ORU – PG&E – Santa Clara County Medical Association Alliance Foundation – Stewart Young – Studies – Wi-Fi in Schools – Wireless | Langford & Greater Victoria, BC – California & New York & Vermont, USA] & (video)
1) This past week, after little notification to those living in the area, Langford City Council held a public hearing (no doubt the only one) about a proposed 35 meter cell tower with 8 antennae. People objected based on health risks, aesthetics, etc. and the Mayor misled the people terribly by saying there was nothing that could be done. The location is public property, property that belongs to the people in Langford.
(click on photos to enlarge)
As we all know, the company must get approval from the owner of any property, negotiate payment and sign a contract. If the owner refuses to lease the land, the cell company must look elsewhere. How many other Mayors and Councils are not being honest with their constituents? Mayor Stewart Young is fully aware of this – and has decided to allow the public land to be used without the public’s approval.
Dennis wrote a response and I hope that others living in the Langford area will too.
Residents voice concerns about cell tower proposal
The latest proposal was met with some opposition during a public hearing Monday at Langford’s council meeting with residents expressing concerns about the appearance of the pole, its proximity to homes and potential health problems coming from exposure to electromagnetic radiation.
Freedom Mobile is looking to install a 35 metre monopole wireless communication facility that would include eight wireless antennas and four microwave dishes on a City-owned property at 1365 Goldstream Ave. The antennas and dishes would be attached to the top of the pole with two accessory cabinets at the base. It would be placed near the southern property line and enclosed by a chain-link fence at the base of the tower.
https://www.goldstreamgazette.com/news/residents-voice-concerns-about-cell-tower-proposal/
ISED Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada:
– http://fednor.gc.ca/eic/site/ic-gc.nsf/eng/07423.html
& http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf10860.html
FCM Federation of Canadian Municipalities – CWTA Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association:
2) In New York, one very involved smeter/grid resister is an Intervenor and has posed serious questions regarding her utility’s smeter program. Many of these are questions (and more) we’ve asked of BC Hydro, FortisBC and the BCUC – but not all have been answered. Here are just a few being asked.
https://www.oru.com/en/search?search=smart%20meter%20program
1. “How many customers and other people in Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc.’s (“ORU”) service territory have requested a smart meter opt-out?
2. How many customers and other people in Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc.’s service territory have identified themselves to the company as being afflicted by electromagnetic hypersensitivity also known as (“aka”) EHS; aka microwave sickness, aka EMF sensitivity, aka severe electromagnetic sensitivities or any other related illness?
3. Did ORU confer with other utilities to see what their policies were in regard to maintaining an electromechanical aka analog, non radio-frequency radiation producing meter to accommodate those afflicted by EHS and related illness at their homes, offices and other locations they have to access, including, but not limited to, doctors’ offices and places of education?
4. Is ORU aware that New York State Electric and Gas (“NYSEG”) offers analog meters as an opt-out and that these meters must be offered to customers who opt-out in the States of California and Vermont?
5. Does ORU know how many utilities in New York, and in other states offer analog meters to customers on request?
6. Is ORU aware of the September 3, 2010 email from the then- President of the California Public Utilities Commission (“CPUC”) Michael R. Peevey to Pacific Gas and Electric (“PG&E”) executive Brian K. Cherry that says,
….I would let anyone who wants to keep their old meter keep it, if they claim they suffer from EMF and/or related electronic-related illnesses and they can produce a doctor’s letter saying so (or expressing concern about the likelihood of suffering same)….
….There really are people who feel pain, etc., related to EMF….
7. Is ORU aware that by “old meter”, then-CPUC President Peevey was referring to analog meters?
8. Is ORU aware that Vermont mandates a no-fee opt out?”
or https://tinyurl.com/y89m2lmf
3) Dr. Toril Jetter speaks about the effect of EMR on children’s behavior, especially those with autism. She also speaks about EHS. She advises that there should be no Wi-Fi in schools or homes.
Part 5 Dr. Toril Jelter- Health Effects of Non-Ionizing Radiation in Children
“Dr. Toril Jelter is a Board Certified Pediatrician and General Practitioner who treats children and adults with electrohypersensitivity. She discusses her clinical experience with autism and improved and at times dramatic behavioral changes in many of her autistic/ADHD patients related to reducing electromagnetic radiation in the home and environment. She has developed a 2 week calming behavior protocol for children.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D98K2zvjBWI (video 20 minutes)
Letters:
From: Dennis Noble (name given with permission)
To: <editor@goldstreamgazette.com>
Sent: May 12, 2018
Subject: Residents voice concerns
[https://www.goldstreamgazette.com/news/residents-voice-concerns-about-cell-tower-proposal/]
Dear Editor: re: Residents voice concerns about cell tower proposal
Does Langford lack the authority to deny the construction of a cell tower on City property as Mayor Stew Young contends?
It depends. And what it depends on is no mystery to Mayor Young.
It’s that ‘Separation of Power’ thing. Land is essentially under provincial authority. In fact, ninety four percent of all land in B.C. is in provincial jurisdiction. And B.C. grants to its municipalities the responsibility of managing that land.
So if a federally sanctioned enterprise, such as a telecom, wishes to put a cell tower on this land it must first get permission of the owner, in this instance the City of Langford. Once given, municipal authority over that land ends. It passes immediately into federal jurisdiction.
So when Stew Young claims that Langford doesn’t have the authority to deny construction of a telecom cell tower on City property, he’s really saying that the City of Langford has already given the telecom company permission to construct it. That brings into question the purpose of a public hearing regarding the proposal.
Dennis Noble