Listed here in reverse chronological order are correspondences from residents and experts with the City of Novato regarding the four AT&T cell antenna installation applications.

Letters Sent to Novato City Council, Planning Division, and City Manager

Week of April 10, 2022

I am writing about the recent applications by AT&T for use permits to install four small cell wireless transmission facilities in Novato. These are antennas and transmitters typically associated with 4G signals, but are also primed for 5G. I am deeply concerned as a resident of Marin and someone who spends a lot of time in Novato, and also want to support all the residents and neighbors speaking up about this tonight.

I am asking you to deny all four applications based on the following, as well as the content that will be presented by residents tonight.

To date, AT&T’s applications are non-compliant with Novato’s ordinance on the following points:

1. AT&T claims it needs to install these facilities because of low or missing coverage. Residents have been out to the locations, and find that their phones work quite well there. AT&T cannot claim a “coverage gap.”
2. AT&T argues that the law forbids mention of health effects. Doesn’t that sound irrational to you and quite archaic, to forbid discussion and free speech? There is much science that has been shared all over Marin during the creation of emergency ordinances in 2018-2020, including peer reviewed science and content from the WHO, among others. Why is it so important to forbid us to speak about health? Consider this.
3. AT&T’s engineers measured the anticipated radio frequency exposures incorrectly. Their engineering firm has been charged with criminal conduct in Palo Alto.
4. The installations are near residences and a school (Novato High), which is prohibited in the city’s ordinance. AT&T did not spell out why it could not install at more-preferred locations, and within distances specified by ordinance. Novato needs to enforce their ordinance which does not allow this. 
5. Neighbors within 600 feet of the installations were not notified by AT&T or the City of Novato, in direct violation of the ordinance. This is unacceptable. Many local residents are deeply concerned, and do not want these new installations.

Ultimately, AT&T is not acting in the interests of residents and community, but in their own interests, solely for profit. Not only have they not followed the legal requirements laid out in Novato’s ordinance, but there is nothing here to benefit the community. You must require detailed evidence from all applicants showing compliance with federal, state and local laws.

Wireless technology is not safe for human health or the health of the environment. I share this information after working on this issue for over 5 years and working with local communities to help craft ordinances that reflect the interests and values of their residents. If you would like resources or content related to this fact, I am happy to share it with you.

No municipality should be further approving or promoting outdated, unneeded wireless installations. The future is fiber-optic connectivity. Fiber is faster, fire-safe, more secure, safer for people and the environment and consumes far less energy.

I fully support the comments that will come in tonight against these applications, and request you listen closely to the residents’ feedback and honor their needs and asks first before giving your power over to corporate interests that only benefit the wireless industry, not residents and homeowners. 

***

Here in Fairfax, we researched all the options for how to create a protective ordinance, and would be happy to share those tips. Novato doesn’t have to reinvent the wheel; many towns and cities are all in the same boat and have had some excellent legal guidance and creativity in crafting ordinances that give them back some control. This also happened in San Anselmo and San Rafael. I can share these resources with you (and there are lists online as well.) Many locations have been models in this way. Let me know if you’d like any of these resources, and would be happy to pass them on to make it easier!

I know Theodora Scarato spoke, an expert in this field- Environmental Health Trust (where she works) also has some lists of exceptional towns and cities who have creatively and successfully written strong and protective ordinances and followed through with holding telecoms accountable to those restrictions. I think Novato can do the same, and can work with what is already in place there as well.

Thank you,

******************************************************************************

Dear Council of Novato,

I understand there are pending applications by AT&T for use permits to install 4 small cell (aka 5G) wireless transmission facilities in Novato. These are antennas and transmitters typically associated with 4G signals, but are also primed for 5G. Wireless technology is not safe for human health or the health of the environment. No municipality should be further approving or promoting outdated, unneeded wireless installations. The future is fiber-optic connectivity. Fiber is faster, fire-safe, more secure, safer for people and the environment and consumes far less energy.

AT&T’s applications are non-compliant with Novato’s ordinance on the following points (according to Novato activists):

1. AT&T claims it needs to install these facilities because of low or missing coverage. Residents have been out to the locations, and find that their phones work quite well there. AT&T cannot claim a “coverage gap.”
2. AT&T argues that the law forbids mention of health effects, which is false— a misreading of the law that can be proven.
3. AT&T’s engineers measured the anticipated radio frequency exposures incorrectly. Their engineering firm has been charged with criminal conduct in Palo Alto.
4. The installations are near residences and a school (Novato High), which is prohibited in the city’s ordinance. AT&T did not spell out why it could not install at more-preferred locations, and within distances specified by ordinance.
5. Neighbors within 600 feet of the installations were not notified by AT&T or the City of Novato, in direct violation of the ordinance.

Do not approve these harmful WTFs!!! Please–for the sake of all our safety!!! Think of the children!

***

Please check out this video regarding what local communities can do and remember that the speakers at the council meeting gave detailed information about how Novato does have power in this situation.

There is an attorney right here in Novato who is an expert in helping communities stand up against the telecom industry, which you could hire at AT&T’s expense according to the Novato Wireless ordinance. That’s Harry Lehmann.

This is an instructional video for towns from top telecommunications litigation and zoning attorney, Andrew Campanelli:

Sincerely,

***********************************************************************

Dear Planning Commissioners,

I’m writing to encourage you to turn down the ATT applications for four small cell wireless transmission facilities in Novato. 

As you probably know, the Federal Communications Commission was sanctioned by the United States Court of Appeals in the DC Circuit for being “arbitrary and capricious” in retaining its outdated and insufficient safety limits for human exposure to wireless radiation.  The court held that the FCC failed to respond to “record evidence that exposure to radiofrequency radiation at levels below the Commission’s current limits may cause negative health effects unrelated to cancer.”  The court further stated that the FCC demonstrated “a complete failure to respond to comments concerning environmental harm caused by RF radiation.”  The court found that the FCC ignored numerous scientists, medical doctors, and organizations that called on them to update limits.  And the FCC failed to address issues concerning the impacts of long term exposure, impacts on children, wildlife, environment, the developing brain, and reproduction.

I urge the Notato planners not to follow in the feckless footsteps of the FCC.  Please do not commit the same oversights as did the FCC by approving four additional wireless facilities that comply only with these obsolete safety limits.

Novato has provisions for wireless constructions in its ordinance.  Please use these requirements to deny these applications.

Sincerely,

********************************************************************

Dear Members of the Novato City Council,

I am writing to urge you to protect property and the health of members of your community by opposing the installation of additional, un-needed cellular antennas in Novato.

Several of the proposed sites are in direct violation of your own ordinance (distance from schools and actual need for antennas, etc.).

Please think about the future of Novato and consider instead supporting proactive installation of  fiber technology which provides fast and more efficient connectivity without harmful effects.   

Some of you have perhaps not read the VAST literature  that is published in peer reviewed journals on the health effects of microwave radiation from 2g, 3g and 4g (partial list here: https://www.americansforresponsibletech.org/scientific-studies).  The effects from 5g, which it comes to Novato, will be compounded significantly because of the nature of the carrier wave technology. 

Thank you for thinking about the health and well being of your constituents first.

Sincerely,

****************************************************************

Dear Council Member,

Please do not consider this unsafe installation and violation of current Novato ordinances… I am a resident of Novato and voter.

1. AT&T claims it needs to install these facilities because of low or missing coverage. Residents have been out to the locations, and find that their phones work quite well there. AT&T cannot claim a “coverage gap.”

2. AT&T argues that the law forbids mention of health effects, which is false— a misreading of the law that can be proven.

3. AT&T’s engineers measured the anticipated radio frequency exposures incorrectly. Their engineering firm has been charged with criminal conduct in Palo Alto.

4. The installations are near residences and a school (Novato High), which is prohibited in the city’s ordinance. AT&T did not spell out why it could not install at more-preferred locations, and within distances specified by ordinance.

5. Neighbors within 600 feet of the installations were not notified by AT&T or the City of Novato, in direct violation of the ordinance.

“I want to comment on the recent applications by AT&T for use permits to install four small cell wireless transmission facilities in Novato. These are antennas and transmitters typically associated with 4G signals, but are also primed for 5G. Wireless technology is not safe for human health or the health of the environment. No municipality should be further approving or promoting outdated, unneeded wireless installations. The future is fiber-optic connectivity. Fiber is faster, fire-safe, more secure, safer for people and the environment and consumes far less energy.” 

Sincerely,

**********************************************************

Dear Novato council members and planners,

I am an Education/Outreach coordinator for the EMF Safety Network (emfsafetynetwork.org), an organization with members across the nation, including many in Marin-Sonoma. Our mission is to educate and empower people by providing science and solutions to reduce electromagnetic radiation sources (EMFs) in our lives. We also work to achieve related public policy change and environmental justice.

Through 2021 I was a member of the Residents Working Group in the County Digital Marin Project. My particular interest was in educating others about the imperative need for minimizing wireless connectivity while maximizing wired connectivity, and ensuring that safety is reflected in the Digital Marin Strategic Plan.

In 2018, I was a co-leader of a team of San Rafael residents who worked with then Community Development Director Paul Jensen and two planners to help develop San Rafael’s small cell telecommunications policy, Resolution 14621. Our team continued to address strengthening the policy in 2019, and, after unfortunate Covid interruptions and personnel changes, are returning to that effort with City staff this year. The siting location provisions of our Resolution prompted Crown Castle in 2019 to withdraw a batch of four small cell applications, three of which were for sites directly in front of homes. Even more protective ordinances are available for reference in San Anselmo, Fairfax, Mill Valley, Petaluma, and some Southern California municipalities.

May I respectfully make two key points relative to the AT&T applications: 

First, wireless radiation is harmful to human health—an inconvenient truth with which local jurisdictions must grapple, because there is no protection to be had from higher levels. Our FCC is a captured agency (demonstrated by a 2015 report from the Harvard Center for Ethics). Its exposure guidelines are industry-driven and so woefully inadequate for protecting individual and public health that a 2021 federal court decision directed the agency to review the vast quantity of scientific evidence it had previously ignored. https://ehtrust.org/eht-takes-the-fcc-to-court/  The evidence of adverse health effects is so voluminous, that as long ago as 2012, a group of scientists published the BioInitiative Report, a comprehensive compendium of studies that now fills a wine carton in my garage. Each month, UC professor of public health Dr. Joel Moskowitz updates a summary of peer-reviewed research on”health risks associated with wireless radiation, including the cancer risk, reproductive harm and neurological disorders.” That listing currently shows over 1500 studies. Last year a New Hampshire state commission released a report (final report attached below) that represents a substantive leap in the U.S with regard to authoritative information assembled especially for state legislators. Since then, an important bill regarding wireless facility setbacks from homes, schools, etc., has been introduced in the N.H. legislature. Both provide valuable guidance for elected officials at any level in the U.S.

Second, Novato community members who are educated about the adverse effects of wireless emissions—as well as about effective telecommunications ordinances, are a rich source of information. They can efficiently expand the understandings of council and staff, and can constructively assist in strengthening policy in ways that serve both the City and its residents. That policy can and should include attention to City participation in building out fiber-optic networks, which are superior to wireless in every way. The landmark 2018 report “ReInventing Wires: The Future of Landlines and Networks” (attached) is a user-friendly overview of municipal fiber.

I hope that you will use all relevant on-the-books Novato policy measures to resist AT&T overtures. Predictably, the carrier is seeking installations that are not needed and will increase ambient radiation and threaten the health of nearby occupants who live in harm’s way. I hope, also, that you will look toward establishing a strengthened, protective ordinance, and that you will look to maximizing fiber connectivity in Novato.

***

Thank you for this response, Mayor Lucan, and for researching all options for maximum protection of human health and the environment.I believe a resident sent you the recent Pittsfield MA Board of Health Cease and Desist order to Verizon? Here is a recent notable action by another U.S municipality—a policy that includes an environmental provision. Duncan, Oaklahoma

Thank you.