From:  CooperJM@aol.com
Hi, Neighbors-
Michael Johnson, Zoning Administrator for the city, has rescinded the stop
work order on the Tower, and work has resumed at a rapid clip.

Did you read in the Washington Post this week that the tower will be one and
a half times as tall as the Washington Monument?  The Washington Monument is,
in fact, 555' tall, and the tower will be 756' tall.

What can you do?
1.  Two community meetings are planned this week:

    Tenley Friendship Library @ Albermarle & Wisconsin
    Tuesday, September 26 from 7:00 to 8:45 pm
    2nd floor meeting room

    St. Columba's Church @ 42nd & Albermarle
    Friday, September 29 at 7:30 pm
    Great Hall
    (With apologies to our neighbors who will be observing Rosh Hashana.  This
      was the only additional time/space available that we could locate next
week
      in the area on such short notice, and we are in a serious time crunch.)

    At each meeting, we will be screening an hour-long video entitled
`Broadcast Blues'
a one hour documentary video by Independent filmmaker and Emmy award winner,
Len Aitken, about efforts of the community of Lookout Mountain, Colorado, the
site of most of Denver's broadcast towers, to challenge the erection of a
similar broadcast/telecommunications tower, and follow the screening with a
group discussion.

2.  Contact the following people in city government and express your concerns
next week- and the sooner the better:
 
    (1) Carlynn Fuller, Acting director, DCRA     442-8947
 
    (2) Andy Altman, Office of Planning   442-7600

    (3) Mayor Williams          Awilliams4@dcgov.org
 
        If 100 people email him, he will take serious notice.

3.  Get the word out-- Forward this email.  Phone neighbors.  I hope to have
a flyer ready late this (Saturday) afternoon.  Phone me at 202/966-3202 if
you'd like a master copy.  Kinko's in Friendship Heights is open all the
time.  Help get them to neighbors, show windows, bulletin boards, schools.

Further, we are considering demonstrating at WUSA, Channel 9, whom we are
told are one of the partners in the tower project, possibly late Wednesday
afternoon the 27th, as well as Saturday morning the 30th (there's no Stoddard
soccer that day).  More on this shortly.

Is it too late?
I don't think so.  Several articles I have read state that Mayor Williams has
the authority to stop this project, and to tear it down.

What is our message?

            STOP THIS NOW
            TAKE IT DOWN
            THERE SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN A PERMIT ISSUED
            GET IT OUT OF THE CITY
            SHOULD NOT BE NEAR RESIDENCES, SCHOOLS &
               BUSINESSES
Get involved!
Quick!

Regards-
Jo Cooper,  the yellow house on the corner of 41st & Davenport

------------

From:   eyoffe@worldnet.att.net (Emily Yoffe)
In the Wash Post metro section today is an article on the Tenleytown tv
tower.  They have started building again.  This thing is scheduled to be one
and a half times the size of the Washington Monument!!  I have written to
Kathy Patterson (who is fighting to stop it and has been very responsive),
the BZE, the mayor, the new city administrator, et.al., but do your troops
have any suggestions on how we can get this stopped? Fine to put in new laws
to prevent future monstrosities, but how do we make sure this grotesque
(potentially dangerous) eyesore does not go up in our neighborhood?
Thanks, Emily Yoffe

-------------

From:   Jen Nielsen007
FYI, I found this on Medline.....

Title : Biological effects of electromagnetic fields and radiation [see
comments]
Author:  Sienkiewicz Z
Address: National Radiological Protection Board, Chilton, Didcot, Oxon, UK.
Source: J Radiol Prot, 18(3):185-93 1998 Sep
Abstract:
There is much debate and controversy surrounding the effects of low intensity
electromagnetic fields and radiation. A few subtle biological effects have
been observed in experiments using animals and volunteers, but there is no
convincing evidence to suggest that exposure to the fields commonly
encountered in the environment will cause any significant adverse health
effect in humans.

------------

From:   billrogers@bigfoot.com (Bill Rogers)
I have nothing to add but rumor, BUT many years ago, a friend here who
worked in the FCC said the inside knowledge on broadcast radiation was
appauling, and that there were clusters of cancer (leukemia?) around
broadcast towers with large doses of a certain type of ground wave which
descends towers and spreads out from there.

He mentioned one tower in Honolulu which broadcast directly into an
adjacent apartment building (not a ground wave issue though), which had
high cancer rates.  I have done some research on this re: transportation
and it seems there is a **LOT** of fear-mongering and very little objective
data to indicate health problems.

I do have trouble picking up WHFS on the radio here as local stations bump
it off my radio!
|^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^|
|Bill Rogers                                                    |
|Policy Analyst in Transportation, Urban Form, & the Environment|

-------------------

From:   johnl@erols.com (Ann Loikow)
I have been trying to educate folks on the issues involved with the
American Tower Systems tower.  I have a copy of a video, "Boardcast
Blues," which describes the issues raised by a similar digital TV tower
proposed for Lookout Mountain, outside Denver, CO. The website for the Lookout
Mountain case is:  http://www.c-a-r-e.org.  It has a lot of useful
information and links to other websites on this issue.  The video is
about an hour long and is excellent in explaining the types of radiation
these antennas emit, how they can be measured, and how little (virtually
none) oversight to protect the public's health is being done. If you
would like an original of the video, the website tells you how to order one.
I will be taking it up to Jim Donald at St. Columba's later today for
him to view in hopes that we can get a showing there for the community.
If you or your neighbors would like to see it, let me know.

The National Trust for Historic Preservation, at its preservation
conference last fall, had a session on the issues raised by the zoning
and siting of antennas and broadcast and cell towers.  I picked up at
the conference a copy of a "Local Officials Guide --Siting Cellular
Towers -- What You Need to Know -- What You Need to Do" which was
jointly prepared by the American Planning Asssociation, the
International City/County Management Association, the National League of
Counties, the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and
Advisors, the National League of Cities, and Public Technology, Inc.  It
includes an extensive list of local government associations and local
governments which can provide more information on local zoning
ordinances. They also distributed case law on the issue and model
ordinances (Fairfax County's was one of the one's distributed).

Also the National Association of Counties, the National League of Cities
and the US Conference of Mayors have been active on this issue, too, and
have participated in a number of FCC rulemakings on the issue.  You can
check the FCC website (www.fcc.gov) and the websites for each of these
entities.

I received the following information and links to relevant documents
about the possible health impacts of cell and broadcast towers from
Libby Kelley, Executive Director Council on Wireless Technology Impacts
(her contact info is at the end of this email). For more background on
the health and related issues regarding broadcast and telecommunications
towers, see her website, which has lots of links:
http://www.EMRNetwork.org.

Libby's group also has a new film out, in preview version, specifically
about the cell tower issue.  It is called "Public exposure: DNA,
Democracy and the Wireless Revolution".  It is 58 minutes long and
provides a basic education on the problems with the Telecommunications
Act of 1996, the science, effects of campaign donations, health effects
and the technology. It includes footage from her trip to Europe
(discussed below) to illustrate that this is a global issue and to
motivate citizens to take a stand now. The video costs $10 and can be
order directly from her (see her address, email, etc. at end of this
email).

She is involved in the appeal to the Supreme Court of the Second
Circuit's decicions in a case brought by the Ad Hoc Association of
Parties Concerned about FCC Radiofrequency Radiation Health an Safety
Rules, the Communication Workers of America, and the Cellular Phone
Taskforce challenging the FCC's health and safety rules.  Tenth
amendment issues about the ability of local and state governments to
regulate this industry, especially the zoning and siting of towers and
antennas, is at the heart of this case.

She just sent me a contact at the FCC to see if we can get a background
radiation study (see below). cathy If I can provide any more information
or help, please let me know

Ann Loikow
ANC 3C05
johnl@erols.com
202-363-6658
______________________________
[Libby's material follows]

I am concerned about the large installation proposed for Tenleytown. I
know the area and can see the impact on the homes and schools nearby.
Please  let me know what I can do to assist to get the word out on this.
I am attaching some recent information - the LA Unified School District
recently  resolved not to site cell towers on or near school property.
The British  government is reviewing similar policies, including banning
use of cell phones by children and youth.  I attended meetings in Austria this
summer  on "Cell Towers and Public Health" attended by concerned
scientists and  public health officials from around the world.  This
body agreed to an outdoor radiation exposure standard which is only 5%
of the current U.S. Standard.

I am presently involved in preparing an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court
of  the case brought by the Ad Hoc Association, in September 1997. The
driving  issue is preemption of state and local government powers under
the 10th  amendment - inability to say no to cell towers; inability to
protect public health. I can send you a brief once it is filed. Just let
me know what you need.

Sincerely,

Libby Kelley
_______________________________
[Also from Libby]

You asked about Lookout Mountain, well the news is not good.  This
community continues to get OVER the limit set by FCC which is OVER 200
microwatts per centimeter squared.  FCC knows and is not doing anything
about it. This is the worst case situation and can happen in any
community unless this is abated here and now.  This situation is posing
a serious health threat. I am attaching a email below sent out by Deb
Carney last week.  You should contact her for more information.  Deb
Carney" <deb@carneylaw.net>.

Also, I know there are probably existing RF emitting facilities around
the proposed site in Tenly town - you have the highest ground in the
District!  You have the Russian Embassy for goodness sake!  American
University, a major television station and American University - all
neighbors who probably already have existing towers. I wonder if there
are antennas on the steeple of National Presbyterian church?  All of
this adds to the radiation background.  First, the background RF should
be checked. Contact  Ed Mantiply, office of Engineering and Technology
at the FCC in Washington. He works with Dr. Robert Cleveland and is an
expert on background radiation.   Ask how you can get a background
radiation study there due to the proximity to so many existing
antennas.  I would be real curious to know what he tells you.
__________________________________________________________

Alfred Hislop
64 Lookout Mountain Circle
Golden, CO 80401
Telephone 303 526 2346
Fax 303 526 7865

          September 15, 2000

Mary Bunn, Zoning Administrator
Jefferson County Planning and Zoning Department
100 Jefferson County Parkway, Suite 3550
Golden, CO 80419-3550

Dear Ms. Bunn:

This letter constitutes a formal zoning complaint regarding
transmitting facilities owned by KRMA (Channel 6 TV) on Colorow Road and KISS
(formerly KHIH) on Lookout Mountain Road.

The FM antennas on the KRMA tower were recently re-configured in an
attempt to reduce ground level RF exposure levels to values less than
100% Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE).  Using a calibrated instrument, CARE
engineers today made measurements of RF exposure in the vicinity of the
KRMA tower in order to ascertain the effectiveness of the antenna
re-configuration.  We have found that the "fix" has resulted in higher
levels of RF exposure than previously existed.  Across the street from
the tower, a large area exists in which exposure exceeds 100% MPE.
Spatially averaged RF exposure as high as 404% MPE was found outside the
fence to
the Boettcher Mansion.  Inside the Boettcher enclosure, spatially averaged
levels as high as 210% MPE were found.  Inside the Boettcher Mansion
itself, peak levels as high as 46.5% MPE were found in the Pine Room,
and 67% MPE peak levels were found in the upstairs sunroom.  Peaks of this
magnitude were never before found inside the building.  The increase in
these levels will almost certainly exacerbate the already severe
interference to audio systems experienced in the Boettcher Mansion.  In
general, RF levels in the vicinity of the Boettcher Mansion have greatly
increased since the antenna "fix."

One would assume that a competent engineer has made calculations of
the ground level RF exposure levels that would result from this "fix," and
that post-modification measurements would have been made by the responsible
parties before allowing these excess RF exposure levels to continue.  It
is disappointing to know that, once again, it has been left to the local
citizens to discover and report dangerous RF exposure levels on Lookout
Mountain.

CARE engineers also re-visited the previously known "hot-spots" on
JeffCo open space near the KISS tower, and found that the RF exposure levels
had increased since CARE and JeffCo last held a joint measurement session
there.  Three spots were found that had exposure levels greater than
100% MPE, with the highest spatially averaged spot being 136.8% MPE.

Sincerely,
Alfred Hislop
________________________________
http://www.thetimesonline.com/

Article by Philip Wieland <pwieland@howpubs.com>
As cell phone use grows, so does concern over safety
Opponents cite studies showing links to brain
tumors,DNA risk

                 BY PHIL WIELAND Times Staff Writer

                 Cellular telephone antennas are popping up all over
                 the nation to satisfy the booming demand for
                 instant communication, but some people believe
                 the towers, the phones they feed and the new
                 generation of computers pose unnecessary health
                 threats.

                 Critics call the background radiation that is
                 generated "electrosmog." The fear that all these
                 radio frequency waves might be a health hazard
                 often prompts citizen protests when new towers
                 are proposed.

                 The Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996
                 prohibits communities from barring the antennas on
                 the ground they might be a health risk, but there is
                 growing concern that the danger extends from the
                 towers to the seemingly minuscule output of
                 cellular phones.

                 As Bill Curry put it in preaching against the
                 unrestricted use of cell phones, secondhand
                 radiation, like secondhand smoke, is potentially
                 hazardous to your health. And he's not alone in
                 urging more testing to determine the validity of
                 studies that found links to brain tumors and DNA
                 breakdown and cell phone use.

                 Curry, a retired staff scientist at the Argonne
                 National Laboratory whose field of expertise is
                 electromagnetics, lives in Illinois but recently spoke
                 to the Munster Town Council about the town's
                 contract with Nextel to install cell phone antennas
                 on the water tower behind the Center for Visual
                 and Performing Arts.

                 He also talked to East Chicago Schools
                 Superintendent John Flores about portable laptop
                 computers being introduced at many local schools
                 because they use cell phone modems to connect
                 with the schools' main computer. His message was
                 the same to both: Radiation from the antennas and
                 the computers could be harmful, especially to
                 children.

                 The radiation he's referring to is not the kind you
                 read with a Geiger counter. He's talking about radio
                 frequency emissions that carry the cell phone
                 signal. It's similar to the electromagnetic fields
                 around high tension lines but at much lower
                 intensities. Curry said holding a phone next to your
                 head is like putting your brain in a very low level
                 microwave oven.

                 While his expertise is not in bio-electromagnetics,
                 the effects of radio frequencies on living tissue,
                 Curry has studied research done on cell phones
                 and radio frequencies since being recruited to fight
                 the installation of a cellular tower in his
                 neighborhood several years ago.

                 A lot of sometimes conflicting research has been
                 done on the different ways a radio wave can be
                 modulated to carry a message. Each type of wave
                 could have a different effect on body tissues.

                 While Curry admits "the jury is still out" on the
                 effects of radio frequencies on the brain, he said,
                 "There needs to be a lot more experimentation and
                 research to tell whether one is more harmful than
                 another."

                 He cited some studies that showed low frequency
                 waves could interfere with the brain's or the body's
                 ability to fight off toxins and possibly cause breaks
                 in the DNA strands carrying the body's genetic
                 code.

                 "The overall background level of radiation has risen
                 in the past 10 years by a factor of 10. That will
                 have unknown effects that will take years to
                 straighten out. Brain cancer has been increasing
                 by 1 percent a year. I can't say we're all going to
                 die, but it's not a healthy environment. The design
                 of the cell phone worries me because it is the first
                 time we've made a practice to put powerful radio
                 transmitters next to our head."

                 Curry's concerns were echoed in a recent Business
                 Week column by Norm Alster, who called for more
                 testing and quoted Swedish Neurologist Leif
                 Salford's assessment that cell phones are "the
                 world's largest biological experiment ever."

                 East Chicago Schools Superintendent John Flores
                 shares Curry's concerns and has joined Curry's call
                 for caution by including the message in a
                 newsletter he distributes to superintendents
                 throughout Indiana, Illinois and Wisconsin.

                 "It confirms what I always believed," Flores said of
                 Curry's analysis. "Radiation travels through stone,
                 so there is a risk no matter what the minimal
                 standard may be. I use a cell phone myself, but
                 very rarely. It's not something I want to do at
                 great length, but sometimes you do have
                 emergencies."

                 Flores said East Chicago does not have the new
                 portable computers although they would be
                 cheaper to use than those connected by cable to
                 the main computer.

                 "We still have to explore all the ramifications they
                 have. Students would be sitting at the computer
                 longer than they would be at a cell phone and you
                 have to take those dangers under consideration. I
                 have grandchildren, and I want them to be healthy
                 30 years from now."

                 Libby Kelley has spent the last four years fighting
                 to get the safety guidelines for radio frequency
                 emissions changed and to give states the right to
                 ban cell phone towers on health grounds. Kelley, of
                 Novato, Calif., near San Francisco, helped found
                 the Council on Wireless Technology Impacts and
                 has won a few battles but not the war.

                 One school district agreed to prohibit the
                 installation of cellular antennas on its buildings and
                 two California communities have issued a
                 moratorium on additional cell towers, but Kelley
                 said that will not stop the sprouting of more
                 towers because "they are like water and will go to
                 the place of least resistance."

                 "We are up against a huge machine of local
                 politicians working with the industry, and campaign
                 contributions have a lot to do with the laws," she
                 said. "The (Republican and Democratic)
                 conventions are being financed by money from the
                 industry.

                 "Wireless computers are the next generation of
                 equipment, but it is non-regulated and unlicensed.
                 The new wave of technology is going to be hard to
                 avoid. It is placing our children's health at great
                 risk."

                 Phil Wieland can be reached at
                 pwieland@howpubs.com or (219) 465-5151.
 

I am attaching  the report from the United Kingdom which calls for more
precaution in siting "mobile masts", the Salzburg resolution,  a chart
showing biological and health effects from low level radiation, an
interview I recently had on the Environmental News Network and a recent
article from Business Week.

There is not much published research on the heath effects on civilian
populations from nearby mobile masts.  This is because the technology is
new and there are few scientific studies underway.  Many experts believe
that due to the latency period between the onset of an exposure and the
development of a cancer it may take up two decades for the emergence of
statistically valid data showing harm. However, there are comparable
studies which may be drawn upon to indicate by reference what the
potential for harm may be. Clinical studies show changes there are early
changes at the cellular level which are viewed as precoursers to cancer.
There
are also effects on neurology and behavior which can occur early on can
cause a host of problems including  sleep problems, depression, memory
and effects on learning and motor ability.

It is important to note that scientists believe the effects are
cumulative.  That means the high intensity exposure people get to the
head from to cell phones from periodic (and voluntary) use are the same over
time as the low intensity exposures people will get by living and
working by a cell tower.  The frequency is the same, the duration and exposure
conditions are different but over time, the effect on biological systems
may be the same.

For more information, here is what some scientists and public health
officials recommend:

1.  UK Report "The Stewart Report" calling for more precaution in siting
mobile masts near residences and schools among many recommendations.
Print out the section on the precautionary principle  .
http://www.iegmp.org.uk/IEGMPsum.htm

2.   Salzburg Resolution - adopted in Austria in June 2000 calling for
more stringent exposure standards related to cell towers.
International Conference on Cell Tower Siting Linking Science & Public
Health Salzburg, June 7-8, 2000
Salzburg Resolution and Proceedings:
<http://www.land-sbg.gv.at/celltower>http://www.land-sbg.gv.at/celltower

3.  Chart on scientific studies which show biological/health effects.
clink on "science on the CCWTI website.
http://www.ccwti.org

4.  Business Week article
  NEWS: ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY

Commentary: Cell Phones: We Need More Testing

Back in the early 1980s, there were 35 researchers at the Environmental
Protection Agency exploring the biological effects of radiation from
cell phones and other devices. But by 1987, budget cuts had shut the program
down. Since then, the Federal Communications Commission and the Food &
Drug Administration have regulated wireless communications with a feathery
touch.

This hands-off approach no longer seems appropriate. Despite repeated
safety assurances from the cell-phone industry, scientists keep turning
up disturbing signs. On July 31, a survey of recent safety studies was
released by George L. Carlo, a pathologist and professional research
administrator who ran a $25 million industry-funded risk investigation.
Some studies in the survey--which appeared on the respected medical Web
site Medscape--showed evidence of gene damage in blood cells exposed to
cell-phone radiation. Others indicated heightened tumor rates in
cell-phone  users. ''At the very least, the data say that claims of
absolute safety would be irresponsible,'' declares Carlo, who now runs a
for-profit research company called Health Risk Management Group.

LEGAL ACTION. Carlo's report doesn't prove that cell phones cause cancer
or other diseases. But many experts echo his concerns. Leif G. Salford,
a professor of neurosurgery at the University of Lund in Sweden, found
that microwave radiation at cell-phone frequencies can weaken the blood-brain
barrier in rats. In May, a British government report recommended that
children not be exposed to mobile phones. Italy and Switzerland have
slashed allowed radiation emissions from cellular base stations.

Belatedly, the U.S. government is also taking action. In early June,
partly in response to recent studies, the FDA announced it would help
supervise
a new industry-sponsored research program. And in July, the industry
announced plans to provide labels disclosing how much radiation phones
emit.

But for an industry struggling to boost consumer confidence, these steps
may be too little, too late. It is certainly past time to keep the issue
from spilling into the courts. On Aug. 1, Christopher J. Newman, a
41-year-old neurologist who developed a brain tumor, sued Motorola Inc.
and several wireless carriers in state court in Baltimore. The suit
alleges that the companies failed to disclose known radiation hazards from
cell-phone use. And lawyer Peter G. Angelos, who helped win huge
settlements against the asbestos and tobacco industries, told Business
Week he has been approached by several brain-tumor victims. He won't
file suit unless he's ''90% sure'' of victory, but says he is ''very
intensively'' studying this area.

The FDA's participation in a Cooperative Research & Development
Agreement (CRADA) with the cellular industry is an encouraging step.
Unfortunately, the effort is flawed. It's troubling that the industry is
picking up the bill and will choose which proj-ects receive funding. With
cellular
companies adamantly insisting that the phones are safe, only research
that is designed and funded independently--presumably by the
government--would have full credibility. ''How can [the FDA] claim to be
impartial if they
are taking a lot of money from industry to do research?'' asks Dr. W.
Ross Adey, distinguished professor of physiology at the Loma Linda (Calif.)
School of Medicine.

The industry, for its part, finds plenty of fault with Carlo, the man
fanning the latest round of concerns. Some of the findings he posted
last week have not yet been replicated. And a top researcher in the program
he administered challenges his interpretation of the brain-tumor data.
What's more, Carlo is on disputed ground in his claim that low levels of
radiation alone--as opposed to heat from the cellular handset--could
cause medical problems. Motorola director of biological research, Dr. Mays L.
Swicord,
insists there is no ''repeatable or established'' evidence of biological
effects from cell-phone radiation.

Henry Lai, research professor of bioengineering at the University of
Washington, disagrees: Looking at about 200 research papers published
since1996 on the impact of microwave radiation, he found that 80% of
them reported biological effects. ''These include behavioral effects on brain
function, effects on the immune system, and genetic effects,'' he
says. Lai has also found DNA damage in rats exposed to microwave radiation at
power levels similar to those produced by cell phones.

Who's right? There isn't enough information yet to judge. As Sweden's
Salford puts it, cell phones constitute ''the world's largest biological

experiment ever.'' Only well-designed and supervised science will tellus
whether and how cell phones affect human cells--and calm consumers'
increasingly frayed nerves.

By Norm Alster
Alster covers technology for Business Week in Boston.

5.  Recent interview I had on internet with the Environmental News
Network http://www.enn.com/radio/earthradiocellphone1.asp
 

Libby Kelley
Executive Director
Council on Wireless Technology Impacts
____________________________

Phone - 415-892-1863
Fax -     415-892-3108
936-B Seventh Street, # 206
Novato, California 94945
Website:  http://www.ccwti.org
EMR NETWORK MEMBER  http://www.emrnetwork.org