The Board of Representatives in Stamford, Connecticut, earlier this month voted to reject a model agreement that would have allowed AT&T and Verizon to install 5G equipment on city-owned utility poles.
In a bid to get 5G swiftly installed in his state, Gov. Ned Lamont’s office created a template contract between the nation’s top two telecommunication carriers and the state’s five major cities.
Stamford, the state’s second-largest city, is the only city so far to have voted against using the contract. Twenty-one representatives voted against the pact. Five were in favor and eight abstained.
Commenting on the city’s decision, W. Scott McCollough, chief litigator for Children Health Defense’s (CHD) electromagnetic radiation (EMR) cases, told The Defender, “I applaud Stamford’s principled stand.”
Advocates for the contract said Stamford’s rejection might bring a lawsuit against the city, but McCollough disagreed.
“The wireless companies do not have a case yet. It is too early,” he said. “This was merely a decision to reject a model agreement. Federal and state law allow the city to instead negotiate individual terms, and that is what Stamford has chosen to do.”
The 21 representatives were largely persuaded by presentations by six independent experts on the scientific evidence of harm from radiofrequency (RF) radiation, including 5G, according to a local media report.
The experts, including toxicologist and epidemiologist Devra Davis, Ph.D., MPH, said there were many documented health and environmental impacts of wireless radiation, including brain damage, memory loss, decline in reproductive function, DNA damage and harm to insects.
The board’s land use committee voted to recommend rejecting the pact after hearing from the experts.
Davis, founder and president of Environmental Health Trust (EHT), told The Defender, “Confronted with overwhelming, independent scientific information about the real and present dangers of bringing electromagnetic fields closer to humans than ever before, Stamford voted to protect people and their environment.”
She added, “We should stop debating whether we have proof of human harm, and take steps now to prevent that harm from spreading.”
No comments:
Post a Comment