Oakland-Emeryville parents fight cell towers
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Julia Dwyer chats on her cell phone after picking up her daughter, Ella Thompson, 5, from school in Oakland. Parents want to block the installation of cellular antennas on the building (left) owned by Verizon.
Parents at two elementary schools along the Oakland-Emeryville border knew the odds were against them in a battle to keep cellular antennas off a building a few hundred feet from their children's classrooms.
But worried about potential health risks, they staged rallies, contacted elected officials and ponied up the $1,000 cost to appeal the application.
And they lost.
Verizon Wireless got the go-ahead from both Oakland and Emeryville officials to install nine panel antennas and two GPS antennas early next year on the boarded-up, two-story brick building across from the North Oakland Community Charter School and Anna Yates Elementary. The private property straddles the boundary line between the two cities.
The parents have two options left. On Friday, they will appeal to Verizon's "corporate conscience" with a march from the schools to the wireless provider's local retail store, said Jen Schradie, whose two children attend the charter school.
Health study
They also will seek to arm themselves with science, conducting their own health study - a costly, time-consuming endeavor, but one that could provide the proof they say they need to stop such placements in the future."It's going to be a long-term process, but we're definitely going to be involved in conducting the study," said Schradie, a sociology doctoral student at UC Berkeley. "We're not willing to sit back and cross our fingers."
The parents argue that Verizon has good coverage in the area and other potential cell sites farther from the schools.
Similar battles over cell towers are raging in communities across the state and country - with similar results. Federal regulations bar communities from considering health concerns in the approval process for towers and antennas, because current rules limit emission levels to what scientists believe are safe.
Verizon followed all local, state and federal guidelines in the project, as it always does, said spokeswoman Heidi Flato.
With the exponential increase in demand for cellular service, including Internet access, the new equipment has to go somewhere.
"We want our cell phone connection, but we don't want the towers," Flato said.
Research does not show a link between radio frequency waves and danger to people.
According to the American Cancer Society, "The amount of exposure from living near a cell phone tower is typically many times lower than the exposure from using a cell phone."
In addition, the radiofrequency waves disperse quickly, often from heights that dramatically decrease exposure to people.
Even so, the Federal Communications Commission and the President's Cancer Panel have called for more research.
Parents worry
Despite assurances from the federal government, wireless service providers and researchers who say the emissions from the antennas are nothing to be concerned about, the parents continue to worry.At one time, tobacco was believed to be perfectly safe, the parents noted. The same was said about asbestos and DDT, until additional research proved differently.
Mariah Landers isn't willing to be the canary in the coal mine - again.
The teacher at North Oakland Community Charter lived in Merced's Beachwood neighborhood growing up. Only within the past two years did she learn that the cancer-causing chemical chromium 6 leeched into the groundwater there, despite assurances from corporate executives that everything was fine.
Many of her neighbors have died of cancer or are fighting the disease. A lawsuit is pending.
'We don't know'
"History has shown me that I can't trust" those assurances, she said. "We just don't know how things can affect our bodies. Our bodies are so fragile. We don't know everything."Elected officials say they would like more control, creating restrictions on antennas or towers, specifically near schools.
"I think local communities should have some say about this," said Jennifer West, an Emeryville City Council member and a parent at the charter school.
It's not just a NIMBY thing, she said, noting that there are about more than 700 antennas and cell towers within 4 miles of the schools.
"I just think it's not a wise place to put additional electromagnetic equipment," she. "We can't prove that right now. But if it's really not necessary, why do harm when you're not sure."
E-mail Jill Tucker at jtucker@sfchronicle.com.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/11/16/BAPT1GCUTR.DTL#ixzz15YXoJJun
A health study is not an effective use of resources. Residents would be much better advised to fight the facilities based on other issues. Pursuant to the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, local officials may NOT consider the health effects of wireless telecommunications facilities when making a decision. Any facility which meets FCC standards must be assumed to be safe. In addition, any ordinance which restricts wireless facilities near schools must be based upon findings that do not consider the health effects.
ReplyDeleteThe Telecommunications Act of 1996, that's when Clinton gave away the radio frequencies, a naturally occurring phenomenon like air, to the corporate media oligarchs. It helped to keep Mr Clinton in power with the ascendent Republicans, but did it help us? Well, not so much.
ReplyDeleteYou failed to mention that the frequencies given to the corporations are finite and extremely limited. The whole public benefit thing has been tossed overboard. The '96 law was just corporate welfare.
ReplyDeleteEveryone has a freaking cell phone, but they don't want to put up with the infrastructure to support them. Typical.
ReplyDelete