Sample Letters to local Planning Board and U.S. Senators re: 5G

Dear Elected Officials,
As some​ of you know, our family has become intimately familiar with the potential health effects of wireless radiation exposure over the last six years. ​

 Now there are two bills which will be voted on in the coming days in the U.S. Senate (see below) which would remove local decision-making processes about our towns’ future connectivity. After seeing how important it is for the Shelburne ZBA, for example, to be able to ask tough questions about AT&T’s cell tower proposal on land under agricultural restriction across the street ​
​from elderly people and children a few years ago, the prospect of Shelburne and other towns losing our local decision-making powers is deeply concerning. ​

Would you have a few minutes to read over the information presented by our colleague Cece Doucette below (and also available as a link here)?

​A related request would be to read the email in blue below about another colleague’s challenges in Weston related to not having up to date local ordinances re: “small cell” technology. I am attaching some sample regulations from Randolph, MA which you may want to adapt for passage in this spring’s town meeting if you have not already done so. I am available for any questions or support you may require. Thank you for your service to our region!
Jonathan Mirin

I just spoke with a lawyer who specializes in helping communities navigate wireless zoning issues, and learned something that you may want to share with your respective (US) networks. It could help prevent others from ending up in a situation like mine.

Many, if not most, communities have zoning bylaws or ordinances that were designed for the era when cell towers were the big threat. Not that towers aren’t still a big problem(!), but the newer (smaller) technologies often slip through the cracks of these ordinances. There have also been two big changes at the Federal level in recent years that effectively undermine local regs that haven’t been updated. (These are the “shot clock” rule, that provides a time limit within which a town must repsond to a carrier application, and a 2014 FCC report which makes a number of changes related to more current technologies (such as small cell antennas).)

My town is currently finding itself between a rock and a hard place, so to speak, since we have outdated regulations (which are “too prohibitive” for current technologies, and so not in line with the 2014 FCC changes.) If we take the time to change our regulations, we will (most likely) run afoul of the “shot clock” time limitation. But if we grant Verizon their permits, then any regs we develop later will be “toothless,” because any carrier that is denied a permit later on can claim “discrimination,” since Verizon will have been treated differently. (One of the federal laws explicitly prohibits towns from treating providers differently.)

So, my recommendation to anyone who cares about this stuff is to encourage your town to be pro-active and get some current regulations in place BEFORE a carrier applies to site a cell antenna, DAS, or other non-tower technology in your town. There are tons of examples of town ordinances (MA and elsewhere) on the web- look for one that incorporates the recent legal changes- ie, written in 2015 or later. (The one I downloaded from Randolph, MA looks promising.) Or, the town can hire a consultant or lawyer to help.


———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Cecelia Doucette

Dear EMF Stakeholders,
Most of you may know it’s more my style to present information on wireless radiation and let

​folks decide what to do with it. Today, however, it takes me out of my comfort zone but I need to ask for your explicit help in our democratic process –realizing it may take you out of your comfort zone too.
The FCC and industry are fast-tracking legislation that would take authority away from our municipalities in deciding whether or not we want the infrastructure needed for 5G and

t​he Internet of Things. They did this back in 1997 too when they circumvented safety testing on cell phone technology then got the Telecommunications Act passed. That left our local authorities powerless as the industry put cell towers near homes, schools, hospitals, churches and senior housing. Many have become very ill, with no recourse.
Now the FCC and industry are trying to push through two bills in D.C. that will put small but extremely hazardous cell antennas in our neighborhoods on utility poles right outside our homes, schools, offices, everywhere. The 5G signal will carry huge doses of data faster, but not very far so the industry wants to install millions of these small cell antennas to carry the data from pole to pole. 5G will also use 3G and 4G technology so existing towers won’t come down; 5G will add to the electrosmog. These small cell antennas will pulse biologically hazardous microwave radiation at us 24/7 at close range.
The way the Telecom Act is written today, industry is supposed to submit an application to town officials to put in antennas, and these new bills are trying to override this control measure for local authorities. Why is the FCC and industry in such a rush? The U.S. National Toxicology Program is in the middle of reporting out findings from a $25M multi-year study that has already found this radiation causes DNA damage, brain and heart tumors. More findings will come out in 2017.
The industry leaders are not concerned with public health, they just want to be first to market. As soon as the NTP findings came out, they pushed to get approval to use the 5G spectrum. The Cellular Telephone Industry Association (CTIA-The Wireless Association) did its own big cancer study in the 1990s which showed the same findings, but they didn’t inform the public. Instead, they crafted the Telecom Act and pushed cell phones and infrastructure on an unsuspecting public. Then they introduced wi-fi which exposes us even further indoors, and now they plan to roll out the Internet of Things and blanket our neighborhoods in radiation.
Please, don’t take my word on all of this, when you have time I encourage you to investigate on your own (thank you, Katie Singer, author of Invisible Silent Spring, and others for this great resource on these two bills, and thank you world scientists for the EMF Scientists website which presents the facts on wireless radiation).
But for today, we need your voice (and every adult’s in your house) in two ways:
1. Call your U.S. Senators’ office with the following message; you can read it to the person who answers the phone, or leave it in voice mail. Phone numbers are given at the end of this email:

My name is ______ from (city/state) and I am calling to ask the Senator to Vote NO on MOBILE Now Act S.19 and DIGIT Act S.88 to stop 5G infrastructure and rollout of the Internet of Things. The National Toxicology Program has found the electromagnetic radiation used by wireless technology causes DNA damage, and brain and heart tumors. Non-industry funded studies all over the world report other short-and long-term biological effects, ranging from infertility, Alzheimer’s and autism to digital addiction, insomnia, headaches, skin rashes, learning disabilities, behavioral issues, depression, anxiety and more. Please VOTE NO on the MOBILE Now Act S.19 and DIGIT Act S.88. Please insist on public hearings, and send a clear message to industry that they need to work with non-industry funded scientists to develop biologically safe technology. Thank you.

2. Email your U.S. Senators with the following message; email links are given below:

Subject: Please Vote NO on MOBILE Now Act S.19 and DIGIT Act S.88

The National Toxicology Program has found the electromagnetic field (EMF) of radiation emitted by wireless technology causes DNA damage, and brain and heart tumors. Non-industry funded studies all over the world report other short-and long-term biological effects, ranging from infertility, Alzheimer’s and autism to digital addiction, insomnia, headaches, nausea, nose/ear bleeds, skin rashes, cognitive impairment, learning disabilities, behavioral issues, depression, anxiety and more. Children, fetuses, the elderly and those with known health compromises are especially vulnerable. See

If this subject is new to you, you will likely have questions as we have all rapidly adopted wireless technology into our lives. Please read this high-level three-page overview titled, “EMF Points of Confusion vs. Fact” at

The FCC and industry are trying to fast-track these bills which will take away local authority from communities to decide whether they want toxic 5G/Internet of Things infrastructure installed at the street-level on poles right outside homes, schools, and offices. Please insist on public hearings, and send a clear message to industry that they need to work with non-industry funded scientists to develop biologically safe technology. Retired Microsoft Canada President Frank Clegg assures us they can, if given a nudge. See

Please VOTE NO on the MOBILE Now Act S.19 and DIGIT Act S.88. Thank you.

This is how the system works. They log your call, then print out your email for the legislator. Multiple calls and emails get their attention. If there is no activity, or very little, the industry wins.
Thank you for taking the time to read this email. I hope you will take another ten minutes to call and send an email to your legislators before your head hits the pillow tonight. The Senate will vote on this any day now, and most do not even know wireless is hazardous yet. They’ve only heard the benefits from persuasive industry lobbyists.
Thank you for the courage to use your voice in a way that might really make a difference in our world!
Warm regards,
Cece Doucette​
Sullivan, Dan – (R – AK)  (202) 224-3004 Contact:
Cotton, Tom – (R – AR)  (202) 224-2353 Contact: 
Feinstein, Dianne – (D – CA)  (202) 224-3841 Contact: 
Harris, Kamala D. – (D – CA)  (202) 224-3553 Contact:
Bennet, Michael F. – (D – CO)  (202) 224-5852 Contact:
Blumenthal, Richard – (D – CT) (202) 224-2823 Contact: 
Murphy, Christopher – (D – CT) (202) 224-4041 Contact:
Coons, Christopher A. – (D – DE) (202) 224-5042 Contact: 
Nelson, Bill – (D – FL)  (202) 224-5274 Contact: 
Isakson, Johnny – (R – GA)  (202) 224-3643 Contact: 
Perdue, David – (R – GA) (202) 224 -3521 Contact: 
Hirono, Mazie K. – (D – HI) (202) 224 -6361 Contact: 
Schatz, Brian – (D – HI)  (202) 224 -3934 Contact:
Crapo, Mike – (R – ID) (202) 224 -6142 Contact: 
Risch, James E. – (R – ID) (202) 224 -2752 Contact: 
Duckworth, Tammy – (D – IL)  (202) 224 -2854 Contact: 
Durbin, Richard J. – (D – IL) (202) 224 -2152 Contact:
Donnelly, Joe – (D – IN)  (202) 224 -4814 Contact:
Young, Todd – (R – IN)  (202) 224 -5623 Contact: 
Grassley, Chuck – (R – IA)  (202) 224-3744 Contact:
Roberts, Pat – (R – KS) (202) 224-4774 Contact: 
Paul, Rand – (R – KY)  (202) 224-4343 Contact: 
Cassidy, Bill – (R – LA) (202) 224-5824 Contact: 
Collins, Susan M. – (R – ME)  (202) 224-2523 Contact:
King, Angus S., Jr. – (I – ME) (202) 224-5344 Contact:
Cardin, Benjamin L. – (D – MD)  (202) 224 -4524 Contact: 
Van Hollen, Chris – (D – MD)  (202) 224 -4654 Contact: 
Markey, Edward J. – (D – MA)  (202) 224 -2742 Contact: 
Warren, Elizabeth – (D – MA)  (202) 224 -4543 Contact: 
Peters, Gary C. – (D – MI)  (202) 224 -6221 Contact: 
Stabenow, Debbie – (D – MI)  (202) 224 -4822 Contact: 
Franken, Al – (D – MN) (202) 224 -5641 Contact: 
Klobuchar, Amy – (D – MN)  (202) 224 -3244 Contact:
Cochran, Thad – (R – MS)  (202) 224 -5054 Contact:
Wicker, Roger F. – (R – MS)  (202) 224 -6253 Contact: 
McCaskill, Claire – (D – MO) (202) 224-6154 Contact: 
Daines, Steve – (R – MT)  (202) 224-2651 Contact:
Tester, Jon – (D – MT)  (202) 224-2644 Contact:
Hassan, Margaret Wood – (D – NH) (202) 224-3324 Contact:
Shaheen, Jeanne – (D – NH)  (202) 224 -2841 Contact:
Booker, Cory A. – (D – NJ) (202) 224 -3224 Contact:
Menendez, Robert – (D – NJ) (202) 224 -4744 Contact:
Heinrich, Martin – (D – NM) (202) 224 -5521 Contact:
Udall, Tom – (D – NM)  (202) 224 -6621 Contact: 
Gillibrand, Kirsten E. – (D – NY)  (202) 224 -4451 Contact:
Schumer, Charles E. – (D – NY)  (202) 224 -6542 Contact: 
Burr, Richard – (R – NC)  (202) 224 -3154 Contact: 
Tillis, Thom – (R – NC) (202) 224 -6342 Contact:
Heitkamp, Heidi – (D – ND)  (202) 224 -2043 Contact: 
Brown, Sherrod – (D – OH) (202) 224-2315 Contact: 
Inhofe, James M. – (R – OK)  (202) 224-4721 Contact:
Lankford, James – (R – OK)  (202) 224-5754 Contact:
Merkley, Jeff – (D – OR) (202) 224-3753 Contact:
Wyden, Ron – (D – OR) (202) 224-5244 Contact:
Casey, Robert P., Jr. – (D – PA)  (202) 224-6324 Contact:
Toomey, Patrick J. – (R – PA)  (202) 224-4254 Contact: 
Reed, Jack – (D – RI)  (202) 224-4642 Contact:
Whitehouse, Sheldon – (D – RI)  (202) 224-2921 Contact:
Scott, Tim – (R – SC)  (202) 224-6121 Contact: 
Rounds, Mike – (R – SD)  (202) 224-5842 Contact: 
Alexander, Lamar – (R – TN)  (202) 224-4944 Contact:
Cornyn, John – (R – TX)  (202) 224-2934 Contact:
Cruz, Ted – (R – TX)  (202) 224-5922 Contact:
Leahy, Patrick J. –  (202) 224-4242 Contact: 
Sanders, Bernard – (I – VT)  (202) 224-5141 Contact:
Kaine, Tim – (D – VA)  (202) 224-4024 Contact: 
Warner, Mark R. – (D – VA)  (202) 224-2023 Contact: 
Capito, Shelley Moore – (R – WV)  (202) 224-6472 Contact:
Baldwin, Tammy – (D – WI)  (202) 224-5653 Contact: