Search news: View news by countries View all news

«First  ‹Previous   Page 290 of 290

San Francisco Wi-Fi Plan Enters Crucial Debate
USA	Created: 13 Jul 2007
Two key votes on the municipal Wi-Fi project have been postponed and a city leader wants to amend the deal. Two important votes concerning San Francisco's plan for citywide Wi-Fi that were set for this week have been pushed back, delaying what may be life-or-death decisions on the controversial network. One vote of the city's fractious Board of Supervisors could force the project to undergo an environmental impact study. The other, by the board's Budget and Finance Committee, would reject the plan or send it on to the full body for final approval. Hanging in the balance is a proposal that was introduced by Mayor Gavin Newsom in 2004 and has become one of the major initiatives of his administration. As the votes were pushed back, Board President Aaron Peskin was preparing a set of amendments to the contract hammered out by the city and EarthLink Inc. in January. Those changes aim to address concerns of some critics but may not win over vocal opponents on the board. San Francisco is one of many municipalities pursuing wireless networks to make Internet access more widely available, both to close the technology gap between richer and poorer residents and to boost the local economy. Its contract calls for EarthLink to offer 1M bps (bit-per-second) service for about US$20 per month and Google Inc. to offer a free service on the same network. Activists and some leaders in the city have raised alarms that echo worries in some other cities, such as how well the network will perform. They have also raised issues that are specific to San Francisco. For example, Google's proposed free service has come under particular fire for allegedly threatening users' privacy and being too slow, at 300K bps (bits per second). In one local twist, the San Francisco Neighborhood Antenna-Free Union (SNAFU) has appealed an April decision of the city's Planning Commission that exempted the network from environmental review. SNAFU, which has fought the placement of cellular base stations near schools, hospitals and some other sites, says Wi-Fi access points on light poles could harm residents' health. It will be up to the Board to force the review or let the exemption stand. At a pro-Wi-Fi rally outside City Hall on Tuesday, Newsom and other speakers called for quick approval of the project and scoffed at the environmental concerns. Newsom called the environmental question "a canard." Citywide Wi-Fi is critical to minority communities that lack Internet access and is being fought mostly by people who have it, speakers at the rally said. Leslie Rule, an educational technologist at local public broadcaster KQED, said she had read all of SNAFU's appeal of the Planning Department's decision. "They're worried about things that don't exist," she said. The rally brought together multiple groups from minority communities and drew about 100 protestors waving "Wi-Fi Now" signs. Peskin's proposed amendments, not yet spelled out in detail, include contract terms that would force EarthLink to serve all parts of the city and would boost the speed of the Google service to 500K bps and protect users' privacy. They also would limit the term of network deal, under which the city would lease its light poles to EarthLink for placement of radios, to eight years and give the city the right to then buy the network. In general, the proposals are things the city tried to get during its own negotiations with EarthLink, said Brian Roberts, a senior policy analyst at the city's Department of Telecommunications & Information Services, which negotiated the deal with EarthLink. The city chose to try to conclude the talks and get the network built rather than press for every term it wanted, he said. "If Supervisor Peskin can get them, God bless him," Roberts said. Peskin said via e-mail on Tuesday that EarthLink had not yet responded to the proposed changes. If Peskin can work out terms he likes with EarthLink, the contract is likely to pass through the Budget and Finance Committee, on which he serves. But on the full board, some long-time opponents question the amendments and other members are also waiting to see more details.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: IDG News Service, Stephen Lawson, 12 Jul 2007

Wi-fi 'victory' for school protesters
United Kingdom	Created: 13 Jul 2007
WIRELESS internet technology in schools should be suspended and an "open and honest debate" on the issue should take place, an influential council committee has recommended. The call was made by councillors after months of debate on the issue, which has focused on Tetherdown School. Anti-wi-fi campaigners, who made a presentation to overview and scrutiny members, were delighted by the outcome. Sarah Purdy, who has fronted a campaign against wi-fi and mobile phone masts near schools, said: "I'm pleased. I hope the executive will approve the recommendations and I hope Tetherdown will take note while they can and get some cabling in the school." Concerned parents last month appealed to the governors of Muswell Hill's Tetherdown School not to install wireless internet in a new building because of the possible health risks. Despite objections during consultation on the plans, the school decided to press ahead with the wireless networks, which links computers using pulsed radiowaves in a similar way to mobile phones and phone masts. Campaigners cited a recent Panorama programme in which Sir William Stewart, chairman of the Health Protection Agency (HPA), suggested potential health risks should be reviewed. Councillor Emma Jones (Labour), Bruce Grove, said: "I, quite frankly, think we are frying children's brains. I'm really worried we going to wake up in 20 years with serious problems." Mrs Purdy added: "We really don't know what we are doing to them." Ian Bailey, deputy director of the children's and young people's services, made clear he was not at the meeting to advocate wi-fi technology. He said: "A fairly cursory five minutes spent on the internet will reveal there is an awful lot on contradictory advice available." He added: "Since the well-known Panorama documentary we have kept track of the advice that's been issued but the advice of the HPA has not changed since soon after the documentary." The committee recommended the council should write to all schools notifying them of the council's concerns, suspend wi-fi use and installation, host an open seminar on the issue, promote hard wired internet, consult parents over installation and only switch wi-fi on when it's needed. Councillor David Winskill (Liberal Democrat, Crouch End), said: "There are genuine questions and concerns over the use of wi-fi in Schools. Up to now we have had to rely on spin from the IT and telecoms industries. "A properly organised, neutral seminar will at least give head teachers and governors the opportunity to make choices and decisions based on the best available information and advice." The proposals must now be approved by the council's cabinet. Nationally about 70 per cent of schools are using wi-fi technology.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Tottenham Journal, 04 Jul 2007

Henrico considers cell-tower proposal
USA	Created: 13 Jul 2007
School Board discusses allowing structures to be placed on school property Cell-phone towers on Henrico County school property?. Henrico School Board members yesterday discussed the possibility of changing their policy regarding commercial activity on school property to exempt wireless telecommunication towers. The current policy prohibits commercial activity of any kind on school property. The exemption would allow the School Board to consider applications from telecommunications companies to put towers or antennae on school property, provided the placement of the towers follow some requirements. For instance, the equipment could not interfere with the efficiency of the schools or have an adverse effect on surrounding private property. Telecommunications companies would pay the county for the placement and use of towers. The board did not discuss how much money a tower would bring in, but a source familiar with a recent negotiation for such a tower said payments might amount to $20,000 or less per year, or more than $100,000 per year if multiple cell-phone companies shared the tower. Board members have different views on the idea. Board member Linda McBride opposes the towers. Among her biggest concerns, she said, is safety. She said there is no conclusive medical evidence that exposure to radiation from the towers would not be harmful. McBride said she is not comfortable with workers having access to towers 24 hours a day in close proximity to schools where students are outside for recess or sports. People could pretend to be working on a tower, she said, "when indeed what they have in mind is doing damage to our students" or employees. She also raised questions about whether the money made from a tower would be distributed equally among the county's schools, or go to the school where the tower is located. Stuart Myers said he shared McBride's safety concerns. He also said if the board is going to consider taking money from one commercial entity, why not others. Myers said if the towers were allowed, the board would be showing preferential treatment to a company that does nothing for the school, yet local business partners that provide scholarship funds for students cannot conduct commercial activities on school property. On the other hand, board Vice Chairman Hugh C. Palmer said he is in favor of the cell-tower policy. Board Chairman Lloyd E. Jackson Jr. said there seems to be a lot of protection for the School Board written into the policy, and he said board members should remember that an application would have to be approved by the board. No tower would go up without the board's permission. Board member Jim Fiorelli suggested that the board consider changing its policy to allow commercial activities by businesses, including those that partner with schools. McBride said the board needs to hear more information on the subject, including input from other school divisions that have cell towers on school property, the financial benefits and the safety issues. Chesterfield County allows such towers on school grounds. In Hanover County, there are no cell-phone-company towers on school property, a spokeswoman said, but there are a few communications towers that use the older microwave technology. The Henrico School Board is scheduled to vote on this and other policy changes next month. Contact Holly Prestidge at (804) 649-6945 or hprestidge@timesdispatch.com. Staff writer Melodie Martin contributed to this report.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Richmond Times Dispatch, HOLLY PRESTIDGE, Jul 12 2007

Cell phone tower rules changed
USA	Created: 13 Jul 2007
Members of the Lyon County Planning and Appeals Board approved a text change to zoning regulations during Wednesday night’s board meeting. Linda Borst, GIS technician and administrative assistant for the appraiser’s office, said the text change approved was related to cell phone towers. An extra step before board approval must now be done to comply with state regulations. The text change states that before board approval of a cell phone tower request, there needs to be an approval letter by the state’s historical preservation office. “It’s just going to be another step,” Borst said. “It’s just to keep up with the state’s current policy.” Next month during their regular meeting, board members will discuss urban access corridors, Borst said. No decision has been made so far regarding that topic. Also during Wednesday evening’s meeting: • Planning board members approved a request for agriculture special use single family dwelling by Rex and Brenda Fisher. • Planning board members approved a request for agriculture special use manufactured home by Michael and Connie Boyce.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Emporia Gazette, Brandy Nance, 12 Jul 2007

Cell tower war off the hook
USA	Created: 13 Jul 2007
It’s getting ugly on 81st Street, where tenants of an apartment building — furious over the installation of cellphone equipment on their roof — confronted workers and nearly came to blows with their landlord’s relative after construction crews began installing more phone machinery. The trouble began several years ago, when the owner of 301 81st St., Gus Sideratos, installed several antennas atop the building. Then, last Friday, residents of the radio active complex awoke to find their street blocked off for the second time in two weeks so a crane could hoist even more equipment to the roof. Residents of the block swarmed around the workers, prompting a relative of Sideratos to get into “a really heated and nasty argument with a resident senior citizen” outside of the complex, said one witness. “There was yelling and cursing and even threatening as the young man accused the senior of starting all the protests and making the petitions,” said one source who lives within the building and requested anonymity out of fear of landlord retribution. The confrontation didn’t sit well with other tenants and neighbors, who are already at a breaking point over the lack of community say over the installation of equipment they believe to be unhealthy. “There are obviously multiple issues here, including reported intimidation by the landlord and his cronies, traffic disruptions, and a lack of leadership by local officials,” said Joe Jordan. “Let’s not forget about the possibility of adverse health issues related to the non-stop and involuntary bombardment of these telecom signals.” Tenants filed complaints with the Department of Building against Sideratos for “storing heavy equipment on top of roof,” but the complaints were dismissed after an inspection. A call from The Brooklyn Paper to Sideratos’s office was not returned by deadline. But Sideratos is not alone. The conversion of rooftops into beacons for cellphone bars has become a growing trend all over Brooklyn. Companies pay building owners big bucks in exchange for a little rooftop space — and most residents enjoy the full bars on their phone and the flush cash in their building’s general fund. But there is so much cellular equipment all over the neighborhood — and virtually no advance warning about its placement — that residents are revolting. Last year, parents of St. Anselm’s School fought the installation of a Sprint/Nextel tower atop a nearby building. As on 81st Street, school parents didn’t know that the tower was coming until a crane showed up late one night. Parents were able to garner enough negative publicity — and political support — to force Sprint to change plans. Councilman Vince Gentile (D–Bay Ridge) is again in the fray, backing the 81st Street residents. Gentile wants governments to have a say in the placement and number of cellphone towers in their communities. “The situation on 81st Street is a perfect example of why Congress should amend the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and give the people who know what’s best for their local communities the ability to regulate cell phone towers,” Gentile said. The councilman also called for a study of health issues related to cellular equipment. Though there is little data to support the claim that cellphone radiation is harmful, most residents are afraid. “I have heard that these towers can cause cancer, and that is what a lot of people are concerned about,” said Ernie Homsey, a resident of the 81st Street building since 1945. “How can they do this when their have been no long-term studies to assure us they aren’t harmful?” Reps for cell phone companies have insisted that the signals are harmless, and assert that not one reputable study has shown adverse health effects. But that didn’t fully satisfy Homsey. “When you have people who feel their family’s health is being jeopardized and no one will listen, they begin to feel desperate,” he said.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Brooklyn Paper, Matthew Lysiak, 14 jul 2007

Fifty Cell Towers to be dismantled
Trinidad	Created: 12 Jul 2007
Fifty illegal Cell Towers to be dismantled! Planning and Development Minister Camille Robinson Regis said more than 50 enforcement notices have been issued for the removal of illegal cell towers nationwide but these notices have been appealed by the telecommunication companies responsible for the sites.
Click here to view the source article.

HIGH COURT WIN AGAINST PHONE MAST
United Kingdom	Created: 12 Jul 2007
JUBILANT residents were this week claiming a High Court victory as a judge ruled that a decision to allow a phone mast must be quashed. It follows a two-year battle by T-Mobile which wanted to install a10-metre mast in Beechwood Avenue, St Albans. Edward Chance and neighbour Anna Spinks, who took the matter to the High Court, stood to lose £40,000 if the ruling had gone against them. As it was the court battle cost them around £7,000 but the Government agreed to pay the lion's share of the costs. Mr Chance, of Central Avenue, who lives across the road from the proposed site, spearheaded a residents' campaign to prevent the plan. He said: "Apart from health-and-safety issues, we also felt that it would affect property values. We collected hundreds of signatures for a petition against this mast." The mast, together with an earlier proposal for a 12-metre one at the junction of Farm Road and Beechwood Avenue, had been rejected by St Albans District Council partly because it was felt the location was not a good one. But the council was overruled by a planning inspector when the phone company went to appeal over their refusal. Now the inspector's decision has been overruled by the High Court on the grounds that it failed to give adequate reasoning for the decision. Mr Chance, who took the legal action on behalf of the other residents, said: "It seems odd that T-Mobile, who are spending advertising revenue on promoting a friendly company image, should have chosen to so spectacularly ignore the wishes of so many local residents." The residents had recruited Paul Stookes, a partner of environmental law specialists Richard Buxton and senior lecturer at the University of Herts School of Law in St Albans, to help them with their case. Mr Stookes said after the ruling: "It is not right that the Government and phone operators feel that they can ignore the wishes of local residents when seeking to erect mobile phone masts. The Government and T-Mobile should now accept that the site is wholly inappropriate for a mast. It should not seek to impose an unwanted development on people's doorsteps." The High Court sent the decision back to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Ruth Kelly, for it to be redetermined.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Advertiser 24, EDITORIAL, 12 Jul 2007

Dancing for joy at mast refusal
United Kingdom	Created: 12 Jul 2007
A DANCE teacher and hundreds of her pupils are celebrating after councillors pulled the plug on plans to build a mobile phone mast near their school. Owner of the Ormskirk School of Dance, Alison Clark of Long Lane, Aughton, protested against the mast which T-Mobile wanted to build on Southport Road, Ormskirk. It would have been 15 metres high and near to the Girl Guide Headquarters on Green Lane where Miss Clark teaches her 220 pupils. T-Mobile said this site was chosen to meet the increasing demands of customers who live, work and travel through Ormskirk. The plans were refused by the district council because of the visual impact the mast would have. Miss Clark said: “I am over the moon they won’t get to build the mast because I couldn’t have moved my school. “When I heard about the proposal I wrote letters to the council opposing the mast. “I objected for three reasons. Firstly, the visual aspect, secondly the health issues and finally, because this is a residential area.” Many people who live on Southport Road also protested against the mast. Father-of-two Wayne McPherson, 35, a business consultant, of Southport Road, feared for his nine and six-year-old daughters’ health. He said: “We kept on at West Lancashire Council – we even got MP Rosie Cooper on board. “The mast would have been 38 metres from where my children play in the garden with only a brick wall separating them. “My children’s health is my priority so I was pleased sense won through this time but we’re concerned the decision could be challenged.” The council received the application on May 17 and a decision was made on Friday, July 6. Cllr Cyril Ainscough agreed this was the wrong place for a mast. He said: “Even though they say it’s safe, it hasn’t been proved – we don’t allow masts on council land. “It’s just like what they said about Sellafield – the number of people suffering from cancer in that area is well above the rest of the country and they said it wouldn’t affect them.” A T-Mobile spokesperson said: “We do understand that the siting of our equipment can cause anxiety and that is why we try to be transparent and open during the planning process. “Mobile phone base stations are low powered radio transmitters, equivalent in power to domestic baby monitors. “The handsets themselves work at more than 1,000 times the power of the base station. “Scientific studies conclude that ‘from all evidence accumulated so far, no adverse short or long-term health effects have been shown to occur from the radio frequency signals produced by base stations’. “We are, of course, disappointed that it has not been approved and we are currently considering our options regarding future action. “We remain committed to working with elected representatives and others to consider alternative sites, although our coverage requirements are very localised to that part of Ormskirk.” T-Mobile can appeal against the decision.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Southport Visiter, Joanne Kelly, 12 Jul 2007

Anti-mast support grows rapidly
United Kingdom	Created: 12 Jul 2007
ANGRY residents in Ditton hope that people power will stop a huge mobile phone mast being built on their doorsteps. The residents from the Hale Road area have handed a 200-name petition and 70 letters of protest to Halton Borough Council, which is considering a planning application for the 11.7m mast. Pensioner Fred Cummings, 67, leader of the protest group, said he has been astounded by the level of public support the campaign has received. He said: 'It's been amazing. People have been stopping me in the street to give us moral support and wish us luck with the campaign. 'We handed in a petition with 200 signatures and 70 letters from individual residents opposed to the mast. Now we're just waiting to see what the council say.' The Weekly News reported last week how a residents' protest group had been formed to oppose plans for the a 11.7m phone mast and two equipment cabinets, which is to be considered by the council's development control committee. Residents fear that radiation from the mast will affect their health, that it will be an eyesore and that the installation will become a target for vandalism.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: ic CheshireOnline, 12 Jul 2007

Cell tower raises questions
USA	Created: 12 Jul 2007
The Maennerchor Club in Taftville stands to earn $1,500 a month, a tidy sum for a social group, by allowing a cell phone tower to be erected on its property. But the issue should come down to more than mere money. Before any agreements are made, diligence and research are needed to determine several things, including: Is this the best site for a tower? What will the tower look like -- will it be disguised as a tree or a flagpole, as some are, or a 140-foot silver sore thumb in the woods? What are both sides of the argument relating to a possible health risk of having a cell tower nearby? Will neighbors share in the wealth, or just share in the view? Hearings will be held before any tower goes up. These questions, and surely more, will need thoughtful and accurate answers. We look forward to hearing them.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Norwich Bulletin, 11 Jul 2007

«First  ‹Previous   Page 290 of 290