My appeal to the Ashland City Council at their business meeting-
I am here again to ask for your help on behalf of the many in this town who currently become physically sick from the intensity of wireless technology. The reason for that is EMFs are ubiquitous and debilitating. I can’t go in to the downtown area due to the high levels of radiation emitted by all the many wireless transmitters. To this point, I have emailed you all a letter from Dr. Magda Havas, a specialist in electro-sensitivity. In the letter she explains the results of the readings of our own downtown area. Ashland falls often in the red zone, a color indicative of a highly toxic level of radiation.
So I am here to ask for two simple and specific actions.
The first ask is that someone from the city communicate with us. Sadly, there seems to be an unwillingness to look into what affects so many of us and to work with us. I know recent staffing changes have made things difficult, so I’m hoping the addition of Mr. Melman will help all of us move forward with transparent communication.
The second ask is informed by solid evidence witnessed in our own town. In 2019, Oregon for Safer Technology presented to Council a study session on wireless technology. About 100 people were in attendance and when asked whether they were affected or knew someone who was affected by wireless radiation, almost every hand went up. That was 2 years ago. In 2020, with the threat of a cell tower looming near a Head Start, Walker Elementary, Walker Middle School and SOU dorms, more than 500 people wrote in to the Planning Dept. to protest the mono pine cell tower proposed by AT&T.
At this time, Oregon for Safer Technology hired Andrew Campanelli, paying his $4,000 legal fees with donations from citizens who also feel at risk from a new tower. More evidence came from this year’s Zoom meeting with a Smartlink rep. again negotiating for a new AT&T cell tower. The plan is now to place it on a light pole at the SOU Stadium, in the same area, near schools and homes.
During the online meeting, the 2 reps were inundated with data and information. Numerous people wrote in or called in to explain why they didn’t want a new tower near their homes and their schools. Their personal testimonies, the science, and the common sense displayed on this call was astounding, and frankly, inspiring. It is clear Ashland residents do not want any more unsafe and unnecessary RF exposure.
My second ask is simply to have the City of Ashland join the municipalities of Hempstead, NY; Lancaster, PA; Little Silver, NJ; Warren, CT; Mason, OH; Boulder, CO; in California: Los Altos, Monterey, Petaluma, Walnut City, Belvedere, Sonoma City, San Diego County, and Marin County.
These cities have proposed or adopted measures or ordinances to maximize their local control over wireless cell communication facilities. They have done so with special urgency for 5G. New, strong ordinances applicable to small-cell facilities are a city’s best tools to do this. Standard cell-tower ordinances do not address the small-cell-facility issues. Requirements for city aesthetics and public safety are still within City control, but they must appear in ordinance regulations before wireless-facility permit applications are received from BIG TELECOM.
Mayor, please, how can I get answers on these simple yet vital asks?
Thank you, Kelly Marcotulli