Just Say No to Big Brother’s Smart Meters by Orlean Koehle


only for emergencies because their brains were still developing and that adults should keep the phone away from the head and use a speakerphone or a wireless headset. Herberman, who says scientific conclusions often take too long, is one of numerous doctors and researchers who have endorsed an August report by retired electronics engineer L. Lloyd Morgan. The report highlights a study that found significantly increased risk of brain tumors from 10 or more years of cell phone or cordless phone use. Also, the BioInitiative Working Group, an international group of scientists, notes that many countries have issued warnings and that the European Parliament has passed a resolution calling for governmental action to address concerns over health risks from mobile phone use. But the National Cancer Institute said studies thus far have turned up mixed and inconsistent results, noting that cell phones did not come into widespread use in the United States until the 1990s. "Although research has not consistently demonstrated a link between cellular telephone use and cancer, scientists still caution that further surveillance is needed before conclusions can be drawn," according to the Cancer Institute's Web site. Motorola Inc., one of the nation's major wireless phone makers, says on its Web site that all of its products comply with international safety guidelines for radiofrequency energy exposure.A Motorola official referred questions to CTIA.


Walnut Creek May Consider Moratorium on Residential Cell Towers: (Thanks to Angela Flynn from the emf-safety-network@googlegroups.com)


By Elisabeth Nardi, Contra Costa Times (Posted: 11/12/2010 04:38:18 PM PST, Updated: 11/14/2010 05:18:43 AM PST)


The Walnut Creek City Council on Tuesday may consider imposing a six-month moratorium on new wireless towers in residential neighborhoods. Responding to outcry from residents, the council held a study session Thursday on the city's 13-


year-old wireless facilities ordinance. The ordinance regulates the height of antennas -- used for cell phone activity, GPS and Wi-Fi -- and what they can look like. But residents from around Walnut Creek are asking that the law be changed to specify where such facilities cannot be placed -- notably, residential neighborhoods. The council seems inclined to agree. At Thursday's study session, after representatives of various neighborhoods spoke about the need to revise the law, council members asked city staff members to prepare a plan for a moratorium. "The neighborhood response is indicative of the growing problem that we've got," Mayor Sue


Rainey said. The controversy bubbled up when a group of Buena Vista residents became concerned about a 28-foot cell antenna disguised to look like a tree that AT&T wants to build at St. Stephen's Catholic Church on Keaveny Court. After revisions, a permit for a 16-foot antenna was approved. The neighbors' appeal of that permit approval will be considered by the council Tuesday. As part of that hearing, the council may decide to adopt such a moratorium, thus putting the


Keaveny Court tower in limbo. Neighbors say that after recent court cases the city can, and should, follow the lead of


Richmond, which essentially tells wireless providers to place their towers anywhere but in residential neighborhoods. Walnut Creek specifically states in its ordinance only that the city prefers antennas be placed on city property, so the city can collect revenue, said planning manager Victoria Walker. That is not enough, neighbors say. "What is happening in the city is wrong, it's so wrong for the citizens," said Liz Menkes with the Buena Vista group. Councilman Bob Simmons said Thursday he favors revising the current ordinance rather than creating a new law. Likewise, Mayor Pro Tem Cindy Silva said she favors a task force tweaking and rewriting parts of the ordinance.


83


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165