More on Microwaves
The following was written by Nick Penny and forwarded to me by Chris Zino with a request to post it on the main page:
Bayville Water Tower Microwave Antenna Proposal
Meeting Bayville Village Hall Monday, December 18 7:45pm
Please make every effort to attend this meeting and voice your opposition to this project.
If you cannot attend, please communicate your opposition to the Village.
This information indicates that the proposal would add significant, powerful transmission equipment to the tower – in close proximity to Bayville Primary School, St. Gertrude’s Pre-School, the Library, and the meeting place for Bayville Scouting.
The Village of Bayville recently added some general technical information the village website, but there were no specifics on the actual project proposal.
One of the documents posted by the Village was an August 1999 FCC publication titled ”Questions and Answers about Biological Effects and Potential Hazards of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields Evaluating RF Radiation”. These FCC regulations are often cited by the telecommunications industry as evidence of the safety of antenna installations. However, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) own stated position on the question of non-thermal exposure and exposure regulations is stated by the agency as:
“The FCC’s current exposure guidelines, as well as those of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) and the International Commission on Non-ionizing Radiation Protection, are thermally based, and do not apply to chronic, non-thermal exposure situations. … The FCC’s exposure guideline is considered protective of effects arising from a thermal mechanism but not from all possible mechanisms. Therefore, the generalization by many that the guidelines protect human beings from harm by any or all mechanisms is not justified.”
http://www.protectschools.org/epa%20letter.pdf
This position is echoed by numerous scientific and governmental organizations around the world.
A brief investigation into subject reveals many additional references stating concern with cell tower and microwave antenna safety, including:
Press Release from U.S. Congressman Major Owens, NY Feb 15, 2006 "Municipalities in California and Florida already have laws banning antennae near schools, as does the country of New Zealand," she said. Research suggests that children's developing brains may be especially vulnerable to long-term radiation exposure. "While the industry points to its own studies along with several others claiming that there is no radiation danger, enough questions have been raised from a vast body of research strongly disputing that conclusion to spur several international conferences on cell-tower siting,"
http://www.house.gov/owens/pr021406.htm
Legislation was introduced in the NY State Assembly by Assemblyman Michael N. Gianaris (Queens) that among other things proposed to:
-Prevent wireless facilities from being constructed within 500feet of a school or nursery.
http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=A05648
The International Association of Fire Fighters has opposed placement of cell phone antennas on their member’s fire houses due to health concerns regarding long-term non-thermal exposure:
The International Association of Fire Fighters’ position on locating cell towers commercial wireless infrastructure on fire department facilities, as adopted by its membership in August 2004 (1), is that the IAFF oppose the use of fire stations as base stations for towers and/or antennas for the conduction of cell phone transmissions until a study with the highest scientific merit and integrity on health effects of exposure to low-intensity RF/MW radiation is conducted and it is proven that such sitings are not hazardous to the health of our members.
http://www.iaff.org/safe/content/celltower/celltowerfinal.htm
Alarmingly, they cite the following as the basis of their position:
There is a large body of internationally accepted scientific evidence which points to the existence of non-thermal effects of RF/MW radiation. The issue at the present time is not whether such evidence exists, but rather what weight to give it.
Internationally acknowledged experts in the field of RF/MW radiation research have shown that RF/MW transmissions of the type used in digital cellular antennas and phones can have critical effects on cell cultures, animals, and people in laboratories and have also found epidemiological evidence (studies of communities, not in the laboratory) of serious health effects at "non-thermal levels," where the intensity of the RF/MW radiation was too low to cause heating. They have found:
· Increased cell growth of brain cancer cells
· A doubling of the rate of lymphoma in mice
· Changes in tumor growth in rats
· An increased number of tumors in rats
· Increased single-and double-strand breaks in DNA, our genetic material
· 2 to 4 times as many cancers in Polish soldiers exposed to RF
· More childhood leukemia in children exposed to RF
· Changes in sleep patterns and REM type sleep
· Headaches caused by RF/MW radiation exposure
Neurologic changes including:
· Changes in the blood-brain-barrier
· Changes in cellular morphology (including cell death)
· Changes in neural electrophysiology (EEG)
· Changes in neurotransmitters (which affect motivation and pain perception)
· Metabolic changes (of calcium ions, for instance)
· Cytogenetic effects (which can affect cancer, Alzheimer's, neurodegenerative diseases)
· Decreased memory, attention, and slower reaction time in school children
· Retarded learning in rats indicating a deficit in spatial "working memory"
· Increased blood pressure in healthy men
· Damage to eye cells when combined with commonly used glaucoma medications
Many national and international organizations have recognized the need to define the true risk of low intensity, non-thermal RF/MW radiation exposure, calling for intensive scientific investigation to answer the open questions. These include:
· The World Health Organization, noting reports of "cancer, reduced fertility, memory loss, and adverse changes in the behavior and development of children."
· The U. S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
· The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)
· The Swedish Work Environmental Fund
· The National Cancer Institute (NCI)
· The European Commission (EC)
· New Zealand's Ministry of Health
· National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia
· Commonwealth Scientific Industrial Research Organization of Australia (CSIRO)
· The Royal Society of Canada expert group report prepared for Health Canada
· European Union's REFLEX Project (Risk Evaluation of Potential Environmental Hazards from Low Frequency Electromagnetic Field Exposure Using Sensitive in vitro Methods)
· The Independent Group on Electromagnetic Fields of the Swedish Radiation Protection Board (SSI)
· The United Kingdom’s National Radiological Protection Board (NRP
· The EMF-Team Finland's Helsinki Appeal 2005
· Non-thermal effects are recognized by experts on RF/MW radiation and health to be potential health hazards. Safe levels of RF/MW exposure for these low intensity, non-thermal effects have not yet been established.
· The FDA has explicitly rejected claims that cellular phones are "safe."
Categories: Microwave Satellite Receivers and Sticks aka -Antennas
Another good site for info on cell towers and other wireless devices:
www.emfacts.com
At least one article about possible effects on children. Several documented studies on animals are also on the site.
Chris Zino
70 Perry Ave
czino@optonline.net
Reply to this
After reading this info Chris Zino found, again I ask, Why hasn't any parent, teacher, administrator at the bayville schools ever questioned what was going on at the water tower and what is being proposed? How did those present cell towers ever get up there in the first place without consulting with the school? What is wrong with the village and this school district? It is a no brainer that this should have been brought forward to the public since it concerns children!
Today at IGA there were village notices posted about the next few meetings and the reason for them but no mention of the cell tower plan, Why is that not mentioned to the public??
Thanks to all of you for posting all this info for us to read before the dec 18th
This info should be posted at IGA and other stores in town or maybe newsday ,news 12 etc since that is how I found out about the water problem we had a few weeks ago!!
BR
Reply to this
About a year and a half ago, I called the Mayor and questioned the activity and antennas on the water tower. She did not call me back, however she did show up at my house explaining how I should question Ed Esposito regarding cell antennas to be allowed in this area.
This is something we all need to stop. It is bad enough we have sick children in this area, possibly connection here??? I think so. Let's pull together as a community and stop this now!!!!
Reply to this
JD.
Queen Victoria likes to blame former Mayor Esposito for many of Bayville's problems. Let the man rest in peace. Did Esposito or Mayor Siegel sign the lease agreements in 2003 for additional antennas for Nextel and Omnipoint. If you don't believe me check the budget and the additional $90,000. a year the village is now getting. What I really find interesting though is that the village helped fight to stop these same antenna's from being place on top of Jones Manor because of concerns by citizens. Was there real motive to get the income themselves and put the health of our children in jeopardy? How many of the trustees have children in the elementary school in Bayville. I believe the answer is 1. Why don't you check the vote on who voted for and against the lease agreements. That is if the closed door government officials will release that information.
Reply to this
This posting is available as a document file that can be printed and/or forwarded.
The original document lost some of it's formatting when posted to this site, so it looks nicer when printed from the original document file.
If anyone would like a copy of this as a pdf document file, please feel free to email me at:
bayvilletower@yahoo.com
and I will send you the document.
Nick Penny
Reply to this
Nick,
Thanks for putting this together.
To download this article click on the following link: Bayville Antenna Proposal.pdf
Everyone: Please distribute this important information.
Reply to this
Thank you for the information. How are the people who don't have computers getting this information? Has anyone asked the Principal of BP and BI if she knows anything about this?
Reply to this
Colleen,
If you or anyone else is interested in posting info(handouts, stores) about this, please email or call me. Some other residents have decided to go door to door, others are papering cars this weekend.
I agree that many people still do not know about this. 3 days ago, my wife started calling bayville parents with small children...only 3 out of the first 25 even new about the situation. 1 expressed no concern. The others expressed concern, and stated they or there spouse would attend on 12/18.
Unfortunetly, other things will come up on Monday night. If 1 out 10 people(who say they are attending the meeting) actually show up to the meeting, I would be pretty impressed.
I am not sure about the BP & BI principles. I am sure that the Board of Ed. has been requested to attend. I heard that they will be sending someone, I hope thats the case.
Does anyone know if the PTA was notified? If so, whats there thoughts?
Chris Zino
czino@optonline.net
Reply to this
Not fer nuthin, but if parents posting here were REALLY concerned about their children's future, they would be attending Board of Education meetings and writing letters concerning the dangerous deterioration of public education in LVCSD and your ever-increasing school taxes. Microwaves are the least of your worries. Please let us know if any member of the BoE graces you with their presence. I will be out of town and unable to attend the Village meeting on 12/18.
Reply to this
Microwaves the least of our worries?
I think the potential for microwave exposure to my, or anyone elses child is VERY important.
Reply to this
This particular blog is about trying to stop more potentially dangerous antennaes from being brought into BAyville , it is not about this constant drone of LVCSD bashing, go on another blog with the rest of those whiners and talk about THAT! These people who started this blog are trying to get the info out in a somewhat professional matter we should try to keep it intelligent and friendly.
It should be a place for the residents to finally be informed about what is going on in this town and know there are others in this town who care about the same issues.
Reply to this
BR,
Perhaps you "forgot" you yourself wrote the following:
"Why hasn't any parent, teacher, administrator at the bayville schools ever questioned what was going on at the water tower and what is being proposed? How did those present cell towers ever get up there in the first place without consulting with the school? What is wrong with the village and this school district?"
Just because I don't happen to think the microwave transmitter is as threatening an issue means I deserve to be treated nastily by you? Am I not entitled to a different opinion, or are only those in lockstep with your opinion entitled to post on the topic? Colleen and Zino ALSO mentioned the schools.
Reply to this
Can we move away from highlighting people's comments and fighting with each other? That is why I liked the onset of this blog. It is adult-like, not fighting each other on each and every word we say. If there is a discrepancy, then of course ask to be clarified, if not just refrain from making it personal.
Curious, not that your opinion does not matter, but quiet frankly, this is a blog page that is being used to "rally" the troops so to speak for the cause of trying to stop these things from going up. If you cannot attend the meeting and do not support those who want it stopped, then you have been heard and please move on to other topics.
It is quite apparent this page is trying to accomplish something, let others have their opinion.
Joan D
Reply to this
The December 18th meeting is quickly approaching and many people have not heard about this meeting.
If everyone who reads this post would please email all of your contacts and call anyone who you think would not be reading this blog, have a child in the school or read eamils reminding them about the meeting.
It is a busy night, school concerts and holiday errenads to run, but this is it. WHat happens at this meting will determine whether these proposals go through or not.
Remember: This is not a Village of BAyville proposal, it is a Police Dept. Proposal. The Village elected officials will vote on wether to allow this to go through or not. IF THEY DO NOT HEAR OPPOSITION, THEY WILL THINK THERE IS NO OPPOSITION TO THIS PROJECT!
Please attend.
Decemebr 18th @ 7:30 Bayville Village Hall
Reply to this
margaret, it is apparent that you started all this fightening news in town. What about all the children who use computers and housewifes who have been using microwaves for years are we all going to die. Just after your notices went up flyers started to circulate around town. What's more important being able to contact police when a child is choking for fast response or not having a new atenna. I don't think St. Gertudes would aloud this if people would be getting cancer. For that matter I don't think the mayor and all employees of the village would want to work less than 100 feet from the tower. Get a life remember you're not the mayor you just like to cause trouble. Stop dividing this town.
Reply to this
NormaJean,
First of all, get a dictionary. The proper word would be "Allowed", not aloud.
Second of all, quoting the parish of St. Gerts and the RCC in general as being great protectors of children is laughable in this day and age. The argument that the Church, either at the parish or diocese level, wouldn't allow it is hogwash and doesn't hold water with me. They would allow anything that will line it's pockets...particularly in light of it's recent financial troubles.
Margaret did not start the grass roots campaign against this antenna, other concerned citizens did. For someone who ISN'T the mayor as you pointed out, you sure think she has a lot of power, huh?
Furthermore, the concerned citizens who are against this antenna issue didn't "Start this frightening news", we are just bringing it to the light of day, making sure that as many people in town are aware of what could be placed on our water tower, near the school, library, village hall, and church. We are not making up the potential dangers that come along with this antenna ,simply making these issues public. That is our right, whether you agree with it or not because even though we cross the bridge to come to Bayville, our Constitutional rights still apply.
If you think this is such a great idea for our town, come to the meeting tonight. Put your money where your mouth is and show up to support a cause you believe in. I will be there and somehow i doubt you will be.
Reply to this
Norma Jean, one more thing....If the antenna's and dishes are so safe, why did the Bayville Fire Dept reject the proposal from Nassau County to put them on the roof of the fire house for 'safety concerns'? if they are not safe enough for grown men to spend a few hours a week with them nearby, how is it safe for small children to be near them 180 days a year for 8 hours a day?
Reply to this
What proposal from Nassau County did the FD reject?? Is this a thread about a proposed site at the water tower or are we just going to make things up?? Please provide facts.
Reply to this
sorry 14str8, that is a rumor i heard....I have no absolute proof that our FD denied this proposal, however, read the entire document above, the original posts that we are all commenting on, and it states that the International Assoc. of Firefighters recommends that their member houses deny the placement of cell towers.
Reply to this
Yes, PLEASE ATTEND!!!
Even if you may not agree with the dangers that could be associated with this proposed equipment. There other factors to consider:
-additional "eyesores" on the water tower. Remember, these are 6 foot in diameter dishes and Six 17 foot stick antennae. Although the RF Safety study that Bayville's environmental consultant has submitted (available at www.bayvillevillagehall.com) mentions the word "pretty" in his description of the 6' dishes, I really doubt that most people would find them "pretty".
-For residents in the immediate area, this could also affect home/property values, as more information and studies surface on the effects of this proposed and even existing equipment.
- And finally, my question is this; When does it stop? If any more antennae or equipment is needed, is Bayville Water tower the place? Our children and residents should not be test subjects. Think back to the days of smoking...how things have changed!
Enough is Enough...see you all tommorow night.
And to Curious...don't ever doubt my concerns for the health of MY children. You are out of line even saying such a thing, especially when hiding behind an alias.
Chris Zino
Reply to this
Zino,
Nobody "doubted" your concern for the health of your children. The suggestion to involve yourself in Board of Ed meetings doesn't NEGATE your other concerns. Geez, take a chill pill.
Reply to this
So? Where's the report? Big turnout? Did BoE PO Ron show up? Was he pro police antenna or for children's health? Inquiring minds want to know!
Reply to this
NO BOE representation. I was very dissappointed. Forget about RW how about the board members with kids in the district. Either way, it really did not matter to most that they were not there. HUGE turnout and alot of community feedback. Not one person was for it...we will see what happens next.
Reply to this
big turnout. had to be moved to the intermediate school. loads of biased to the hilt propaganda from motorola and Don Cotton, and loads of opposition from many many residents. I left at 11 pm and it was still going strong.
Reply to this
Edie and Vinnie,
Thanks for the update. I am glad that a lot of people turned out as this proves that apathy hasn't overtaken the general populace and even during this busy time of year, if an issue is important to some, they are willing to make their voices heard.
You should be disappointed that not one of the 7 Board of Ed members found the issue important enough to attend the meeting. Do remember that when May 16th rolls around and they come grovelling for your YES vote on the budget.
Reply to this
Vinnie,
RW HAS a child that attends school in Bayville.
Reply to this
For those of you who could not attend tonights meeting in Bayville - this links to one of the high points when the Village's "expert" Don Cotten (Vocal contributor to VS last campaign) tried to explain a DiPole antenna and ended up giving the whole audience the middle finger - not just right-side-up, but also up-side -down
Way to go Don - I feel so much better knowing that this man is on the case keeping our children, and us, safe...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWCXQCuSQMs
Sorry for the poor quality - I am requesting a better location for the camera at the next meeting...And you may have to paste the link into your browser, or go to you tube and search bayville video...
Reply to this
I pasted that link in my browser and saw the video - why is he flipping off the crowd?
Reply to this
Thanks BayvilleVideo,
As those of you that were there know, Don Cotton is our (concerned residents)greatest ally.
Curious, this pains me to say , but you're right (ouch, it burns)...the BOE should have had a representative there. The fact they didn't, is inappropriate. If there is a conflict of interest with the NCPD/BOE/Walsh, I could understand Mr. Walsh not being there. But being that I personally heard our Village consultant say that his(Don Cotton's) wife got a current high ranking school official his/her job, I believe there is another conflict of interest that is not so obvious or legitimate. The comment I am referring to was said on school property, in the company of another, within the last 10 days.
Whats next? Does the village continue to discuss this issue at every meeting until, they are ready to make a decision? Mayor Siegel, in public hearing, has stated that all existing equipment was installed around 1993, when she was out of office. Yet, towards the end of the meeting(12/18/06), we learned otherwise. In 2003, additional antennae from T-Mobile(omnipoint) and Sprint appear to have been installed. I am not sure how this could have been overlooked, it appears in the Rental Income section of the budget, along with an RF Safety Report & Proposal from Omnipoint & Sprint in 2003(public records).
Mayor Siegel is in a very difficult situation. If she agrees with the new proposal, myself, and apparently many other parents & residents will not be happy. If she is against it, then she will be perceived as preventing the PD from doing there job 10% better (as per NCPD estimates). Since the start of this, my real issue is with the location of the proposed equipment.
As one resident stated: Is a 10% increase in radio reliability worth a 10%(or 17%) increase in risk to our children. [for those who did not attend, I am referring to the charts/percentages that NCPD furnished]
Bayville Video, maybe you can get the clip of Mr. Cotton telling us we should be worried about "what is already up there". PLEASE tell me the camera was still on then!!!Could you please email me, I have some questions. Whoever you are, thanks for recording the meeting...I hope you have set a new standard. Many towns/villages have there meetings broadcast on public access and other forms of media.
Chris Zino
czino@optonline.net
Reply to this
I can only assume you're kidding about Cotten's fingers. He's an elderly man, and I am sure he didn't even think about it- it's a silly and inflammatory thing to say.
I wish I could see some scientific evidence on these allegations- not that I don't believe them, but I'd feel much better knowing I've got irrefutable proof signed off by a scientist . I found an Air Force report on RF exposure- but no actual proof RF caused anything in it. Ideas?
Reply to this
Zino,
Sorry to have pained ya there, buddy. I sure would love to know more about that nepotism of which you speak, but we'll save that for another topic spot. I don't doubt for a minute that what you say is true, based on the K-12 corruption and dysfunction in this district.
Question: Was the Bayville Bridge or a tower down at Centre Island Beach ever mentioned as a possible alternative location? A 10% improvement in radio communication seems pretty paltry to me.
Reply to this
That last post was from me, Zino.
Bayvillevideo -
What kind of sick troublemaker are you? I watched your little soundless video 5 times and Mr. Cotton is in no way, shape, or form flipping off the audience. To me it is very clear he is merely gesturing with his arms for emphasis. Of course, anyone who wasn't trying to put a slanderous slant on something would have included the audio so that we could truly discern the meaning of his arm movements.
Reply to this
Sick - hardly.
Troublemaker - well that depends on your definition...
Soundless Video? - turn up the volume on your computer, the clip (as well as most of the evenings events were captured in full color and glorious stereo sound)
In regards to his arm movements - it isnt his arms that were the most entertaining (and anyone who actually attended the hearing can attest to this)
In fact there is audible "whoops" when he realized what he was doing...
His presentation style was very weak, he needed all that movement because he didnt have any visuals to illustrate his VERY TECHNICAL points...
My whole "sick" and "troublemaking" point is that something as serious as the health of the children in the nearby school should not be in the hands of someone who does not come across as impartial and appears to be slightly disconnected from the opinion of the community members that attended...
We need an independent (truly independent) analysis of the proposal, and IMHO the entire set up on the tower needs to be looked at - currently there are 52 towers, these alone should be cause for alarm... We have had far too many kids get sick in the Village, in fact Don himself expressed the same sentiment which I will try and find on the recording and post later today... It may take some time as I have a few hours of footage to go through...
Regards,
BV
Reply to this
I am starting to analyze the proposal as a concerned father/engineer. If there is anyone who wants to help me I need money for tools (Not My time)
Reply to this
BayvilleEng,
What tools do you need?
Chris Zino
Reply to this
Signal strength meter (Or meters if I can’t find one that handles all the frequencies on the tower) they can cost $100 to $1000.
Or for even more detail a tool called a spectrum analyzer ($5000 used to 10,000 new)
Reply to this
I may actually have a spectrum analyer, or access to one. I'll get back to you on it.
Reply to this
Correction - Don did have a visual in the presentation - a map of the two paths of the microwaves. There was no visual of the current towers and RF and EMR paths - which would have shown what is already there and where those paths are affecting.
RF - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_frequency
EMR -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_radiation
Reply to this
BV,
Well, I guess there is something seriously wrong with my brand new computer as I am able to hear all other sorts of audio on the web but nothing accompanying your 17 second video "masterpiece". Frankly, I could care less about whoops or his presentation style. You posted in here that a well respected longtime Bayville resident flipped off the audience at a very public meeting. To me that indicates you are trying to portray him as a crude and vile individual. You owe Mr. Cotton an apology.
Reply to this
Dear "curious"
If you re-read my post I state: "tried to explain a DiPole antenna and ended up giving the whole audience the middle finger - not just right-side-up, but also up-side -down"
No where do I say he "flipped off the audience"
I am not trying to portray him as crude or vile - but rather to display a simple visual showing he is out of touch - even with his own bodily movements.
BTW - thanks for your feedback on my "masterpiece"...
Glad to hear you have a brand new computer - this link might help you set it up for youtube videos:
http://www.youtube.com/t/help_center
Reply to this
is it just me? why does curious have to stir the pot? go to another blog and do that.....seriously, you are truly annoying. you were mocking the meeting by asking if RW was there. i know you have issues with the BOE, but come on, our children's health is potentially at risk, stop being so petty already.
Reply to this
its great to hear there was a big turnout last night. i was unable to make it because i was at my daughters concert.
i'll be honest, all these numbers and acronyms are flying right over my head, but it just seems to me that when you are talking about putting anything on a water tower you must take the risk of being OVER CAUTIOUS. It can never be good idea to comprise your water supply or to even run the risk, no matter how remote.
I beg the officials to really consider the risk reward ratio of this proposal.
MAYOR SEGAL THIS IS OUR WATER. WE HAVE TO KEEP IT SAFE. NO MATTER WHAT!!!!! PLEASE DO THE RIGHT THING.
Reply to this
I am new to this and have several comments after both attending the meeting and reading the above.
1) I do not have children in LV schools but I absolutely think the BOE president or a rep should have been at that meeting, police conflict or not. If there is someone at the School District who got there job through the Cotton's then that certainly is a conflict and people should absolutely know about it.
2) To Bayvillevideo, THANK YOU for filming this, every meeting should be filmed. I was at the meeting and did see Mr C's gesture to the audience. He is perhaps well-respected by some of Bayvilles residents but certainly not an effective speaker and the residents of this Village would have been better served by Mayor Siegel had she suggested the police pay for a research company with a somewhat more up-to-date and worldly approach. My rose colored glasses are gone, but I do remember receiving a letter from Don Cotton and his wife asking I vote for the Siegel ticket. When his "private company" (OOOH bad word according to Don last night) is PAID to do a job and the results and the speaker are so one-sided, one begins to wonder....
3) Mayor Siegel was quite concerned about the court reporter (PAID) last night, perhaps the board should take lessons from the TOB meetings on how to deal (nicely and professionally) with a crowd of residents who have every right to be heard. (oops I'm sorry VS doesn't believe in learning on the job!)
4) Mayor Siegel made an explicit comment about noone having a problem with the 52antennea until she brought up that they were there, she also defensively questioned a woman about why their road association had never said anything before. She also vehemently defended herself saying if she were on the board when the antenna went up she would not have voted for it. After Mr Marchand "refreshed" her memory and pointed out the antennas placed since then, the web began to unravel.
5) The shocker (really?) is that it seems that the board and the Mayor as elected officials are willing to lend more credence to there opinion rather than the fact that the were ELECTED TO REPRESENT THE PEOPLE. I counted one supporter of the project amoung the resident speakers. The Mayor said about 3x at the end that she had not received any solid documentation that this WAS HARMFUL. Curious choice of words if she hasn't made up her and the boards minds.
I say the pot needs stirring.
Reply to this
Who Am I? I’m an engineer / Physics that lives in Bayville. I have 4 children under the age of 7 who will be or are going to the Bayville Primary School. I received my BS in engineering with out reading any of the textbooks (I Have a strong technical mind But please be patient with my spelling and writing). I am a very concerned about the environment. I do drive a car that runs on my own environmentally friendly fuel.
What I saw was many hours of concerned parents and residents who got no clear answer to their questions about the heath affects to their children and to the rest of us.
I will do my best to answer these questions in simple terms.
The biggest question is what are the heath affects of radio ways related to cancer. I’m sorry to say that no one truly knows at this time if there are any.
What we do know is that Radio waves can heat the human body. We can measure this heating affect. We can also measure the amount of radio energy in a given area. Lets keep it simple we will call this radio energy in a given area “radio power” . We were told that the maximum safe level of radio power is 200 units. The current power measured at the primary school is about .2 units. To put this in perspective it is about ten times less than when you are using a hand held cell phone. According to the mathematical calculation’s given the new system would add 17% to the current power at the primary school (A small amount of power more on a small amount of power)
As an engineer the above data sounds reasonable. The only Math I question is the mathematical calculation of power for the 500 mhz antennas.
As A father I will double check that Math.
As an environmentalist I wish all the antennas on the water tower were gone. But I must say this. If you chat on a cell phone while driving your SUV and your kids are in the back seat eating fruit role ups the new police antennas are the least of your problems.
If the above doesn’t help I hope the following will.
The following is a list of the things I’m concerned about in life (My worry list) with a level of concern from 1 to 100 (100 being very scared)
Global warming 20
Misuse of fossil fuels 20
Eating Processed Food 40
Dairy from Hormone enriched cows 40
Loosing weight (I’m to fat) 50
Using a cell phone 5
Using a cordless phone 5
My kids getting abducted 15
Keeping the seal on the microwave clean 10
Using chemicals on my lawn 30
Stray electricity (Power lines) 15
The Police’s radio reception ?
The antennas on the water tower 3
I will continue to research all of the above issues (Including the antennas on the water towers). I wish I could do more extensive radio measurements but I am on a low budget I will continue my studies why because I live here and so do my children.
Reply to this
Some interesting points from last night's meeting:
POINT #1
Don Cotton ( the village expert)admitted he is not licensed in NY to conduct the analysis he did. He had a colleague work with him. That person Mr. Morra(don't know spelling) was not at the meeting. He has been retired from his field for 3-5 years, Don was not sure.
POINT #2
Don Cotton admitted that what is up there (52 cells) are far more dangerous than what is going up there.
POINT #3
Motorola's expert cited the same studies from the FDA FCC and WHO as the audience did. They took the stand that RF's(radiation) is not harmful. They refused to answer or acknowledge that those reports also state, the effects of RF are unknown. They also refused to state that RF's DO NOT CAUSE leukemia, brain tumors and other seirious illnesses.
POINT #4
The NCPD showed the audience a map of coverage now, coverage if we do not participate in the project and a map of if we do participate.
The maps of coverage now to coverage if the project goes through without us show a significant increase in coverage. What is in it for us then?
POINT #5
Don Cotton, who gave his address as 70 Shore Road lives in what is now considered a dead zone. However, on several occasions through out the night he reported a story of how the NCPD came to his assistnace when he was stricken in his yard, within good response time.
POINT #6
Astoria Queens had 100 parents protest about cell towers too close to a school. Peter Vallone (city councilman) came to their side and helped them WIN the fight to remove the towers. He is now fighting for new laws to be put in place to restrict cell towers from within 500 ft. from a school. NYC schools have also started to follow them by removing cells from school property.
We had more than 100 people there last night, only one person voiced his approval of the project.
How many meetings, hearings will it take for the Village to understand the public does not want this. That question was posed lsat night, with no definitive answer.
Reply to this
jen,
Grow up dear.
Hanson,
Rest assured, RW has no problem with "conflict of interest" when it comes to deciding educational matters if it makes him look better in the eyes of the NCPD. Just take a look at the Police sponsored anti-bullying program he pushed through on the Board's consent agenda without public input or discussion.
BV,
Thanks. I guess that's why I wasn't able to hear the audio. However you DID say:
"...and ended up giving the whole audience the middle finger - not just right-side-up, but also up-side -down Way to go Don - I feel so much better knowing that this man is on the case keeping our children, and us, safe..."
which I do believe any literate individual could interpret as "flipping off the audience" (my words) So if he didn't do that and it isn't visually apparent in your clip, then you really shouldn't try and inflame people by saying he did.
Reply to this
Curious,
Although I was at the meeting and did see it for myself. I went to the mytube link and it did have the sound attached and Mr C is very clearly gesturing up and down with his middle finger. I don't think he was doing it purposely, but nonetheless he is doing it. His presentation and mannerisms was quite disconnected and the fact that someone videod a public hearing and posted a certain portion is really not that big of a deal. What is a concern is that Mr C should not have been making this presentation on behalf of the board if what Vinnie says is true about not being licensed in NYS.
Reply to this
Don Cotton was asked the question point blank last night and answered, no I am not liscensed.
Reply to this
I was at the meeting and did not get the chance to ask three final question, the Mototral Phy. Expert talk about the lower the frequency and the more body surface you have puts one at more risk. As someone in the medical field I have a small understanding of children. Children under the age 15 have more body surface then adults for their size and weight. Does that mean that our children are at more risk then the adults. Second, if the dish is attached to the top of the water tower, what will be the exspelled enery level be when the dish has to taken down for water tower repairs and painting. The third question, if we were to have a storm and the dish was to fall or move due to wind, the beam would still be active, where would that beam go. Mr. C also talked little about what the beam does after it fades, that puts the village hall and the girl scout room at risk. The decission is in the boards hand, we need a stronger showing at the next village meeting, tell you families and friends. Thanks
Reply to this
Mr. Cotton's motions should not be of major concern, just amusement, it was funny in real life!
His credibility, conflict of interest and the fact that at the first meeting November 2, prior to the comission of an impact study, Mr. Cotton stated that the proposed plan by the NCPD was sound and should be somthing the Village agrees to. How could he make that statement without a full impact study. On NOv. 2 the audience asked him about an impact study and he had only done one at Village Hall.
The audience asked for an impact study to be done at the schools and for a second meeting so more of the public could attend. The Mayor agreed and said she would take it all under advisement.
What was alarming last night is when Mr. Cotton lost his temper and yelled at the audience, and I qoute "You are should be more concerned about what is already up there, not what is going up there. What is up there is more dangerous." By the way, he yelled this quite loud.
I think the community needs a more neutral party to do an impact study.
Reply to this
Like with many issues today regarding our health, there is a lot of controversy and various opinions. There are many studies of this particular issue in the US and you'll always find one that negates the other, neutral party or not. I think people chose the one they like best. Maybe both parties should agree to chose an authority that they would both be comfortable with although I don't know where you'll find that person. That being said, I think each person should start by examining if they are protecting their children from environmental harm on a more fundamental level: the food they eat, cells phone and cordless phone use, microwave ovens to name a few. Picking on Dr. Cotton and Vicky is an easy target. Everyone uses cell phones and many are quite upset that there are dead zones in the area. But when the issue of what helps us use those cell phones comes up, everyone gets up in arms and doesn't want the towers in their community. I found Dr. Cotton to be credible and yes a little confusing and gesticulating a lot. This is typical of a scientist who doesn't take classes in PR but speaks from a different knowledge base. Dr. Cotton "yelled" because he was being badgered. Intellectual debate fosters better answers and shouldn't become emotional even when the issues bring up emotions.
The LVCSD BoE did have someone there but I guess only a bald head is noticable.
Reply to this
while it may be true that we are all living experiments regarding cell phone use, and that studies can be done to push one side or the other, it is more a matter of common sense, that major equipment be kept a certain distance from our schools,, make no mistake, what's up there & what's being proposed is major equipment! If there is a true health risk, realize that it will be kept from the public if that industry can help it.
With a school the chance should not be taken.
Why is all of that up there? MONEY,, why is the Mayor and her board pushing for this addition?? I have no direct knowledge if there is compensation to Bayville, but I would think so, does anyone know if there is, and how much?
Do the police need a better system?, I would guess that they can make due with what they have..a push for this is also more likely also a matter of MONEY.
Reply to this
Dear Bayville Resident,
I agree with "curious" - your's was a well written view... There were a few items I was "curious" about...
"Picking on Dr. Cotton and Vicky is an easy target"
yes that may be true - but they are our elected officials and it is our mandate as residents to review the decisions the board(mayor)makes that affect all or large portions of our community.
Many items go through this village rubber stamped without any resident (other than those directly connected with Village Hall)ever having the opportunity to get involved. I think that is why you saw such a spirit of mis-trust in the audience.
In terms of Dr. Cotton you further wrote: "I found Dr. Cotton to be credible"
Forgive my question - but may I ask on what you based this credibility? I published that portion of video because I felt that a "scientific expert" should be on top of his game, not absent minded. (Any mention of "middle fingers" was strictly to identify the clip as mature content before anyone actually watched it) And the fact that he was very involved in a portion of Mayor Siegels campaign strikes me as a bit of conflict of interest (as mentioned elswhere in this blog)
See his involvement at the bayville reporter from last summer:
http://bayvillereporter.blogspot.com/2006/06/bayville-democrats-come-out-of-hiding.html
One final comment:
"Dr. Cotton "yelled" because he was being badgered."
Mr "cotten" was badgered because had lost credibility in the November meeting and his role in the Decmber meeting was poorly planned and executed. No one expects the Village "expert" to be unbiased - the very fact of being paid makes a person biased toward the source of the income. But the points that Mr. Cotten was trying to make were all technical and hand/arm gestures do not re-assure the community - diagrams that visually display what is being spoken about tell a clearer story - just ask that poor NCPD officer. His diagrams worked more against him than for him (at the end he even tried to remove them before resident could view and take pictures to share with others)
IMHO all the presenters were woefully unprepared for a hostile and informed audience.
BTW Y'all love Don so much please spell his name correctly - "Cotten"
Check the spelling here - http://bayvillereporter.blogspot.com/2006/06/bayville-democrats-come-out-of-hiding.html
Regards,
BV
Reply to this
Bayville Resident,
If a rep from the LV BoE was there, representing the BoE, they should have identified themselves as such. The bald head you mention, your referring to?
Did they stay the entire meeting? If not, how long? Anyone know?
As far as "examining if they are protecting their children"...your right to some degree. In the case of the cell towers proximity to the school and the possibility of adding 15% more emissions, we(my wife & I) are doing exactly what you stated. We are protecting our children by getting the facts and stating our respective opinions.
Interesting idea about a third party descision. Unfortunetly, village officials are not allowing a public vote on this, so your idea probably would be considered "out of line" as 1 village official stated at the 12/18 meeting.
Its nice to see all these new names on the blog.
Chris Zino
czino@optonline.net
Happy Holidays
Reply to this
Bayville resident,
Your accounting of the meeting sounds like a very reasonable and unbiased one. Thank you for sharing.
Reply to this
BOE representative was there but left after 45 minutes. Therefore only saw Mr. Cotton's presentation.
I do not know if you were there, but if you were can you honestly say Mr. Cotton presentation was professional?
Did you notice the response of the audience when he tried to gain the floor again? Did you notice exchange between Mr. Cotton and Carol Kennedy, where he could not answer her questions and the MAyor had to intervene? Did you notice the MAyor asking him to stop talking, politely I may add?
Lets not blur the issues. The issue at hand is the proposal of the cell towers. The other issues in the environment will get there turn. The Village already sphere headed a project to erradicate pesticides in town, starting with the fields and trying to educate the public.
Sometimes, it takes events like to for people to reevlauate theri lifestyles and make changes. Please do not say that if you give your kids fruit roll ups you should not be fighting this project. Maybe some education about food, enviroment and the like will come of this as a byproduct.
For the record, after doing the research, I am reducing my cell use to essential talk time only.
I drink bottles water, use organic pesticides, feed my children organic meats, produce and dairy products. Recently St. Gertrudes held a meting about toxins on the home and I am starting to make the change over in that are as well.
Don't blur the issus. Keep focused on the issue at hand.
Thanks
Reply to this
My microwave oven was banished from the house 4 years ago, we limit cell calls as much as possible, but as adults we make the choice to use our cell phones and subject ourselves to the possible and probable damages down the line. Children sitting in a classroom don't have that choice, our elected officials get to make that choice for them.
Reply to this
Bayville Resident,
You are absolutely right. Those among us who are concerned about negative environmental effects on ourselves and our kids should examine the rest of our lives to see what else could be harmful. I for one buy all organic milk, meat, produce and mostly organic snacks. We use bottled water for everything but baths, we eat very little processed food , I limit microwave use, my kids are in properly installed car seats, etc, etc,etc. I could go on if you'd like.
Do I now pass the litmus test of being allowed to object to this project?
The bottom line for me is that i can control if my kids are using cell phones or eating artificially colored foods or what have you. If these antennas go up, i can't control that at all and that's what bothers me, and why i am planning to object to this as much as i can while it's still possible.
Reply to this
So what you're saying is because you CONTROL the right to CHOOSE to give your 8 year old a cell phone, that's ok, those are waves you will bear the risk of because you chose to, but because the police or the government wants to FORCE waves upon those same 8 year old heads those are "bad" waves, (even though the main intent of those waves is to provide better radio contact for rescue officials in the event of a REAL emergency).
Reply to this
Not sure who you think I am, but...nonetheless, I would never give an 8 year old or 15 year old for that matter a cell-phone.
Reply to this
"So what you're saying is because you CONTROL the right to CHOOSE to give your 8 year old a cell phone, that's ok, those are waves you will bear the risk of because you chose to, but because the police or the government wants to FORCE waves upon those same 8 year old heads those are "bad" waves, (even though the main intent of those waves is to provide better radio contact for rescue officials in the event of a REAL emergency)."
yup. because the reality is that for ME for my kids, they will not have a cell phone at 8 and IF they have one at 15 it will be one that only calls home, to me or their dad. so that in and of itself will limit their exposure, no mindless gabbing with friends.
and as far as the REAL emergency...well Lisa, you should have come to the meeting. The graphics displayed by the NCPD clearly showed that even if bayville says no to the system, the system will go forward w/out us and our coverage will improve greatly just by the fact that the system is improved. and as JoanD pointed out, the NCPD's maps clearly showed Don Cotten's house in a current "dead zone" but he repeatedly told the story of how he got such prompt response from the PD when he needed it. I just feel like we bayville will be bearing the burden of any possible negative effects, and not really gaining enough to warrant it.
furthermore, the NCPD stated that there have been NO fatalities in Bayville as result of a failure on the part of the current system.
Reply to this
Don't ignore the fact that dead spots for emergency communication do exist in Bayville. The fact that there have been no fatalities to date is just terrible reasoning. The other side of the equation (and I do not agree with this line of thought)that no one has died due to cell or other communication towers in Bayville either.
The fact that there are dead zones for cell communications (not a terrible need IMO) as well as emergency response communications (a potential threat to someones well being IMO)should be a very real concern. I agree with most everyone else that if there is a risk to children or any human life, the proposed solution should be tabled and others entertained.
It's very easy to disagree with the proposed plan, but to ignore the actual problem that it is designed to address is not wise. It is a real problem that would benefit the entire community if it can be safely addressed.
Reply to this
Very good point....but I don't think anyone is against the NCPD proposal. Its all about Location, Location, Location. Should we, the community, be responsible to find a better location??? (I am not asking 14str8 directly).
Reply to this
I was out of state and not in attendance at the meeting, hence my request for an update as to what transpired earlier on this thread. Perhaps anyone who attended could tell me if any of the following questions were addressed:
1. Have any alternate sites been explored?
2. Why is there only a 10% level of improvement?
I would suggest the Police/communications companies develop better technology for their money and come back to the Village with a proposal when they can show a safe means of transmission with at least a 40% level of improvement.
I do not believe that the 10% estimated level of "improved" radio contact warrents placement of the transmittor on the water tower, especially in light of citizen concerns. A better proposal, a better location, and greater justification of need in order to guarantee citizen safety, should be required of the PD. imho.
Reply to this
bottom line is if there is a 0.00001% chance of this being a danger to the kids and to us, WHY would anyone want to take a chance. has everyone at the meeting forgotten that vs told us more than once she did not let this happen everything happened in 1993.yet when paper work to prove otherwise is put before her she remembers. dos she think we all are stupid? maybe i am old school but i do take it personal when i am lied to. what is really scary is this is the person we ALL need to trust to make the right choice for us. oh ,and to make it clear to all of you what happened. vs told me on the phone nothing was added since 1993 and she would never had let it happen if she was in office. in the same phone call she stated she remembers the day i was born that was 32 yrs ago.when her bluff was called at the meeting and she admitted to installing new stuff, i questioned her, (i hope you all are sitting down for the answer) she had a cold.(do you want me to say it again) almost unbeleivable. a cold made her forget the new antenea that the village is collecting rent on but she remembers the day i was born(32 yrs ago).sad and scary and TRUE.I LOVE MY KIDS and i will do what it takes to protect them. i WILL NOT leave their wellbeing up to anyone. my opinion after beverly pleaded with the board and vs they should have ended the meeting nothing more to talk about we can't take a chance. but that did not happen. WHY????
Reply to this
i agree with edie. choice is important. being forced to do something harmful is not acceptable. and like kirsten, i do not understand why this issue has not been put to bed already. or maybe the village should hold a special vote at polling places. it is the townspeople's decision. i would bet the farm that the vote would be a big fat "HEcK NO!"
Reply to this
I was at the meeting. I saw what Mr C was doing with his hands - if he was a proffessonal he would have ha a chart/drawing of what he was trying to explain. My issue with him was that I didn't totally understand what he was saying and he seemed to be filling in with a lot of words that had nothing to do with the issue.
I was impressed that the Bayville citizens did their homework. So what if no one knows for sure whether any of the towers are safe or not -- there's DOUBT. When in doubt - err on the side of safety - other states, countries and towns have.
Does anyone remember thalidomide? It was deemed "safe". It caused major birth defects. What about agent orange - "safe"; cigarettes - "safe"; second hand smoke - "safe"; and most recently the air at WTC - all deemed safe by the "experts" - all are causing health issues and deaths. Even new and some old drugs on the market that were said to be safe by the FDA are now being taken off the market. All the experts said they were safe!
Why is anyone even THINKING about putting thses antenaes near our children? Like Mr. C said - we should be more concerned about the 52 that are already up there. Get them down. If these companies and NCPD want their antenaes here. let them build a tall tower somewhere else, away from our kids. Why should our children and grandchildren be guinea pigs?
If VS said she wouldn't have let the first antenaes go up if she had been major, why didn't she take them down and put them somewhere else when she became major? What did she do? She put more up!!! Sounds rather hypocritical to me.
My family has lived in Bayville for more than 38 years. My children went to the schools here and are now raising their children in Bayville and sending them to the schools. When my kids were growing up there were no children with environmentally caused illnesses. When they were babies, the pediatrician said Bayville water was the only water you didn't have to boil before giving it to an infant. What happened???
Mayor S was voted into office to serve the residents of Bayville. She heard the voice of Bayville on 12/18. Let's pray she listens to it and protects our children.
Reply to this
Bayvillevideo,
I'd like to make something very clear. As someone who was unable to attend the meeting, having someone in our community with the technical capacity to videotape the meeting and post it to Youtube is very valuable. I fully support the public posting of public meetings. You had the opportunity to provide a real community service. I know of school districts in other states that post their entire board meetings online. Unedited, those meetings can be referred to objectively by an outsider and an opinion can be arrived at without the bias of the videographer entering the picture.
It is very clear to me that your agenda here has nothing to do with the actual safety of the microwave transmitter but rather, only to bash Mayor Siegel and her supporters. Having been called out on your malicious allegation that Cotten gave the audience the middle finger you now state:
"(Any mention of "middle fingers" was strictly to identify the clip as mature content before anyone actually watched it)"
How disingenuous of you. There is no "mature" content in your 17 second clip. Now that I'm back home and have my audio, I can hear that he is discussing how waves travel. Be a man or woman and just admit you were wrong to present your clip in the manner you did.
As for your citing the BayvilleReporter as a source for information, you might as well cite the National Enquirer. At least the Men in Black found some credibility in what is written there, more than I can give the BayvilleReporter.
Reply to this
Hanson,
My comment was in response to Edie's post, not yours - my fault for not addressing it as such. Let me also state that the "8 yr. old" is a purely hypothetical child. I do not know an "Edie", nor do I know if she has an 8 yr old. I do know a number of young mothers in this community however, who give elementary age children cell phones. It was my observation of what I personally consider an irresponsible action on the part of parents who give cell phones to children under the age of 12, that I based my comment.
Reply to this
Meryl L,
You stated you were at the meeting and you said:
"If these companies and NCPD want their antenaes here. let them build a tall tower somewhere else, away from our kids."
So can I assume from your above statement that the answer to my question - 1. Have any alternative sites been explored? ............is NO?
Reply to this
Curious:
The demeanor of the POlice Officer in charge was vastly different from hie demeanor in the first meetng. He was more intolerant or hardline this time.
That being said, he was repeatedly asked about alternate locations. His answer was "No". He also stated "There is no other spot, Our experts choose it and they said this is the most critical spot."
When questioned over and over again about why not Mill Necks Water tower, which is higher than ours and has NO cell towers, ours has 52! He said Bayville is the only spot.
He never answered the questions "where other spots evaluated and rejected? He was directly asked about a backup plan if Bayville said no and/or if the original plan by his experts had alternate sites and his answer always was..."It must be BAyville."
The visuals the Police brought, backfired in their case. They showed better coverage if we do not participate and only a 10% increase from what we have now if we do participate. When he was questioned on it, by most of the audience he attempted to hide the maps!!! He took them out of view for the rest of the meeting. They had been front and center!!!
When asked if any fatalities had occurred b/c of the status of our coverage now, his response was "What do you mean by fatalities?"
The Police also had maps to the right of the stage labeling all the 24 sites they needed for this project. They also had a map of existing sites. Sands POint has a communication tower now and will not after this project. WHY?
Hope that answered your question.
Reply to this
curious....
the answer is no. the NCPD contracted with motorola to find them 24 sites for their new system. According to the NCPD Officer (think his name was Harris, check the court reporters report) he was vehement in stating that there was no alternative provided to them for the bayville location. he said it was "crucial" or "critical". to me, that is a big old waste of PD money....they should have had motorola find them several acceptable sites in each geographic area, knowing that there might be reasons that the first choice wouldn't work out. so either the NCPD is a bunch of idiots or the guy they sent us was lying/stonewalling us.
as far as the 10% improvement: again, according to my recollection of the NCPD's presentation..Bayville is currently at 85% coverage on handheld walkie/talkies (not the car based ones), they want to bring it to 97% coverage when the officer is outside a dwelling and 95% when the officer is inside.
the total available upside is only 15%, and they are shooting for 10%
Reply to this
No, I did not state in my letter that I said that at the meeting. It is my sentiment as I wrote my letter. Be careful how you read things.
Reply to this
Edie and Joan,
Thank you for your replies. I am of the opinion that if the PD couldn't be bothered to even consider alternatives to the Bayville Water Tower, with that sort of demanding arrogance, they should be sent packing. Whether the health risks are major or minor, the fact that enough people are concerned about them and the PD is acting like tyrants and refusing to even contemplate compromise is enough for me to say NO to their transmitter.
Thank you neighbors for turning out for this meeting. Please keep in mind you have the same inflexible, arrogant, police mentality running our school board.
Reply to this
Curious,
please start your own blog, called WWW.I HATE THE BoE.com .
Almost every entry you make leads to the BoE.
Reply to this
Meryl L,
I asked a simple question which joan and Edie nicely responded to. On Dec. 20th, you posted:
"Meryl L wrote:
I was at the meeting."
In my post, I said:
"
You stated you were at the meeting and you said:'If these companies and NCPD want their antenaes here. let them build a tall tower somewhere else, away from our kids.'"
I didn't say WHERE you said the statement. It seems pretty obvious to me that I was quoting your POST.
I then asked:
"So can I assume from your above statement that the answer to my question - 1. Have any alternative sites been explored? ............is NO?"
Please respond only if your answer is YES. As I said before, Joan and Edie have already nicely responded to this simple question from someone who was NOT in attendance (me). I hope this clears up your misunderstanding.
Reply to this
Zino,
Golly gosh Zino, I don't know how! But you're so smart and realize there's absolutely no connection between Village governance, school governance and our childrens' health and welfare, so will you do it for me? ;-p
Reply to this
Maybe this is a very far fetched idea, But since we have a police booth and 2 police on duty at all times, why not have one stay in the booth with a real phone line so they can get all the emergency calls and not risk the chance of loosing a call because they are out of range???? It might even be easier to find them when they stay in one place all the time. Why do we need these antenna's? Even if we do not know the facts of the effects it has on children or anyone for that fact, why risk it?? You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure that out. Also the Mayor has 2 grandchildren in the Bayville schools and they live very close to the water tower why would she even risk their health???? AND don't we have enough problems with our water without adding more stuff on the water tower already, Look at the tower and see all the cables wrapped around it, It makes you think if we don't know the effects why add more, Land lines always work better then cell phones it takes the same amount of time to call the police from a cell phone as it does a land line, The length of time to reach the police is due to the number you call it's Nassau County Police Dept. they then send the calls, if a police officer was in the police booth he would get the call right away in a clear phone conversation, not trying to get threw on a cell phone and driving around try to get a signal, so think about it what's easier, a land line or finding a signal, the response time will make a big difference if you use a land line. So the real question is why don't the police use the Police Booth we have in the middle of town?????
Reply to this
Seems logical enough upfront, but you need to look a little deeper into the problem.
First re: the police booth. Plaon Old Telephone is subject to outages that you don't, or very rarely, see at the County Communications Center. They have generators and backups that can be switched to in the event of an emergency. Events that cause these outages generally result in a higher volume of 911 calls, so having our primary call location (in your scenario the police booth) down is not a pretty picture.
Second - there are not 2 police cars assigned to Bayville but actually one that is manned by one officer. The other cars you see are actually assigned to Lattingtown and Locust Valley (one car each).
Third - I think as many people, if not more, that are up in arms about the topic being discussed will be even more irate over the fact that an officer being paid almost $100,000 per year is sitting in the police booth answering phone calls of which more than 80% are most likely non-emergency issues.
Fourth - what if you were to witness a pedestrian getting struck at the point of one of our dead zones?? You would most likely reach into your car for the trusty old cell phone that doesn't have service to call the reliable land lines at the police booth. That wouldn't work out too weel either.
I for one would not like to rely on calling the police booth for our emergency services to be dispatched if I should need them.
Playing a little devils advocate here, but the underlying issue of communication problems is real and not so easily fixed.
Reply to this
thanks a lot about this info..
Your blog's informative is very rich in contents. I agree this information is acceptable to everyone.
Reply to this
Good Day. There are admirable potentialities in every human being. Believe in your strength and your youth. Learn to repeat endlessly to yourself, 'It all depends on me.'
I am from Timor and now teach English, please tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "Explore all the services hawaiian airlines offers."
Waiting for a reply
Reply to this
Excuse me. Never part without loving words to think of during your absence. It may be that you will not meet again in life.
I am from Belize and learning to read in English, tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "Information on polish airports and domestic and international flights."
With respect
Reply to this
The only rule in art is what works.
Reply to this
Looking is a gift, but seeing is a power.
Reply to this