[1st-mile-nm] Despite protests, council OKs wireless telecommunication measures

Thu May 10 14:35:25 PDT 2018

It would be helpful to settle this among reasonable people if only we
tracked the rate of new cancer diagnoses. Oh wait, we do!  Men are seeing
less risk of cancer and women are about stable. In the meantime, I guess
38% of us will eventually get cancer of some kind - but that is because we
have tamed damn near everything else that would have killed us otherwise.
Of course the anti-vaccers want to take care of that - I guess more people
dying of easily-prevented diseases could game the stats to make it look
like there is less cancer because people will die long before they have a
chance to get cancer.

I might be concerned about some of these claims about wireless except that
we have been using these devices, bathed in this spectrum for what, 15
years? If there is a health exposure risk, it is quite small and should
certainly be studied.

In the meantime, we have no shortage of tin foil.

Christopher Mitchell
Director, Community Broadband Networks
Institute for Local Self-Reliance

MuniNetworks.org <http://www.muninetworks.org/>
@communitynets
612-545-5185

On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 11:31 AM, Edward Angel <angel at cs.unm.edu> wrote:

> Not much as changed in the past 15 years. When many of us argued against
> the flawed telcom ordinance, the same people did the same thing. The major
> reason it was passed in its flawed form was that the mayor refused to have
> any more public meetings about it, all of which got out of control and
> ended with one in which the mayor was accused of being a Nazi. At the city
> council meeting where the ordinance passed on a tie vote, 75 of them lined
> up behind us to speak against the ordinance, some of us spoke first and
> talked about the importance of developing a fiber infrastructure. That
> calmed down most of the 75 who then said they supported fiber. It took them
> about a week for them to realize the fiber was used to connect cell towers
> and they switched to opposing fiber too.
>
> Ed
> _______________________
>
> Ed Angel
>
> Founding Director, Art, Research, Technology and Science Laboratory
> (ARTS Lab)
> Professor Emeritus of Computer Science, University of New Mexico
>
> 1017 Sierra Pinon
> Santa Fe, NM 87501
> 505-984-0136 (home)   angel at cs.unm.edu
> 505-453-4944 (cell)  http://www.cs.unm.edu/~angel
>
> On May 10, 2018, at 10:02 AM, Richard Lowenberg <rl at 1st-mile.org> wrote:
>
> Note, I did not attend last night's City Council meeting, but
> anticipated the process and outcomes reported below.    I had
> and still have deep concerns about the poorly understood economic
> and community inclusion aspects of this decision making, rather
> than the health effects of wireless radiation.   Behind the scenes
> conversations, however, led me to understand that City staff and
> consultants are also still considering a number of critical issues.
> The five franchises, I'm told, are therefore short term, only
> through September.   City Councilors are legally being pressed by
> recent State mandates, with which they need to comply (Senate Bill 14,
> passed by the Legislature and signed by the Governor).   The City
> is pursuing preparation of a strategic plan that will more
> comprehensively addresses our telecom. near future.  All or some of
> the five newly franchised companies may or may not deploy fiber or
> wireless infrastructure in the near term.  This matter is ongoing,
> and deserves some focused attention, analysis and clear-headedness.
>
> The health effects of various wireless radiating systems is
> contentious, with lots of good science being countered with lots of
> bad or inadequate science.  It is a long term issue to be better
> understood and acted upon, as blinding consumerism drives tech.
> adoption.   To the extent possible, we ought to practice the
> Precautionary Principle.   Young children and the elderly may be
> most susceptible to (non-ionizing) EM radiation.   Might schools
> limit wireless networking, in favor of extended fiber nets?
> Should the City establish wireless 'quiet zones'?  How will
> neighborhoods and the City benefit from our tele-networking
> developments, and who benefits; how and when?
> Lots of questions remain.
>
> RL
>
> ------
>
> Despite protests, council OKs wireless telecommunication measures
>
> By Tripp Stelnicki | tstelnicki at sfnewmexican.com  May 9, 2018
>
> The dozens of Santa Fe residents who claim they are endangered by the
> radio frequencies emitted by telecommunication facilities protested five
> proposed telecom franchise agreements at length Wednesday night before the
> City Council.
>
> Amid the interruptions of the frequently disorderly crowd, councilors
> approved the agreements, which are expected to pave the way to enhanced
> wireless and cellular connectivity. The decision places the city in
> accordance with a new state law that will establish access and regulation
> rules for small cellular facilities on public infrastructure.
>
> The five ordinances establish new access rights to public rights of way
> for telephone and internet service providers, whether with cables or
> antennas.
>
> Subsequent network expansions could eventually provide Santa Feans with
> faster speeds, broader coverage and additional retail competition,
> according to city fiscal analyses.
>
> Each of the council votes was 7-2 in favor; councilors Chris Rivera and
> Renee Villarreal were against.
>
> “I can’t imagine what it would be like to live like some of these people
> do with the issues they might have,” Rivera said, referring to the health
> concerns expressed by some who came to the meeting. “Thirty years from now,
> we may be looking at this the way we do look at cigarettes.”
>
> The well-attended, two-hour hearing began with fireworks. A leader in the
> local advocacy against electromagnetic radiation, Arthur Firstenberg,
> launched into a lengthy and emotional tirade about what he alleged are the
> mortal risks posed by the telecom facilities — ignoring repeated requests
> to relinquish the podium after his allotted time had expired. He alternated
> between reading his prepared remarks and shouting at Mayor Alan Webber as
> the mayor sought to restore order in the boisterous council chamber.
>
> “Don’t tell me to shut up!” Firstenberg yelled.
>
> Webber, showing exasperation but not anger, sternly and repeatedly asked —
> and then instructed — Firstenberg to stop and admonished the crowd for
> their applause when he had finished.
>
> It would not be the last time Webber asked the crowd for quiet.
>
> Nodding toward the long line of residents waiting to speak behind
> Firstenberg, Webber said, “To hold the podium for that amount of time is
> simply disrespectful of everybody else.”
>
> The residents who spoke for roughly an hour afterward echoed Firstenberg’s
> concerns at a lower volume, variously saying they were victims of
> encroaching wireless “toxins” and that the city must protect their health.
>
> Many attributed the franchise applications to the telecom industry’s
> coming wave of improved wireless technologies known as 5G.
>
> But a city land-use senior planner, Dan Esquibel, said that no matter when
> that next generation of wireless arrives elsewhere, it was not imminent in
> Santa Fe, which he said does not yet have the necessary fiber-optic
> infrastructure.
>
> “I don’t think we’re going to be seeing 5G for quite some time,” Esquibel
> said.
>
> Assistant City Attorney Marcos Martinez reminded councilors that federal
> law prohibits them from considering “environmental effects” and “health
> effects that may flow from the environmental effects” of radio frequency
> emissions.
>
> Webber said the approvals represented the city taking control of its own
> infrastructural investments. Still, he said, he took the testimony “very
> seriously.”
>
> “I think it’s completely legitimate to be very vigilant and to recognize
> not all technology is progress,” Webber said.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> Richard Lowenberg, Executive Director
> 1st-Mile Institute     505-603-5200
> Box 8001, Santa Fe, NM 87504,
> rl at 1st-mile.org     www.1st-mile.org
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> 1st-mile-nm mailing list
> 1st-mile-nm at mailman.dcn.org
> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/1st-mile-nm
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 1st-mile-nm mailing list
> 1st-mile-nm at mailman.dcn.org
> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/1st-mile-nm
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/1st-mile-nm/attachments/20180510/48819e38/attachment.html>