LVCSD Board of Education Antenna Inquiry
It’s been brought to my attention that the LVCSD Board of Education has opened a dialogue with the Village Gov’t, expressing concerns about the safety of the Cell Towers being so close to BP. The Village has responded that there is little community opposition to this situation, merely a dozen or so people who are worried about it. That is patently untrue, as evidenced by the large attendance at last winter’s meetings about the NCPD proposal. In addition to the many people who attended and spoke at those meetings, I gathered upwards of 200 signatures on a petition, all asking the village to move the cell towers away from the children of our community. Mayor Siegel subsequently dismissed the impact of all those signatures by claiming that five people called her and told her they felt co-erced or forced to sign. If that is indeed true, that does not negate the many others who signed.
The Board would like to hear from the community, to see how people really feel about this. Please go to this page of the LVCSD website http://www.lvcsd.k12.ny.us/page.cfm?p=22
Click on the link on the bottom to email the school board. E-mails are printed and distributed to each board member. This is a very easy way for people to make their voices heard on this situation. The direct email for the board is: board@lvcsd.k12.ny.us
Thank you,
Edie Dickman
Categories: Microwave Satellite Receivers and Sticks aka -Antennas
Dear Bayville Citizens: There has been a lot of talk about the cell towers, unfortunately because the Mayor is in favor of them she will deny the public out pour and disapproval. It will not be advertised because she has no fault with it. Our concern is our children and these meetings should be advertised people need to know, and be informed, LVCSD should be very concerned because there are children leaving our district because of these towers and going to private schools, with the taxes we pay we should be able to stay at our schools and not have to worry. The next meeting for the cell towers is on April 14th at the Locust Valley Library at 7:30. Tell your friends and neighbors, this effects all Bayville residents. I am sure that if Mr. Harrison who left the land to our town would find the tower very offensive to this beautiful town. Let's respect his wishes he was kind enough to respect the future of Bayville.
Sincerely,
A very Concerned Citizen
Reply to this
It is my understanding that the LVCSD Board of Education wrote Mayor Siegel a letter and misrepresented receiving a letter from Senator Carl Marcellino. Senator Marcellino was contacted by Mayor Siegel and she was told that he had written no such letter to the Board of Education, that to the best of his recollection he had met with several members of BRACT and indicated to them that he would be introducing legislation which would restrict the placement of cell antennae IN THE FUTURE outside of a specified distance from schools. Such legislation, if approved, WOULD NOT BE RETROACTIVE. The letter from Sen. Marcellino to the BRACT members was presented to the LVCSD Board at a public meeting, but was never sent directly to the Board by the Senator. This is a gross misrepresentation by not only the Board of Education but the members of BRACT.
I think it is disgraceful that the LVCSD Board has taken sides and allowed itself to become involved in a political firestorm based on the public say-so of a handful of Bayville residents. The antennas have been on the water tower since 1992 and NOT ONCE has an LVCSD Board member stated a position regarding the controversy. Now the Board wants to hear about how people feel? I think not. I see nothing on the LVCSD website requesting input from residents on the cell tower issue.
Perhaps Dr. Chu thought his "effort" would win him votes next month when he runs for re-election. Public school education should be apolitical. I hope voters will consider LVCSD's duplicitous attempt at manipulating Village politics when they go to the polls on May 20th.
Reply to this
I believe the information and feedback that the board received regarding the amount of resident that opposed the antennas on the water tower is incorrect. I question where the board got this information. The meeting that was held at the Bayville Inter. School was packed. There was many residents in attedence, they asked many questions regarding the safeness of the existing and future antennas. The Village mayor and Trustees had approved the installation of the new NCPD dish, I believe the vote was something like 4 for and 3 no's. The school board and its members had plenty of opportunity to step in and attend the meetings. The lack of knowledge of such meetings is not an excuse due to the fact that the meetings were at the school. I personally know 7 families that are pulling their children out of LVSCD and sending their children to private schools, solely because of the antennas. The health factors are not completely known, the existences of cell towers have not been thoroughly research. Depending on what expert you read, the studies are insufficient. The school boards need to mediate discussion with the village and collect information related to all the risks. The school board and its members own it to the children that attend their schools, and to the many great staff members that tend to our children. When issues such as the antennas come to a head, the residences get exhausted battling the village. The honesty of all parties involved (private or public) need to be truthful. Also as a resident it is a responsibility to gather the facts and and report the findings. If the school board feels obligated now to tackle this issues, then the residents should support the the board.
Reply to this
Mr. Trama,
You're kidding, right? Residents should "support" the Board's misrepresentation of facts? The Board all of a sudden feels "obligated", a month before the budget vote? How convenient. Funny, the Board didn't feel "obligated" to investigate the issue when its input might have been valuable or made a difference one way or the other. The Board didn't issue a statement on the matter when the hearings were being conducted. But now, AFTER all of the hearings have been held, the Board is suddenly "obligated"? Why is that? Is it because, according to you, 7 families are putting their kids in private schools because of the antenna? With all due respect, that is the most ridiculous argument I have ever heard. Are those same 7 families bringing their microwaves to the dump? Getting rid of their cell phones? Disconnecting their computers? Have they "surveyed" the cell sites surrounding private schools?
BRACT lost the lawsuit. The school district has no standing when it comes to this matter. It's over folks. Find a new war to wage.
Reply to this
Where was the BoE last year and earlier this year to express their concerns over the cell tower. Guess they were not too concerned then. As far as the petition with over 200 signatures, the BoE dismissed a petition of over 300 signatures two years ago to add another 4th grade section in Bayville. The only thing the current BoE is interested in, is spending our hard earned tax dollars on programs that are not working for the students. NCPD wanted the tower, and we have a BoE member who works for them. Maybe that is the reason for the Board's late concern.
Reply to this
I checked the Court's website for the case Perrin v. Bayville, Nassau County Supreme Court Index Number 9468/07, which I believe is the "cell phone tower" case at issue here. It appears that the motions made by both sides in the case are still pending and have not been decided. So the case has not yet concluded. We will have to follow up for a decision, and that may take some time, because some of the motions have been put over until May, 2008 to be heard and hopefully decided.
I do not know if this link will work, but this is where I found the information as to the status of the case:
http://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/webcivil/FCASSearch
If not, you can go to:
http://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/webcivil/ecourtsMain
Select "webcivil Supreme" and then enter Index Number 9468/2007 for Nassau County to follow for when the motions are decided by the assigned trial court Justice.
Reply to this
To Kathleen Fioretti -
Perhaps you might want to e-mail the forum Administrator and request that they delete your post, as the following appears on the first link you shared:
"This site may not be directly linked to by any website without the express written permission of UCS."
Unless of course, you obtained express written permission, in which case, never mind.
Reply to this
Kathleen poses no issue stating her factual response to a very heated set of concerns. The disclaimer you refer to is associated with the direct use of this governmenet site directly on another website. Providing a reference to where helpful information can be found is helpful whereas you obviously have another aganda here Ms. McLoughlin.
I am curious about two things.
1. Do you have young children?
2. If you do, do they attend the school in quesiton where this proposed tower is to be erected?
Reply to this
Regardless of where the lawsuit is in the stages of the "fight", it is a matter of principal to be heard. I agree, the board is a day late and a dollar short, but the fact is that a lot of people cared back when this was going on and those people need ot voice their concerns again to the board. It is a matter of principal...I do not want to hear their excuse, well no one cared! We did care and still do, just a little beaten down, but get those emails and letters to hte board and tell your friends!!!
Lisa, your issues with the board are so deep, butout of this one, let the people be heard.
Reply to this
BPR,
You are correct, my issues with the Board do run deep. But why waste your time and energy on an issue that has been legally decided? Hearings were held, and you expressed your opinions. Fighting for what you believe in is admirable. However, with all legal venues exhausted and decisions rendered, I think it is time for BRACT to graciously accept defeat. Spending your time writing e-mails and letters to the Board at this point in time, is an exercise in futility.
Only because you used the phrase "a matter of principal" twice, do I feel the need to point out to you something that I learned back in the Jurrasic age when I attended school. The Principal is your "pal". "A matter of principle", concerns certain doctrines or tenets.
I have no power to stop anyone from writing e-mails and letters. I am a firm believer that the pen is mightier than the sword. I just happen to believe that your energy would be more wisely spent helping to improve educational opportunities for students WITHIN our school walls, instead of focusing on the cell tower across the street.
Reply to this
While all "opinions" are welcome, I just want all readers to know that there have not been any decisions rendered by the Court re: the BRACT lawsuit. All legal venues have not been exhausted by any means.
And as for BRACT to "graciously accept defeat", I, along with many other parents, will never do so when it concerns the health of my children or any other children for that matter.
Reply to this
Thanks Lisa. I fixed Kathleens post and removed the direct links. If anyone wants to use them, just copy and paste into you browser.
Reply to this
Jeff,
You're welcome. You are doing a wonderful job with this blog and I wouldn't want to see you to get in trouble.
Reply to this
Thank you Lisa and Jeff. I apologize for posting the direct link.
Reply to this
Thank you to the Board of Education for sending the letter to Mayor Siegel. They never declared, nor did BRACT, that Senator Marcellino wrote to them directly. This letter was addressed to myself and submitted to the Board as such. The Senator told me, in his letter, that he was going to introduce legislation to regulate the distance a cell tower could be placed next to a school. I believe he did this because he was quite stunned when we met with him, and then when he took a ride out to view our cell tower.
We are very concerned for the health and welfare of our residents, particularly our children, who are being exposed to low levels of radiation for six to eight hours per day. Please don't just take our word for it, view the Cindy Sage interview summarizing the bioinitiative reports posted right on our blog--or come to the next meeting of BRACT on Monday, April 14, 2008 at the Locust Valley Library Community Room at 7:30 pm. Come to see why this situation cannot be allowed to continue. Most sincerely, Jo-Tina DiGennaro
Reply to this
Ms. Perrin and Ms. DiGennaro,
I suggest that you speak with your attorney to update yourselves on your own lawsuit. Your "cause of action" to have the cell antennaes removed has been DISMISSED. The Judge has now kicked the NYPD antenna component over to the County, a suit in which the Village need not be involved with.
Regarding the letter the LVCSD Board of Education wrote to Mayor Siegel, dated February 15, 2005 which I just FOILed a copy of:
"Dear Mayor Siegel:
During a recent public meeting of the Locust Valley Central School District, the Board of Education received a letter from Senator Carl Marcellino representing that he intends to introduce legislation limiting the proximity of cell phone antennae to school buildings.
Given this recent development I am writing on behalf of the Board of Education to respectfully request that the Village of Bayville consider, if feasible, relocating the antennas presently located across from the Bayville school buildings.
Sincerely,
Dr. Yao Chu
President
Board of Education"
One thing that really gets my craw is the complete lack of integrity and honesty on the part of BRACT and the LVCSD Board of Education. --"They never declared, nor did BRACT, that Senator Marcellino wrote to them directly. " ~Jo-Tina Oh really? That's not what the letter, reprinted verbatim above, states.
P.S. Did you ladies don your biohazard suits before you put up your posts?
Reply to this
Typo - February 15, 2008
Reply to this
Hi Lisa - I am interested in obtaining a copy of the Order/decision rendered in the case and as I noted above, what I thought was the subject case filed in Supreme/Nassau under Index Number 9468/07 was not yet decided and is marked active in the Court system. Can you provide the actual case caption, index number and date for the order/decision to which you are referring to so that I can obtain a copy from the clerk's office?
Thanks in advance, Kathleen Fioretti
Reply to this
Wow Lisa, Why are you attacking BRACT when the letter you quoted was written by Dr. Chu? Perhaps he would have been more correct had he penned "written by" rather than "from" Senator Carl Marcellino. Despite that minor error, the letters intent is clear and it certainly is NOT a "gross" misrepresentation by either the school district or BRACT. Judging by your sarcastic writing (despite the smiley faces) you are a nasty petty person.
Reply to this
I have no idea who you are, but it is very easy and cowardly to name call behind an anonymous moniker. BRACT wasted Village taxdollars by forcing the Village to defend itself in their frivolous lawsuit. BRACT members begged the Board of Ed to get involved, (as someone pointed out quite nicely, a day late and a dollar short) on their behalf. The Board then misrepresented its request to the Village as being based on a letter the Board received from Senator Marcellino. Ms. DiGennaro stated the letter was handed into the Board by her. Why didn't the Board include a copy of the Senator's letter to the Village? Could it be because it was addressed to BRACT or Ms. DiGennaro personally?
Misrepresentations and outright lies are no way to run a school district. These are petty, nasty, bad, politics on the part of the LVCSD Board and BRACT. Hate me if you want to, it makes no never mind to me, I'm just telling it like it is.
Reply to this
The first thing that jumps out at me looking at this is be careful what you ask for. The cellphone towers are on the water tower because its the highest point in the village. Remove them and you will probably end up with many more towers at lower levels around Bayville.
Of course you could turn your phones off to reduce the demand for cell towers. Of course you shouldn't have them as they themselves are mini 'cell towers' located just feet from your children. (not to mention all the other electronic equipment you place around your kids as mentioned above.) Don't forget to turn off your home's WiFi as well
Reply to this
Let me add one more thing.......... I was aware of this entire issue well over a month ago. I did not post anything on the Internet about it or write a Letter to the Leader, as I felt that Mayor Siegel's letter in response (which was never even acknowledged by the BoE, btw) succinctly put the BoE in its place. However, now that Ms. Dickman decided to make this a blog issue, I feel the FACTS need to be made public.
Reply to this
Kathleen Fioretti -
I didn't mean to ignore your request, but I don't have that information on hand. If you call James Reilly, the Village's attorney, I'm sure he can provide you with what you seek.
Reply to this
My suggestion would be to remove the current cell antennae and only place the antennae for the police department on the tower.
Reply to this
Cellular Phone Towers
What Are Cellular Phone Towers?
The widespread use of cellular phones has led to the placement of cellular phone towers in many communities. These towers, also called "base stations," consist of radios, computerized switching equipment, and antennas that receive and transmit radiofrequency (RF) signals.
When a person makes a cellular phone call, a signal is sent from the phone’s antenna to the base station antenna. The base station responds to this signal by assigning it an available radiofrequency channel. Transmission and reception of these radio signals transfer the voice information to the base station. Next, the voice signals are sent to a switching center, which transfers the call to its destination. For additional information on the phones themselves, please see the American Cancer Society document, "Cellular Phones."
Cellular phone towers are usually mounted either on top or on the side of existing structures, such as trees, water tanks, or tall buildings. The antennas need to be located high enough so they can adequately cover the area. Base stations usually range in height from 150-270 feet.
Cellular phones operate at the radiofrequency (RF) part of the electromagnetic spectrum. This is non-ionizing radiation. Other examples of the non-ionizing part of the electromagnetic spectrum include AM and FM radio waves, microwaves, and infrared waves from heat lamps. Unlike x-rays and gamma rays (which are examples of ionizing radiation), radio waves have too little energy to break the bonds that hold molecules (such as DNA) in cells together. Similarly, since RF of this frequency contains relatively low energy, it does not enter tissues. At very high levels of exposure, RF can cause warming of tissues, much as a heat lamp does. The wavelength of cell phone waves is about one foot and the frequency is approximately 800 to 900 MHz, although newer models may use higher frequencies up to 2,200 MHz.
How Are People Exposed to Radiofrequency Energy From Cellular Phone Towers?
As people use cellular phones to make phone calls, signals are transmitted back and forth to the base station. The radio waves produced at the base station are emitted into the environment, where people can be exposed.
The energy from a cellular phone antenna, like that of other telecommunication antennas, is directed toward the horizon (parallel to the ground), with some downward scatter. Base station antennas use higher power levels than other types of land-mobile antennas, but much lower levels than radio and television broadcast stations. The power density decreases with increasing distance from the antenna. As a result, the level of exposure to radio waves at ground level is very low compared to the level close to the antenna.
Public exposure to radio waves from cellular phone antennas is slight for several reasons.
Reply to this
Agencies such as the National Council on Radiation Protections and Measurements, the International Radiation Protection Association, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, and the American National Standards Institute, have established guidelines for exposure to RF radiation originating from cellular communications base stations. These guidelines were designed to protect workers, as well as the public, from potentially harmful radio frequency. The recommended exposure limits are in the range of .41-.45 milliwatts per square centimeter (mW/cm2) for cellular radiofrequencies.
Exposures that exceed these recommended standards can sometimes be encountered on the rooftops of buildings where base stations are mounted. If this is the case, access to these areas should be limited. The power density inside buildings where a base station is mounted is typically 10 to 100 times lower than the level outside depending on the construction materials of the building. Wood or cement block reduces the exposure level of RF radiation by a factor of about ten. The power density behind an antenna is hundreds to thousands of times lower than in front. Therefore, if an antenna is mounted on the side of a building, the exposure level in the room directly behind the wall is typically well below the recommended exposure limits.
Do Cellular Phone Towers Cause Cancer?
Humans generate electromagnetic fields internally as well as externally. The simple collision between 2 molecules is an electrical event. Since there is electrical activity inside the human body, the question arises as to whether radio waves emitted by cellular phone towers can influence cell function, and in particular whether they can cause cancer.
However, several theoretical considerations suggest that cellular phone towers are unlikely to cause cancer.
First, the energy level of radio waves is relatively low. Electromagnetic energy comes in "packages" that are referred to as photons. Photon energy is measured in electron volts (eV), the energy gained by an electron after accelerating over 1 volt. The energy in the photons depends directly on the frequency, and decreases as one moves down the electromagnetic spectrum. X-rays have about 1,000 eV of energy, while the photon energy of radio waves from cellular phone towers is about one millionth of an eV, not enough to alter molecules in the body.
A second issue has to do with wavelength. Radio waves have a wavelength of approximately 1 foot in air, and about 2 inches in body tissue. As a result, RF radiation can only be concentrated to about an inch or two in size. This makes it unlikely that the energy from radio waves could be concentrated on a small bit of tissue, affecting individual cells.
A third issue has to do with the magnitude of exposure. Measurements taken around typical cellular phone towers show ground level power densities well below the recommended limits.
Reply to this
For these reasons, cell phone antennas or towers are unlikely to cause cancer.
What Does the Epidemiologic Evidence Say?
No human studies have focused specifically on cellular phone towers or even on radio waves more generally. Several studies have looked at the effects of radio waves and microwaves combined; these have generally not shown any increase in cancer, except for a US Air Force study that suggested an increase in brain tumors in association with radiofrequency/microwave exposure.
What Does the Animal Evidence Say?
A number of animal studies have been conducted, generally showing no carcinogenic (cancer-causing) effect of radio waves. Several experiments have used exposure levels that cause a rise in tissue temperature, and even in these studies, there was no increase in DNA mutations or in cancer. A recent review concluded that: "The scientific evidence indicates that exposure to radiofrequency radiation fields is not mutagenic and is therefore unlikely to act as an initiator of carcinogenesis.”
What Do the Expert Agencies Say?
The expert agencies that usually provide findings on carcinogenicity (whether something can cause cancer) – the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the National Toxicology Program (NTP), and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) – have not issued findings on cellular phone towers.
The World Health Organization stated in 1993 that "the epidemiologic and comparative clinical studies do not provide clear evidence of detrimental health effects in humans from exposure to RF fields. Occupational exposure to RF will be at higher levels than that encountered by the general population, and, thus, there is less likelihood of health effects in the general population as a whole.”
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) offers the following information to individuals concerned about the safety of cellular phone towers (also known as wireless telephone base stations):
The electromagnetic RF signals transmitted from base station antennas stations travel toward the horizon in relatively narrow paths. For example, the radiation pattern for an antenna array mounted on a tower can be likened to a thin pancake centered around the antenna system. The individual pattern for a single array of sector antennas is wedge-shaped, like a piece of pie. As with all forms of electromagnetic energy, the power decreases rapidly as one moves away from the antenna. Therefore, RF exposure on the ground is much less than exposure very close to the antenna and in the path of the transmitted radio signal. In fact, ground-level exposure from such antennas is typically thousands of times less than the exposure levels recommended as safe by expert organizations. So exposure to nearby residents would be well within safety margins.
Reply to this
Cellular and PCS (Personal Communications Service) base stations in the United States are required to comply with limits for exposure recommended by expert organizations and endorsed by government agencies responsible for health and safety. Measurements made near cellular and PCS base station antennas mounted on towers have confirmed that ground-level exposures are typically thousands of times less than the exposure limits adopted by the FCC (Federal Communications Commission). In fact, in order to be exposed to levels at or near the FCC limits for cellular or PCS frequencies an individual would essentially have to remain in the main transmitted radio signal (at the height of the antenna) and within a few feet from the antenna. This is, of course, very unlikely to occur.
When cellular and PCS antennas are mounted on rooftops, RF levels on that roof or on others near by would probably be greater than those typically encountered on the ground. However, exposure levels approaching or exceeding safety guidelines should be encountered only very close to or directly in front of the antennas. In addition, for sector-type antennas, typically used for such rooftop base stations, RF levels to the side and in back of these antennas are insignificant. General guidelines on antenna installations and circumstances that might give rise to a concern about a facility's conformance with FCC regulations can be found in A Local Government Official's Guide to Transmitting Antenna RF Emission Safety: Rules, Procedures, and Practical Guidance. This Guide can be accessed on the Internet at: www.fcc.gov/oet/rfsafety.
Do Cellular Phone Towers Cause Any Other Health Problems?
While high levels of radiofrequency waves can cause a warming of tissues, cellular phone towers do not yield exposure at levels sufficient to cause this effect. There is no evidence in published scientific reports that cell phone towers cause any other health problems.
What Do I Do If I’ve Been Exposed to Cellular Phone Towers?
As noted above, cell phone towers pose little risk under ordinary conditions. There is no test to measure whether you have been exposed to RF radiation from cellular phone towers. However, if there is a cellular phone tower mounted near your home or office, you can ask a government agency or private firm to measure the radiofrequency field strength near the tower to ensure that it is within the acceptable range. If you have additional health concerns, please consult your doctor.
The Bottom Line...
Cellular phone towers, like cellular phones themselves, are a relatively new technology, and we do not yet have full information on health effects. In particular, not enough time has elapsed to permit epidemiologic studies. There are some theoretical reasons why cellular phone towers would not be expected to increase cancer risk, and animal studies of RF have not suggested a risk of cancer.
Reply to this
People who are concerned can ask for measurements of RF near cellular phone towers to be sure exposures do not exceed recommended limits.
Additional Resources
National Organizations and Web Sites
The following organizations can provide additional information and resources.*
Federal Communications Commission
RF Safety Program, Office of Engineering and Technology, 2006
Internet Address: www.fcc.gov/oet/rfsafety/
Food and Drug Administration
Cell Phone Facts: Consumer Information on Wireless Phones, 2005
Internet Address: www.fda.gov/cellphones/
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
Internet Address: www.niehs.nih.gov/external/faq/cellular.htm
World Health Organization
Electromagnetic fields and public health: extremely low frequency fields and cancer. 2001.
Internet Address: www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs263/en/
* Inclusion on this list does not imply endorsement by the American Cancer Society
References
ANSI-C95.1, 1982, American National Standards Institute. American national standard safety levels with respect to human exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, 300 kHz to 100 Ghz. New York: IEEE.
Food and Drug Administration: Cellular phone facts. Consumer information on wireless phones; 2003. Available at www.fda.gov/cellphones/qa.html#36. Accessed September 2003.
IEEE-C95.1, 1991, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. Safety levels with respect to human exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields, 3 kHz to 300 Ghz. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
IEEE: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. Human exposure to RF emissions from cellular radio base station antennas; Washington, DC: 1992.
ICNIRP: International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection. Health Issues related to the use of hand-held radiotelephones and base transmitters. Health Physics 1996;70:587-593.
IRPA, 1988, International Radiation Protection Association. Guidelines on limits of exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields. IEEE United States Activities, COMAR, Washington, DC.
NCRP, 1986, National Council on Radiation Protection. Biological effects and exposure criteria for radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. Report 86, (Bethesda, MD: National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements) pp. 1-382.
OET: Office of Engineering and Technology, Bulletin Number 56 (Third Edition January 1989). Questions and Answers About the Biological Effects and Potential Hazards of Radiofrequency Radiation. http://www.fcc.gov/oet/info/documents/bulletins/Welcome.html
Petersen RC and Testagrossa PA. Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields Associated with Cellular-Radio Cell-Site Antennas. Bioelectromagnetics 1992;13:527-542.
Rothman KJ, Chung-Kwang C, Morgan R, et al. Assessment of Cellular Telephone and Other Radio Frequency Exposure for Epidemiologic Research. Epidemiology 1996;7:291-298.
Reply to this
Valberg PA. Radio frequency radiation (RFR): the nature of exposure and carcinogenic potential. Cancer Causes and Control 1997;8:323-332.
World Health Organization (WHO). Environmental Health Criteria 137: Electromagnetic Fields (300Hz to 300 GHz). Geneva, Switzerland: WHO, 1993:1-290. A fact sheet based on this volume can be found at http://www.who.int/inf-fs/en/fact183.html.
Revised: 01/31/2006
PTS RETRIEVED THE POSTS FROM THE AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY
Reply to this
Reply to Lisa: I have seen your posts here and there but have no idea who you are either. It would make no difference if you had used an alias. I am simply stating the facts as I see them about your aggressive posting style. Your anger seems misdirected at BRACT when it seems that Dr Chu's letter is what gets your goat. Have you followed up with him or are you just posting to attack good people who, as U.S. residents, have every right to partake of our legal system? (which BTW the village also uses to its advantage)
Reply to this
Bayville Resident,
Please go back and re-read my first post to this thread. Certainly BRACT has the "right" to petition or address the BoE with their concerns. Nowhere have I ever objected to an individual's or group's right to publicly protest policy or law which they feel is unjust. My objections lie with the BoE sending a letter to the Village of Bayville which deliberately misrepresents receiving correspondence from Senator Marcellino, when the truth is that the Board sent the letter, based on the pleas of three people who handed into the Board a letter they received from the Senator. The intent of the Board to interfere in Village politics on behalf of a litigious fringe group without any public discussion, is unconscionable. This issue should have been listed as an agenda item at the next BoE meeting, allowing for input from ALL LVCSD residents on the matter. Roberts Rules of Order no longer seem to apply to LVCSD Board meetings.
It's funny how you consider my response to this thread an "attack". I consider BRACTS' lawsuit against my Village officials an attack. As I said earlier, I was well aware of the Board's letter over a month ago and said nothing. But because Ms. Dickman decided to make this a blog "hot topic" a month and a half before the district budget vote and election, I have just as much right to post my opinion as she does hers. Or do you disagree?
Reply to this
Lisa, please be assured there is no sinister connection on my part between the budget vote/election and bringing this up here on the blog.
Also, I would like it put on the record in this thread that Mayor Siegel invited people to sue the village to overturn the cell towers placement on the water tower. When asked in a public meeting what the people's recourse was, she said 'Take us to court'. BRACT (of which I am not a part in any way shape or form) simply took her up on her offer.
Reply to this
Edie,
Sinister? Oh, my, where did I say sinister? I merely found the timing rather, er, uh, coincidental. Yeah. That's it. That's the right word. Coincidental!
Reply to this
Dear PTS Thank you for all of your information and research. The problem is that is has nothing to do with our situation in Bayville. All of the research that was used to set the safety standards of EMR was done by engineers and physicists. The research involved high intensity radiation for short term exposure. We all know that high levels of radiation burn tissue. The children in Bayville face low levels of radiation for a long term exposure ( 6-8 HOURS per day). The research performed by biologists, epidemiologists, and scientists shows detrimental health effects to humans (especially children) at levels far below the present accepted levels of safety. A good summary of this research can be found on this Bayville Blog in an interview by Cindy Sage (environmental consultant from California) entitled The Bioinitiative Report A Rationale for a Biologically-based Public Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Fields (ELF and RF). I encourage everyone in Bayville to view this educational interview. Most sincerely, Jo-Tina DiGennaro
Reply to this
does this have to do with low levels of radiation for long periods of time?
In fact, due to their lower frequency, at similar RF exposure levels, the body absorbs up to five times more of the signal from FM radio and television than from base stations. This is because the frequencies used in FM radio (around 100 MHz) and in TV broadcasting (around 300 to 400 MHz) are lower than those employed in mobile telephony (900 MHz and 1800 MHz) and because a person's height makes the body an efficient receiving antenna. Further, radio and television broadcast stations have been in operation for the past 50 or more years without any adverse health consequence being established.
Scientific evidence on the distribution of cancer in the population can be obtained through carefully planned and executed epidemiological studies. Over the past 15 years, studies examining a potential relationship between RF transmitters and cancer have been published. These studies have not provided evidence that RF exposure from the transmitters increases the risk of cancer. Likewise, long-term animal studies have not established an increased risk of cancer from exposure to RF fields, even at levels that are much higher than produced by base stations and wireless networks.
feel free to read the entire WHO fact sheet 304 may 2006 here http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs304/en/index.html
according to the Biological standards for wireless, the cindy sage video, her group believed 1 microwatt/cm2 was a safe standard for chronic exposure (a year or more constant) in 2000 (outside the school less than that). now 2007 she claims her personal safety level would be 1 nanowatt/cm2 (1000 times less than 1 microwatt/cm2) for chronic exposure (a year or more constant).
is this even possible? anywhere?
the lowest government standards in the world are based on the precautionary principle which allows placement near hospitals, schools, and residential areas with a max of 10 microwatts/cm2.
i understand everyone wants the safest environment for their children. we all do.
the levels inside the classrooms (our children's situation) are comparable to our own homes and are much lower than outside the school according to the cotton report. the children spend the majority of the 6 to 8 hours a day in a classroom. very little time is spent outside where these levels still meet the worlds strictest precautionary standards under 10 microwatts/cm2. again, outside is even less than cindy sages group standard set in 2000 for chronic exposure (a year or more constant) of 1 microwatt/cm2.
with much respect, PTS, others and i are looking at our specific situation in bayville.
Reply to this
As I stated before, the safest standards in the world have nothing to do with our situation because the basis of the research setting the standard is flawed. Look elsewhere in Bayville--or better yet for all of our health and safety, let's eliminate a cell tower in such a small Village. How can we not protect our children and ourselves? Jo-Tina DiGennaro
Reply to this
how can we not protect our children and ourselves? look elsewhere? other than the highest structure on the highest point in bayville?
if BRACT never accepted the 1 microwatt/cm2 for chronic exposure than why present us with studies and teachings of cindy sage and co?
i understand a group not believing in current worldwide standards. but wouldn't this group have standards set that they felt were safe? not just the antenna are too close to the school. wouldn't this group then attempt to find a way to create that safe environment that fit their own standards? it sounds possible that BRACT standards actually may be impossible to meet. this 1 nanowatt/cm2 for chronic exposure is exceeded everywhere in bayville according to the cotton report. even exceeded in mill neck over a mile away from our antenna.
personally i was relieved to read the RF was under 1 microwatt/cm2 in the cotton report. as i stated before until a better location is found i feel our residents and children are safe with the current exposure levels. especially since those antenna are on the highest structure on the highest point in bayville. because of our geographical layout, we the residents in bayville, have very limited options on where to place these antenna.
Reply to this
http://www.theleaderonline.com/2008/LVCSD%20Jumps%20into%20Bayville%20Tower%20Debate.htm
Reply to this
i as well want a safe environment for our children and knowing the potential hazards that may be around our children is very unsettling
your efforts to maintaining a healthy environment is appreciated
my posts were retrieved from the American Cancer Society which had multiple references
this is from WHO
Do ELF fields cause cancer?
ELF fields are known to interact with tissues by inducing electric fields and currents in them. This is the only established mechanism of action of these fields. However, the electric currents induced by ELF fields commonly found in our environment are normally much lower than the strongest electric currents naturally occurring in the body such as those that control the beating of the heart.
Since 1979 when epidemiological studies first raised a concern about exposures to power line frequency magnetic fields and childhood cancer, a large number of studies have been conducted to determine if measured ELF exposure can influence cancer development, especially leukaemia in children.
There is no consistent evidence that exposure to ELF fields experienced in our living environment causes direct damage to biological molecules, including DNA. Since it seems unlikely that ELF fields could initiate cancer, a large number of investigations have been conducted to determine if ELF exposure can influence cancer promotion or co-promotion. Results from animal studies conducted so far suggest that ELF fields do not initiate or promote cancer.
However, two recent pooled analyses of epidemiological studies provide insight into the epidemiological evidence that played a pivotal role in the IARC evaluation. These studies suggest that, in a population exposed to average magnetic fields in excess of 0.3 to 0.4 μT, twice as many children might develop leukaemia compared to a population with lower exposures. In spite of the large number data base, some uncertainty remains as to whether magnetic field exposure or some other factor(s) might have accounted for the increased leukaemia incidence.
Childhood leukaemia is a rare disease with 4 out of 100,000 children between the age of 0 to 14 diagnosed every year. Also average magnetic field exposures above 0.3 or 0.4 μT in residences are rare. It can be estimated from the epidemiological study results that less than 1% of populations using 240 volt power supplies are exposed to these levels, although this may be higher in countries using 120 volt supplies.
The IARC review addresses the issue of whether it is feasible that ELF-EMF pose a cancer risk. The next step in the process is to estimate the likelihood of cancers in the general population from the usual exposures and to evaluate evidence for other (non-cancer) diseases. This part of the risk assessment should be finished
Reply to this
while i agree that cell towers may have a contributing factor in childhood ca...i am not sure that it is the definitive answer
Reply to this
Dear Lisa,
Your issues with the BEO and the IB program are a dead issue, as you said "Find a new war to wage" As far as the cell towers there are a lot more then 7 families leaving the district, if my youngest daughter wasn't in 5th grade I would be putting her in private school asap, so let it go!!! Lisa you really need to respect other people's issues if people feel the need to protect our children from something that really isn't proven and can maybe save a child's life then I for one will do anything to protect my children, We don't have all the facts, but I would hate to hear 5 maybe 10 years down the road that it could have been avoided because the cell towers turned out to be bad for us, then I will support BRACT, what do you care what we want to do if we feel it's harmful and bad then let us continue to get rid of them, your children are out of school and in college what do you care? My concern is the amount of people in this town with health concerns, there are and awful lot of cases of cancer around here, is it from the cell towers, I don't have all the facts yet but if 10 years from now and all the studies are complete and they say it's from the cells and I could have changed it I would be pretty upset with myself for NOT trying to get rid of them. The facts are we don't know if you can get cancer from cell towers but wouldn't it be better to avoid them? I think you should stop trying to be so negative about the towers and let us be. People let you rant about the IB program now let us be.
Sincerely,
A Concerned Citizen
Reply to this
Dear Concerned Citizen,
Please feel free to post as much as you like about your fears and health concerns. I enjoy the reading. You ask, why do I care? For starters, my home is my primary investment. I happen to live less than a block away from the water tower. My children both attended the Bayville elementary school. If I were to believe the dangers you want me to believe are real, it could have tremendous impact on both my family's health and my home's property value. Your actions also impact me as you are allowing your unfounded and unqualified fears to attempt to interfere with the placement of emergency response equipment and deprive the rest of the community of the limited cell phone service we currently have. I'm sorry if my opinion on this issue is not to your liking.
If you believe so strongly in your cause, then defend it with logic, research and facts, not fearful projections and "what ifs".
I am a staunch supporter of the First Amendment. I'm sorry if you don't feel the same way. My issues with IB is far from a dead issue. LVCSD has no contract with IBO and the program can be suspended at any time. The decision lies entirely in the hands of the BoE and with a new Superintendent joining the district on July 1, it is my hope that IB's sunset is on the horizon. Please feel free to contact me regarding any concerns you may have on the IB issue.
Reply to this
Dear Lisa,
Being from a family of many NYC Firefighters and a big supporter of the local Fire Department and Police Dept. I am not against first response, or depriving the community of cell service, I am concerned about the long term effects on our towns health. I find it very alarming that you seem to so frivolously disregard other peoples feelings. All I was saying in my last comment to you was, to please have respect for others peoples feelings. My so called fears are concerns for my family, and until you are approached with any health concerns which I hope you are not, you too will look around your environment to see what could have caused it. I think cell phones have taken over peoples lives and people need to have cell phone etiquette, it has gotten out of control. Not only do we not know the long term effects of the cell towers, but there is evidence of the actually cell phone causing long term effects on people. For emergency purposes I don't have a problem with them, Do I really care if all the people in town have cell phones so they can chat with friends at the supermarket on line, or at the deli and ignoring the people that are waiting on them trying to do their jobs or driving their children to school, No I do not have the tolerance for rude inconsiderate people, BUT do I have the utmost respect for the Police and Fire Department, yes I do ,and I think they should have cell rights and first response services. Does it have to be within 500 feet of a school NO. Find another home for it. All I am saying to you is I care about the cell towers as much as you care about the IB program. Let's let it be at that. I respect your caring about the IB program now respect my caring about the towers.
Sincerely,
Concerned Citizen
Reply to this
Dear concerned citizen,
Believe it or not, I agree with you on many of the points you have made about the frivolous use of cell phones. People call it progress. To me, they seem like adult pacifiers. How did we ever grow up without them?
You say you are "alarmed" at what you perceive to be my "frivolous diregard for other people's feelings". It is certainly not my intention to disrespect your feelings on an issue by expressing my own. Have you ever stopped to consider for a moment, how your feelings may disrespect my rights as a Bayville resident?
You may fear long term radiation effects on children. We all have our fears. I happen to be extremely afraid of heights. My own father died of leukemia, but I don't blame it on the cell tower. I personally have a greater fear of some sort of emergency (flood, biowarfare, etc.) occuring and our first responders not being able to communicate with each other and perhaps SAVE the children in those buildings at the time of occurance. You suggest "relocation". If these antennas are as dangerous as you believe them to be, where do you suggest relocating them to?
Again, no disrespect intended, just a fair question.
Reply to this
cindy sage in her video tells that wifi in use by 20 to 30 students for an hour is equivalent to those same students being exposed to 20 minutes on a cell phone. second was your cordless phone is comparable to your cell phone. heard the second before but i never really paid attention. i had already bought headsets for the family phones. i do wish they would use them more often though.
http://www.smarthome.com/971333.html (first one i could find)
this phone working at max output of .2 watts (200 milliwatts) (200,000 microwatts) would be against your head while in use. keep in mind the base has a same max output of .2 watts. surface of a sphere=4*pi*r squared. that means this phone can create 1 microwatt/cm2 of RF a at distance of 4 feet (base has the same potential). if any parent ever lets the child use a headset that would expose the childs head to 4.1 microwatts/cm2 of RF at 2 feet away. plus the phone is probably against the childs body around the waist area. imagine the RF level there. depending on your cell phone the max may be as high as .6 watts (600 milliwatts) (600,000 microwatts). try that in a car as RF bounces back in off the car frame. this can actually increase RF more. ever see 2 parents talking on their phones with the kids in the back seat? 1 cell phone would create RF of 3.1 microwatts/cm2 at 4 feet, 12.4 microwatts/cm2 of RF at 2 feet. cindy is an advocate of headsets you know. maybe we shouldn't let the kids use the phones even with headsets. well, that might be a bit extreme.
if there are any errors in math or theory feel free to correct me.
inside the classroom that was closest to the tower measures .024 microwatts/cm2 (.000000024 watts/cm2). inside a home on cyrus point .059 microwatts/cm2 outside that home .024 microwatts/cm2. that house is almost a half mile away and over a 100 feet lower in elevation.
parents still scared? be sure to cross the street before passing a starbucks. wifi systems are popping up all over, libraries, public forums, even your public and private schools, especially colleges and universities.
again i have no problem with anyone protecting their children. i commend those who are here (blog), were at meetings and are a part of BRACT who care enough to get involved. the fact is bayville residents and children are currently being exposed these same and higher levels elsewhere on a daily basis.
it seems many are ignoring the fact that even though the antenna are at the current distance (within 100 feet) to residents and the primary school property the actual levels of RF are very low.
i also notice cindy sage seems more worried about the electromagnetic fields and their relationship to leukemia.
my intention is not to scare anyone. it seems if people are scared of the levels of RF near the antenna they would be scared to live with their own cell phones, cordless phones and any other wireless technology period.
Reply to this
Reading the blog on the "cell tower", I understand both sides of this issue. My interpretation of this blog, correct me if I'm wrong,is the "BRACT" group sees the need for the "tower", but not the location, near the elementary schools. We can all agree, the "tower" is vital for the Fire and Police Departments. What I have not read, is another suitable location for the "tower". Did the "BRACT" group look into another location for the "tower"? Did this group,sit down with the Mayor, and try to work out a compromise? This seems to be an issue where everyone understands the need, but not in "their backyard". Every year our school taxes go up, in part, because of technology. There are many classrooms equipped with two or three computers,plus the computer labs,containing around 28 computers each, that are on all day. I would think, the children are exposed to more harm just from the confinement of their school building. With this in mind, would "BRACT" want the district to get rid of all "technology"? Heck no. So,my question is - What other location do we have, that would be suitable for the "tower"?
Reply to this
Cathy,
"the "tower" is vital for the Fire and Police Departments"
Just for clarification- The Fire Departments are not part of this implementation. The federal grant that was obtained to fund this was for the Police only (very, very poor planning on behalf of the county in my opinion). Local Fire departments were left out. They have the option to "purchase in" but for most local fire departments in our area this would be a tough nut to crack due to the tremendous expense. This system, in its current state, affords no benefit to the local fire departments other than the ability to contact the police. This system will not improve fireground operations for our volunteers.
Reply to this
Cathy,
At the first meeting that the village held last winter where the NCPD and Motorola Reps were there to talk to residents about their proposal, the NCPD Rep had a large chart with a map of bayville on it. it showed the 'coverage' in Bayville for police radios both before and after the newly proposed system. essentially, bayville's coverage was the same, perhaps a less than 5% increase in coverage after they added their system to our water tower. interestingly enough, those charts were questioned at that meeting and then never seen again. So basically by adding the NCPD proposal to our water tower, we do not increase the ability of the PD to respond in any significant way, but we do increase any danger there may be and we subject our water supply to more incidents of infectin b/c of the construction necessary to install. Jeff has told us it will not increase our FD response unless they "buy in" at great expense. so the net-net is the PD needed bayville to make their system work county wide, NOT to make bayville in and of itself safer. so you're right, i am saying, find another spot, not in my backyard. and i'm not ashamed to say it. we have the burden of all those cell towers on our water system due to the avarice of our local gov't, why add to it?
Reply to this
Edie just to clarify-
"Jeff has told us it will not increase our FD response"
Not reponse and not referring to any one department, but fireground communication itself and the lack interoperabilty of the different agencies.
Reply to this
the NCPD project would add less than 5% of the RF to the highest levels measured near the tower. the signals that support your cell phones would account for the other 95% plus.
oyster bay, glen cove, locust valley, greenvale even jericho right across the street from their own water tower all have cell antenna. what makes anyone think bayville doesn't need the antenna for cell service? don't these same residents use cell phones?
the NCPD project was to fix problems specific to the current NCPD comm system (1982). NCPD asked for the new project to include interoperability. the system interoperability does include 71 separate volunteer fire departments. this will probably cost tax payers at some point when the 71 VFP's are put online and provided with comm systems for the trucks, fire houses, portables etc. i have to imagine it would be nearly impossible to get 71 VFP's on board at any cost. read the article draw your own conclusion.
http://www.nassaucountyny.gov/agencies/countyexecutive/NewsRelease/2005/03-09-2005.html
last time i checked bayville was part of nassau county. the nassau county police are the police that keep watch on our bayville streets. the same nassau county police that originally needed the upgraded system. only makes sense to me to support my local police department. considering my cell phone accounts for 95% of the highest RF.
Reply to this
Just to make it clear>
Jericho Water District has a policy, which they mailed to every JWD customer last Spring, stating the have always upheld a strict policy to keep their towers free from antennaes, cells etc. and will continue to do so.
NPS,You did write it was across the street from a JWD tower, but a tower is not a school filled with children and staff.
Reply to this
the water tower is the highest structure in the jericho area. the rooftops that currently house the antenna nearby are much lower. that logic only makes sense if the RF level on the ground is not the main concern. that was my point. the antenna being across the street facing the tower would actually expose the water to probably more RF if the RF could even penetrate the tower shell. so why keep the tower clear of antenna? i'm still not clear on the strict policy of the jericho water district. i guess it is clear to others?
bayville isn't like jericho. jericho is fairly level and surrounded by land. land like hicksville that has more antenna on more buildings just on the south side of NS PKY. bayville has neither level landscape or land surrounding its borders. the primary school happens to be located near the highest piece of real estate that houses the highest structure. our situation in bayville, "our backyard", is very unique.
i have seen many write that they want a safer bayville for the children. i haven't seen or heard of a plan yet that has a safer location in mind that would meet the needs of all that are concerned with current antenna location.
the only plan i have heard is take it down. pretty careless plan in "our backyard".
Reply to this
How many people are needed to make up the quorum? How many showed up at the last meeting? As near as I can tell there are two sides to this issue - the residents who do not want the cell towers and the others that really don't care. I do not see anyone saying that we NEED them......am I mistaken?
Reply to this
How would we know if we really, really need them? Do we really, really need cell phones? Only the people I see driving around town with there cell phones to there ear can answer that.
Reply to this
VOTE NO ON THE SCHOOL BUDGET
Reply to this
Does LVCSD even have a school budget? I haven't seen a school budget. Has anyone else seen a projected % increase or $$ amount? No?
VOTE NO ON MAY 19TH!
Reply to this
http://www.lvcsd.k12.ny.us/page.cfm?p=657
"while enhancing the educational excellence which earned the district the distinction of being ranked in the top 1% of school districts in the nation. The proposed budget, which will be presented to district voters on May 19th,"
Drop the BS, LVCSD! Are you afraid to mention where you got that ridiculous "top 1%" from? That would be the Newsweek List, no? The same wonderful magazine that brought us such wonderful recent covers as "We Are All Social-sts Now" and "The Decline and Fall of Christian America"......THAT Newsweek? Does anyone in their right mind really give a hooey what Newsweek ranks LVCSD? Are you people so shallow and vapid that you can't see that this district is blatantly trying to hide its budget information?
According to NYS Education Law, Section 4:19 "A public hearing on the proposed budget is no longer optional. School districts must hold a public hearing on the budget at least seven days but not more than 14 days prior to the annual meeting and election." 1608(1)1716(1)1804(4)2022(1)
I see no posting of a public budget hearing on the LVCSD website.
http://www.lvcsd.k12.ny.us/page.cfm?p=593
LVCSD is in violation of NYS Law.
SEND A MESSAGE - ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
VOTE NO ON MAY 19TH!
Reply to this
I take back the part about being in violation of NYS Law - the listing of the hearing is buried in the Board meeting calendar - MAY 6TH is the Public Budget Hearing.
Reply to this
It's there, they buried it under the Board of Ed meeting calendar. It is not listed on the school calendar or under budget information, though.
tsk, tsk
Reply to this
Ohhh, I get it now. LVCSD is ranked in the TOP 1% for taxes and SPENDING of all school districts in the country! That makes more sense.
Let's see, a 3% increase would bring the budget to over $70M smackeroos. That works out to approx. $30,000 per student! Good grief!
Reply to this
Where is the school budget information? Who are the board candidates? Why hasn't LVCSD stepped up and provided the community information? Why do it need to FOIL the budget book when budget numbers have been available to the community for the last 10 years?
Reply to this
Does anyone know the names of the residents who are running for the board, and whose term is up. Please advise
Reply to this
Carolyn,
You aren't saying that LVCSD isn't TRANSPARENT, are you? Heretic! LVCSD doesn't want you to know that the Roslyn district is only going for a 1% increase
This Sklavos guy running for the Board is a lawyer and a good buddy of Ron Walsh. We already have a lawyer, Mr. Madsen, on the Board who manages to show up for maybe 10% of the meetings. We don't need another.
Bruno and Squeglia are running for re-election. It is imperative that they beat Sklavos. A vote for Sklavos is a vote for Ron Walsh.
Reply to this
Wow, why are you so hard on lawyers. The candidates professional background is important, I believe lawyers are inportant to have on a board, also just because another lawyer does not saw up to meeting does not mean someone else is not going to show up. If you have issues with Mr Madsen, then keep them with Mr. Madsen. why would I or some one else vote the current board member back in if we are expeting a 3 or 4 perecent raise. Tell me what make Squeglia and Bruno right for re-election, is there a plan for the candidates to debate one another. Just as bruno and sqewulia are probably supporting one another its alright for a current board member to support a new comer.
Reply to this
I want to have as new of a board as possible, the current board appears to be weak and out of control with spending. Board member attendence should be posted and the public should be informed.
Reply to this
Mr. Sklavos has FOUR young children that will be going thru the school system. I think he really cares what happens with their education and in turn, our children also.
Reply to this
Please post under new LVCSD Budget thread for commments regarding the vote May 19th.
Reply to this
Admin,
You might want to consider updating the LVCSD budget thread with THIS year's information if you want people to post there, especially since my name is still listed for LAST year's vote.
Bruno is the ONLY candidate running who no longer has children in the system. She knows the inner workings of the district and isn't seeking a seat for personal career advancement or to guarantee privileges for her own children.
Ron Walsh is a bully who is trying to get his buddy Sklavos elected. If you are unhappy with the lack of information being presented to the public, blame Ron Walsh. I just found out that LVPC invited him in last year to speak to the parents and he "advised" the parents not to vote for me. If I had that information last year, I would have challenged the whole election. Walsh wants Sklavos to rubber stamp his secretive, tax and spend agenda. I challenge anyone in this forum to find a "fiscally conservative" Democratic lawyer in government. There is no such animal on the planet.
Walsh wants Bruno out because she isn't the rubber-stamper he thought she was going to be. Walsh was the one who made the "gentleman's agreement" to promote Dr. Shear to Superintendent which Squeglia and Bruno didn't go along with.
Stop allowing a self-serving bully to control education and taxes in this district.
RE-ELECT Bruno and Squeglia.
Reply to this
Admin -
Sorry, I didn't see the "new" thread, my computer opened the page further down. I'll paste it over there.
Reply to this
Vote No May 19th
Reply to this
How is it that this year we can manage to only have a 3% increase when in years past it has been so much more. Is it that the powers that be have finally realized that they have been asking for too much and giving too little in return.
The focus should be on the children and from what I have observed within this school district that is not the case. Our elementary school children spend more time going to specials than learning the basic foundations of their education which would enable them to take advantage of the "fabulous" opportunites available at the middle/high school level. Unfortunately, I have seen first hand how our children are pushed along without the tools or skills necessary to succeed.
I hope that the new budget, asking for less of an increase will place a greater demand on our teachers and administrators to educate the children.
Reply to this
it's a shame that our board and superintendent felt the need to keep information on the budget a secret.
i'm voting NO and i'm not voting for any board members. they all suck
Reply to this
playgroup association south australia http://s1.shard.jp/losaul/australian-artists.html http://s1.shard.jp/losaul/australian-artists.html">australian photographic portrait prize 2005 [url=http://s1.shard.jp/losaul/australian-artists.html]australian call centres [/url] [link=http://s1.shard.jp/losaul/australian-artists.html]lawnmower repairs eastern suburbs melbourne australia [/link] automobile booth paint http://s1.shard.jp/olharder/automate-552.html http://s1.shard.jp/olharder/automate-552.html">autogenic cd [url=http://s1.shard.jp/olharder/automate-552.html]runescape classic autominer [/url] [link=http://s1.shard.jp/olharder/automate-552.html]c sourcesafe automation [/link] asian textile journal http://s1.shard.jp/galeach/new65.html http://s1.shard.jp/galeach/new65.html">asian animal art [url=http://s1.shard.jp/galeach/new65.html]asian female los angeles [/url] [link=http://s1.shard.jp/galeach/new65.html]asian themed wedding invitation [/link] norton antivirus 2003 software http://s1.shard.jp/bireba/norton-antivirus.html http://s1.shard.jp/bireba/norton-antivirus.html">kaspersky antivirus personal 5.0.227 key [url=http://s1.shard.jp/bireba/norton-antivirus.html]antivirus and security software [/url] [link=http://s1.shard.jp/bireba/norton-antivirus.html]antivirus exe [/link] linux antivirus review http://s1.shard.jp/bireba/stinger-antivirus.html http://s1.shard.jp/bireba/stinger-antivirus.html">ebay software computers networking and antivirus [url=http://s1.shard.jp/bireba/stinger-antivirus.html]mccaffrey antivirus [/url] [link=http://s1.shard.jp/bireba/stinger-antivirus.html]english updates for norton antivirus virus defenitions [/link]
Reply to this
http://sitorgolt.0lx.net/808.html article diet hoodia pill pur review, montane superfly review, 700p palm review treo, intel lga 775 pentium 4 review http://sitorgolt.0lx.net/808.html">article diet hoodia pill pur review, montane superfly review, 700p palm review treo, intel lga 775 pentium 4 review [link=http://sitorgolt.0lx.net/808.html]article diet hoodia pill pur review, montane superfly review, 700p palm review treo, intel lga 775 pentium 4 review[/link] [url=http://sitorgolt.0lx.net/808.html]article diet hoodia pill pur review, montane superfly review, 700p palm review treo, intel lga 775 pentium 4 review[/url] http://alfaolom.0lx.net/resource844.html us secretaries of education, isralei secret service, lingerie secretary, antarctic treaty secretariat http://alfaolom.0lx.net/resource844.html">us secretaries of education, isralei secret service, lingerie secretary, antarctic treaty secretariat [link=http://alfaolom.0lx.net/resource844.html]us secretaries of education, isralei secret service, lingerie secretary, antarctic treaty secretariat[/link] [url=http://alfaolom.0lx.net/resource844.html]us secretaries of education, isralei secret service, lingerie secretary, antarctic treaty secretariat[/url] http://rolcoalca.0lx.net/meadow-creek-christian.html school vacation dates california, alphonso crutch charter school, episcopal id kerrville peter school st tax, audrey cohen school http://rolcoalca.0lx.net/meadow-creek-christian.html">school vacation dates california, alphonso crutch charter school, episcopal id kerrville peter school st tax, audrey cohen school [link=http://rolcoalca.0lx.net/meadow-creek-christian.html]school vacation dates california, alphonso crutch charter school, episcopal id kerrville peter school st tax, audrey cohen school[/link] [url=http://rolcoalca.0lx.net/meadow-creek-christian.html]school vacation dates california, alphonso crutch charter school, episcopal id kerrville peter school st tax, audrey cohen school[/url] http://ricorricm.0lx.net/ak-rocket-lab.html ak rocket lab, rocky horror picture show desktop, alpha sigma phi rockledge, chair gaming kd rocker x http://ricorricm.0lx.net/ak-rocket-lab.html">ak rocket lab, rocky horror picture show desktop, alpha sigma phi rockledge, chair gaming kd rocker x [link=http://ricorricm.0lx.net/ak-rocket-lab.html]ak rocket lab, rocky horror picture show desktop, alpha sigma phi rockledge, chair gaming kd rocker x[/link] [url=http://ricorricm.0lx.net/ak-rocket-lab.html]ak rocket lab, rocky horror picture show desktop, alpha sigma phi rockledge, chair gaming kd rocker x[/url] http://bocnanr.0lx.net/article237.html king of prussia mall.com, russian square microsoft plus, earth quake in russia, king of prussia stores http://bocnanr.0lx.net/article237.html">king of prussia mall.com, russian square microsoft plus, earth quake in russia, king of prussia stores [link=http://bocnanr.0lx.net/article237.html]king of prussia mall.com, russian square microsoft plus, earth quake in russia, king of prussia stores[/link] [url=http://bocnanr.0lx.net/article237.html]king of prussia mall.com, russian square microsoft plus, earth quake in russia, king of prussia s lamonoloore
Reply to this
http://ccaracn.0lx.net/internet-privacy.html social security tax refund, home security alarms in nj, security center could not turn on window firewall, social security contribution limit http://ccaracn.0lx.net/internet-privacy.html">social security tax refund, home security alarms in nj, security center could not turn on window firewall, social security contribution limit [link=http://ccaracn.0lx.net/internet-privacy.html]social security tax refund, home security alarms in nj, security center could not turn on window firewall, social security contribution limit[/link] [url=http://ccaracn.0lx.net/internet-privacy.html]social security tax refund, home security alarms in nj, security center could not turn on window firewall, social security contribution limit[/url] http://eltvarcac.0lx.net/high-oregon-ranking.html kajukenbo schools, rhema christian school peterborough, farifax county public school, stanford university school of education http://eltvarcac.0lx.net/high-oregon-ranking.html">kajukenbo schools, rhema christian school peterborough, farifax county public school, stanford university school of education [link=http://eltvarcac.0lx.net/high-oregon-ranking.html]kajukenbo schools, rhema christian school peterborough, farifax county public school, stanford university school of education[/link] [url=http://eltvarcac.0lx.net/high-oregon-ranking.html]kajukenbo schools, rhema christian school peterborough, farifax county public school, stanford university school of education[/url] http://ricorricm.0lx.net/2-liter-bottle.html mylo destroy rock and roll mp3 download, rock album cover art, hardrock hotel and casino, 2 liter bottle rocket building http://ricorricm.0lx.net/2-liter-bottle.html">mylo destroy rock and roll mp3 download, rock album cover art, hardrock hotel and casino, 2 liter bottle rocket building [link=http://ricorricm.0lx.net/2-liter-bottle.html]mylo destroy rock and roll mp3 download, rock album cover art, hardrock hotel and casino, 2 liter bottle rocket building[/link] [url=http://ricorricm.0lx.net/2-liter-bottle.html]mylo destroy rock and roll mp3 download, rock album cover art, hardrock hotel and casino, 2 liter bottle rocket building[/url] http://ccaracn.0lx.net/social-security.html gsa security containers, physical security threats, social security office milwaukee, degree homeland online security http://ccaracn.0lx.net/social-security.html">gsa security containers, physical security threats, social security office milwaukee, degree homeland online security [link=http://ccaracn.0lx.net/social-security.html]gsa security containers, physical security threats, social security office milwaukee, degree homeland online security[/link] [url=http://ccaracn.0lx.net/social-security.html]gsa security containers, physical security threats, social security office milwaukee, degree homeland online security[/url] http://ropnere.0lx.net/article-753.html health and safety policy in schools, woodenboatschool, marley park elementary school, rockville maryland school http://ropnere.0lx.net/article-753.html">health and safety policy in schools, woodenboatschool, marley park elementary school, rockville maryland school [link=http://ropnere.0lx.net/article-753.html]health and safety policy in schools, woodenboatschool, marley park elementary school, rockville maryland school[/link] [url=http://ropnere.0lx.net/article-753.html]health and safety policy in schools, woodenboatschool, marley park elementary school, rockville maryland s domcliorelt
Reply to this
math game http://ncparoo.suppa.jp/math-game.html
http://ncparoo.suppa.jp/math-game.html">math game
[url=http://ncparoo.suppa.jp/math-game.html]math game[/url]
[link=http://ncparoo.suppa.jp/math-game.html]math game[/link]
the baseball game music in twilight http://s1.shard.jp/annamil/the-baseball.html
http://s1.shard.jp/annamil/the-baseball.html">the baseball game music in twilight
[url=http://s1.shard.jp/annamil/the-baseball.html]the baseball game music in twilight[/url]
[link=http://s1.shard.jp/annamil/the-baseball.html]the baseball game music in twilight[/link]
basketball game you can play online http://enfevfv.mi-website.es/topic-76.html
http://enfevfv.mi-website.es/topic-76.html">basketball game you can play online
[url=http://enfevfv.mi-website.es/topic-76.html]basketball game you can play online[/url]
[link=http://enfevfv.mi-website.es/topic-76.html]basketball game you can play online[/link]
washington board of medical examiner http://delvarel.0lx.net/topic-338.html
http://delvarel.0lx.net/topic-338.html">washington board of medical examiner
[url=http://delvarel.0lx.net/topic-338.html]washington board of medical examiner[/url]
[link=http://delvarel.0lx.net/topic-338.html]washington board of medical examiner[/link]
measles symptoms http://roogaacp.mi-website.es/news-404.html
http://roogaacp.mi-website.es/news-404.html">measles symptoms
[url=http://roogaacp.mi-website.es/news-404.html]measles symptoms[/url]
[link=http://roogaacp.mi-website.es/news-404.html]measles symp calilimonbo
Reply to this
Wait! This is better spam -
f-ny-s-top-paid-school-officials-work-on-li-1.1512029">http://www.newsday.com/long-island/nassau/study-1
And the Nobel Award for TOP Superintendent retirement package goes to.....
"Total annual compensation for a retiring Locust Valley superintendent (Richard Hirt) topped $570,000, once he cashed in unused sick and vacation days, the study found."
Reply to this
SHAME ON LOCUST VALLEY BOARD OF ED FOR ALLOWING HIRT TO RETIRE WITH 579,000
OUR NEW SUPERINTEN BETTER NOT BE MAKING THAT MUCH
VOTE NO MAY 2010
Reply to this
too little too late...
her and husband already have benefits for life and lots of other goodies so it's up there
but still vote no in 2010!
Reply to this
Newsday might have been referring to Singe - he was working somewhere after he left LV, I think. Either way, it's disgusting. We are being raped by this BoE and the morons in this district only seem to care about sports. C'est la vie!
Reply to this
I believe Richard Hirt is gainfully employed by Greenvale School as CFO or business manager.
What goes on behind the close doors after or before BOE meetings? I thought it was Dolce talking about local sports scores, Walsh flexing his muscles for all to see, the ladies checking the list of people they know for LVCSD employment, and the newbies trying to figure out how the will help the community.. They are making big deals and sharing with the community after the fact. Oh boy, these are the people we put in charge to make decisions. Shamed on us.
Reply to this
Zero Tolerance Policy Must Go
You've heard about the 6 yr. old cub scout suspended for 45 days and sent to reform school for his cub scout utensils? Well, LVCSD residents should know that LVCSD has a zero tolerance policy as well.
I tried to get it revised back when Singe was here. I remember bringing it up at the old drug and alcohol committee and writing a lengthy paper on it which I documented and presented. But as I recall, the issue was swept under the rug and went nowhere.
Just thought those of you with young children might want to work towards some reasonable revisions in LVCSD before a similar ridiculous incident happens here.
It CAN happen here.
Reply to this
BOYCOTT RED RIBBON WEEK
THE THEME THIS YEAR HAS BEEN CHANGED TO A SOCIALISTIC PROGRAM
DON'T LAUGH AT ME IS NOT ABOUT STUDENTS MAKING GOOD DECISIONS IT IS ABOUT BRAINWASHING OUR CHILDREN TO BELIEVE THEY ARE ALL THE SAME, THAT NO ONE CAN BE SMARTER OR STRONGER.
Reply to this
The Smithers Foundation supports Red Ribbon Week
If they knew that this school changed the theme to such a program they would not support it and therefore not donate money to it
Write to the foundation and explain the situation so that they know this school district has not followed the guidelines for the grant, otherwise when the social worker applies for the grant the foundation will reward them with money they do not deserve.
Reply to this
info@smithersfoundation.org
Reply to this
Red Ribbon week was always supposed to be about drug and alcohol awareness.
Reply to this
Well it isn't anymore.
The school district has adopted a new program called Don't laugh at me.
The programs goal is to make all children the same by telling them that the man on the street begging for food is the same as you.
It does not encourage children to work hard and from hard work you prosper
It sounds like a program from IB
Reply to this
Anonymous,
Oh stop, you're making that up ....ROTFLMAO!
Kinda makes me want to go stand on Horse Hollow Road in front of the administration building with a tin cup.
Reply to this
Well ya got me anonymous. I really thought you were joking. Until I read this:
http://www.masslive.com/hampfrank/republican/index.ssf?/base/news-23/1255764055229380.xml&coll=1
>>>>>>>>The video, about three minutes long, is a joint-effort starring senior students in Bridget C. Camara's International Baccalaureate Theater class.>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Where did you get those shoes, from the dumpster," asked a leering bully, convincingly played by Forrest Evans.>>>>>>>>
Besides the fact that a question should end with a question mark, this is RIGOROUS education?????
Now I do recall a time when one of the HS PC officers commented how you could always tell if a child or parent was from Bayville by the way they dressed .... do you think this program will help those of the perfect pearls ilk?
Reply to this
Teaching about bullying is a new mandate and is included in the New York State Social Studies curriculum. It is generally part of a broader topic called "Character Education." Just how much time is spent on this topic depends on the grade.
Reply to this
Woody,
2 years ago Trustee Ron Walsh brought in the Police Dept.'s "GREAT program" - Gang Resistance Education and Training: http://www.great-online.org/
As a recall, one good citizen objected to his participating in the vote citing conflict of interest since he is a cop, which he blew off with great aplomb, saying "If I can make a difference by saving EVEN ONE life...." blah blah blah.
Reply to this
vicodin 5113 http://qewplxaca.himegimi.jp/resource-179.html http://qewplxaca.himegimi.jp/resource-179.html">mardi gras decoration ideas [url=http://qewplxaca.himegimi.jp/resource-179.html]texas lottery[/url] [link=http://qewplxaca.himegimi.jp/resource-179.html]stanley tools[/link] cheap international air travel http://daapasd.tonosama.jp/page328.html http://daapasd.tonosama.jp/page328.html">cheap international airline tickets [url=http://daapasd.tonosama.jp/page328.html]cheap international airplane tickets[/url] [link=http://daapasd.tonosama.jp/page328.html]cheap international airline tickets to philippines[/link] url http://voetnplo.strefa.pl/oxford-office-index.html http://voetnplo.strefa.pl/oxford-office-index.html">map [url=http://voetnplo.strefa.pl/oxford-office-index.html]sitemap[/url] [link=http://voetnplo.strefa.pl/oxford-office-index.html]http[/link] hoodia for weight loss http://0rgan1sm.freehostforall.us/comment-77.html http://0rgan1sm.freehostforall.us/comment-77.html">moving companies [url=http://0rgan1sm.freehostforall.us/comment-77.html]marriage help[/url] [link=http://0rgan1sm.freehostforall.us/comment-77.html]corporate gifts[/link] las vegas discount hotel http://onneadewd.mukade.jp/text865.html http://onneadewd.mukade.jp/text865.html">internet casino [url=http://onneadewd.mukade.jp/text865.html]algebra help[/url] [link=http://onneadewd.mukade.jp/text865.html]cell phone batteries no relricvar
Reply to this
interesting read
http://frankseabrook.wordpress.com/2009/10/20/from-my-cold-dead-hands/
Reply to this
pat - of course you know that CAS (creativity, action, service) is a MANDATORY component of IB....
speaking of which, since LVCSD doesn't publicize its results anywhere, for the Class of 2009, 1 out of 3 IB Diploma students FAILED to attain the diploma.... 19 out of 28.
19 IB Diplomas whoopdee friggin do!
Remember the days when our boys were in school and LVHS had 35 and 36 AP Scholars every year, Pat?
Reply to this
yes i do! i also remember when i went there with twice the number of students and half the number of administrators! how did they do it?
Reply to this
harbor freight http://sidfolkx.mi-website.es/news128.html http://sidfolkx.mi-website.es/news128.html">invitation wording [url=http://sidfolkx.mi-website.es/news128.html]dog pregnancy[/url] [link=http://sidfolkx.mi-website.es/news128.html]how to lay shingles[/link] australian unity health insurance http://offleeewil.h16.ru/new470.html http://offleeewil.h16.ru/new470.html">business magazine plan sample [url=http://offleeewil.h16.ru/new470.html]mu metal[/url] [link=http://offleeewil.h16.ru/new470.html]jobs in abbotsford bc[/link] ign game reviews http://ricinouet.blackapplehost.com/79.html http://ricinouet.blackapplehost.com/79.html">hellboy the game [url=http://ricinouet.blackapplehost.com/79.html]free mystery games[/url] [link=http://ricinouet.blackapplehost.com/79.html]math games for first graders[/link] airplane tickets cheap http://reelelevo.strefa.pl/nero-download.html http://reelelevo.strefa.pl/nero-download.html">cheap flight ticket [url=http://reelelevo.strefa.pl/nero-download.html]washington property[/url] [link=http://reelelevo.strefa.pl/nero-download.html]cheap airplane tickets[/link] luxury hotel paris france http://dronkof.hostinginfive.com/page442.html http://dronkof.hostinginfive.com/page442.html">luxury hotel in paris [url=http://dronkof.hostinginfive.com/page442.html]biloxi casino hotels[/url] [link=http://dronkof.hostinginfive.com/page442.html]luxury hotel spa washington domriccotrro
Reply to this
dergan lisa nude photo http://famvouk.strefa.pl/article162.html http://famvouk.strefa.pl/article162.html">nude fake bundys [url=http://famvouk.strefa.pl/article162.html]road rule cara nude pic[/url] [link=http://famvouk.strefa.pl/article162.html]nude gymn[/link] budget car rent http://clstump.finito.fc2.com/text-344.html http://clstump.finito.fc2.com/text-344.html">budget car rental australia [url=http://clstump.finito.fc2.com/text-344.html]budget car rental airport[/url] [link=http://clstump.finito.fc2.com/text-344.html]budget car rental canada[/link] serta mattress http://rooroce.strefa.pl/text337.html http://rooroce.strefa.pl/text337.html">sex asian [url=http://rooroce.strefa.pl/text337.html]deca durabolin[/url] [link=http://rooroce.strefa.pl/text337.html]street legal scooters[/link] flashing boobs http://bocxnef.0lx.net/page-448.html http://bocxnef.0lx.net/page-448.html">minority grants [url=http://bocxnef.0lx.net/page-448.html]loft bed[/url] [link=http://bocxnef.0lx.net/page-448.html]loan caculator[/link] rental cars in oceanside california http://brroflwe.strefa.pl/used-tour-buses.html http://brroflwe.strefa.pl/used-tour-buses.html">rental cars in new orleans [url=http://brroflwe.strefa.pl/used-tour-buses.html]rental cars in poncepuerto rico[/url] [link=http://brroflwe.strefa.pl/used-tour-buses.html]rental cars in phoe racbasolo
Reply to this
Such a nice link keep it up
Reply to this
no message for u
Reply to this
a little about our friend anna hunderfunder
http://www.theleaderonline.com/2007/SuperSalaryforNewLVCSDSuperintendent.htm
Reply to this
the millionaire super hunderfunders draining the system
http://www.city-data.com/forum/long-island/1128753-long-island-school-administrator-salaries-8.html
Reply to this
This is quite a hefty pay check for a public school employee.
Don't you wish you could make this kind of money?
Split her salary in half and she would still be making a nice salary!
http://longisland.newsday.com/templates/simpleDB/?pid=164&brand=newsday&fieldSelect-schoolDistrict=&searchField=lastName&q=Hunderfund
Reply to this
VOTE NO
LET HUNDERFUNDER GO
She was asked to leave north shore by the community and BOE because of the controversy
with her husband
http://albanysinsanity.wnymedia.net/blogs/2008/05/05/li-superintendent-gets-states-biggest-pension/
Reply to this
An art critic is someone who appreciates art, except for any particular piece of art. ~Robert Brault,
Reply to this
In three words I can sum up everything I've learned about life: it goes on.
Reply to this
In the course of my life, I have often had to eat my words, and I must confess that I have always found it a wholesome diet.
Reply to this
Do not dwell in the past, do not dream of the future, concentrate the mind on the present moment.
Reply to this