2018 My Street My Choice | Bruce Kushnick: $400 Billion Broadband Scandal
Fiber Optic cables installed to every home can provide 1,000 Mbps Internet download/upload speeds for $40 a month — for everyone in a city with no data caps, no data throttling and no RF Microwave radiation hazard.
Fiber is by far the fastest, most secure, most reliable and most energy-efficient way to stream Internet and 4k video data — many thousands of times more energy-efficient than streaming video data Wirelessly through the air, from the curb, as Verizon Wireless, AT&T Mobility and others intend to do:
- Verizon Fixed Wireless = television
- AT&T Fixed Wireless = 10 Mbps down
- Google Fiber is still expanding
California cities strive to be green cities. Fiber optic, not Wireless, delivers a much, much greener broadband solution.
Undergounded fiber is the best, but fiber can be strung on Electric Utility Poles — Sonic does it all the time. FTTP can leverage the many miles of fiber optic cable that have already been installed by AT&T California, our Title-II regulated State Telecommunications Utility— an installation of fiber that California residents already paid for with charges on Wireline AT&T landline phone bills over the last 25 years. The best solution would be one set of shared Title-II regulated fiber-optic cables to every home, which would create an even, fair and non-discriminatory playing field on which every Internet Service Provider (including Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile and Sprint) can compete for your dollars, by offering Wireline Television/Video services — a better Wireline television video service than Comcast offers today. That’s real competition and a solution that preserves the residential character of residential neighborhoods.
It’s a No Brainer: California cities can claim ownership over the many miles of fiber optic cable installed with public utility money within the city limits — lines that have been fully-depreciated and ignored by AT&T California. This smart action by cities can thwart the devious plan that is being aided and abetted by the FCC and the CPUC: a plan for private Wireless companies to steal this fiber, charge themselves virtually nothing to use it, while charging competitors (like Sonic) very high rates. Cities can stop this fraud and earn revenue to boot. Lots of it. Municipal Wireline broadband over fiber optic cables is much, much better than going through the expense, heartache and legal battles it will take to install four competing Wireless broadband networks in our neighborhoods that will require many thousands, if not millions of ugly, hazardous 4G/5G so-called “Small Cell” cell towers in residential zones.
Link To Video Bruce Kushnick – The Book of Broken Promises
Bruce Kushnick, Executive Director of New Networks. has been a telecom analyst for over 30 years. Kushnick’s 2015 book, The Book Of Broken Promises: $400 Billion Broadband Scandal, is the third in a trilogy spanning 18 years, was placed in the FCC’s public record in 2017, is a must read and is a free download here.
Biologically-Based RF Microwave Radiation Exposure Guidelines
To compare, explore this link to “FCC Guidelines for Human Exposure to Radiofrequency Microwave Radiation”
BioInitiative, 2017: “A scientific benchmark of 30 µW/m² for lowest observed effect level for RF microwave radiation is based on mobile phone base station-level studies. Applying a ten-fold reduction to compensate for the lack of long-term exposure (to provide a safety buffer for chronic exposure) or for children as a sensitive subpopulation yields a 3 to 6 µW/m² RF Microwave Radiation exposure guideline”
Similar scientifically-based RF Microwave Radiation Exposure Guidelines are published by the International Institute for Building-Biology & Ecology:
- µW/m² = millionths of a Watt per square meter (a measurement of power flux density)
- Power flux density (PFD) = the amount of electrical power that flows through a unit area: expressed as microWatts (µW) per square meter (m²).
- PFD measures only the rate of electrical power, NOT the total electrical power delivered over time, which requires the rate to be multiplied by the time of exposure and then requires reporting the results in a more relevant unit: µW-seconds/m² or µJoules/m²
- Average µW/m² readings, as specified by the FCC, significantly under-report the levels of pulsed, data-modulated, RF microwave radiation exposures for two reasons —
- Peak RF microwave radiation exposures meter 100x–1000x higher than average RF microwave radiation for data-carrying, modulated, high-crest signals like Wi-Fi, 4G/LTE and 5G because of the duty cycle, inherent in these RF signals. Inexplicably, the FCC RF microwave radiation exposure guidelines only consider average RF microwave radiation exposures, which is a significant error because living organisms’ biology reacts to the sharp changes of RF microwave radiation from zero to peak levels and back again. This is more fully explained here: Palo Alto Whitewashes RF Microwave Radiation Exposure Hazards
- The FCC RF microwave radiation exposure guidelines consider neither the time of exposure nor the total electrical power delivered over time, which is utter nonsense and scientifically unsound. This is more fully explained here: RF Microwave Radiation Counter.
Signal Strength RF Microwave Radiation Exposure Guidelines
dBm (decibel-milliwatts) is an abbreviation for the power ratio in decibels (dB) of the measured power referenced to one milliwatt (1 mW = 1/1,000 of a Watt). It is used in radio, microwave and fiber-optic communication networks as a convenient measure of absolute power because of its capability to express both very large and very small values in a short form. The following data is based on that published in the Cornet ED-85X Manual; the meter’s antenna is centered at 2,450 MHz and can meter RF Microwave Radiation from 700 MHz to 6,000 MHz.
Conclusion: 0.02 µW/m² (-75 dBm) is all the RF microwave radiation that is needed for strong cellular service in a residential neighborhood, so local municipalities should set 0.02 µW/m² (-75 dBm) as the upper limit for RF microwave radiation maximum public exposures.
- 0.02 µW/m² is 500 million (500,000,000) times lower than the scientifically-unsound, FCC RF microwave radiation maximum public exposure guideline of 10,000,000 µW/m².
- 0.02 µW/m² is still 20 billion (20,000,000,000) times higher than the PicoWatt (0.000000000001 Watt) electrical rates of power that human cell membranes use in regulating many key biological functions.
The simple math, above, clearly explains why Close Proximity Microwave Radiation Antennas (CPMRA) are hazardous and should not be allowed in public rights-of-way in residential zones.
Compare Versions of Federal Telecommunications Act (TCA)
Conclusion: regulation of the operations of Wireless Telecommunications Facilities was never preempted from local zoning authority.
Penultimate Version of the TCA
(HR 1555 from Fall 1995)
In the penultimate version of the TCA, in Section 107, the words operateand operation appear throughout.
1995 — SEC. 107. FACILITIES SITING; RADIO FREQUENCY EMISSION STANDARDS.
(a) National Wireless Telecommunications Siting Policy. — Section 332(c) of the Act (47 U.S.C. 332(c)) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
(7) Facilities siting policies. —
(A) Within 180 days after enactment of this paragraph, the Commission shall prescribe and make effective a policy regarding State and local regulation of the placement, construction, modification, or operation of facilities for the provision of commercial mobile services.
(B) Pursuant to subchapter III of chapter 5, title 5, United States Code, the Commission shall establish a negotiated rulemaking committee to negotiate and develop a proposed policy to comply with the requirements of this paragraph. Such committee shall include representatives from State and local governments, affected industries, and public safety agencies. In negotiating and developing such a policy, the committee shall take into account —
(i) the desirability of enhancing the coverage and quality of commercial mobile services and fostering competition in the provision of such services;
(ii) the legitimate interests of State and local governments in matters of exclusively local concern;
(iii) the effect of State and local regulation of facilities siting on interstate commerce; and
;(iv) the administrative costs to State and local governments of reviewing requests for authorization to locate facilities for the provision of commercial mobile services.
(C) The policy prescribed pursuant to this paragraph shall ensure that —
(i) regulation of the placement, construction, and modification of facilities for the provision of commercial mobile services by any State or local government or instrumentality thereof —
(I) is reasonable, nondiscriminatory, and limited to the minimum necessary to accomplish the State or local government’s legitimate purposes; and
(II) does not prohibit or have the effect of precluding any commercial mobile service; and
(ii) a State or local government or instrumentality thereof shall act on any request for authorization to locate, construct, modify, or operatefacilities for the provision of commercial mobile services within a reasonable period of time after the request is fully filed with such government or instrumentality; and
(iii) any decision by a State or local government or instrumentality thereof to deny a request for authorization to locate, construct, modify, or operate facilities for the provision of commercial mobile services shall be in writing and shall be supported by substantial evidence contained in a written record.
(D) The policy prescribed pursuant to this paragraph shall provide that no State or local government or any instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement, construction, modification, or operation of such facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions, to the extent that such facilities comply with the Commission’s regulations concerning such emissions.
(E) In accordance with subchapter III of chapter 5, title 5, United States Code, the Commission shall periodically establish a negotiated rulemaking committee to review the policy prescribed by the Commission under this paragraph and to recommend revisions to such policy.”.
(b) Radio Frequency Emissions. — Within 180 days after the enactment of this Act, the Commission shall complete action in ET Docket 93-62 to prescribe and make effective rules regarding the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions.
(c) Availability of Property. — Within 180 days of the enactment of this Act, the Commission shall prescribe procedures by which Federal departments and agencies may make available on a fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory basis, property, rights-of-way, and easements under their control for the placement of new telecommunications facilities by duly licensed providers of telecommunications services that are dependent, in whole or in part, upon the utilization of Federal spectrum rights for the transmission or reception of such services. These procedures may establish a presumption that requests for the use of property, rights-of-way, and easements by duly authorized providers should be granted absent unavoidable direct conflict with the department or agency’s mission, or the current or planned use of the property, rights-of-way, and easements in question. Reasonable cost- based fees may be charged to providers of such telecommunications services for use of property, rights-of-way, and easements. The Commission shall provide technical support to States to encourage them to make property, rights-of-way, and easements under their jurisdiction available for such purposes.
Ultimate Version of the TCA
(S.652 passed in Feb 1996)
In the ultimate version of the TCA, in Section 704, the words operate and operations were removed, expressing Congressional intent.
1996 — SEC. 704. FACILITIES SITING; RADIO FREQUENCY EMISSION STANDARDS.
(a) National Wireless Telecommunications Siting Policy. — Section 332(c) (47 U.S.C. 332(c)) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
(7) Preservation of local zoning authority. —
(A) General authority. — Except as provided in this paragraph, nothing in this Act shall limit or affect the authority of a State or local government or instrumentality thereof over decisions regarding the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities.
(B) Limitations. —
(i) The regulation of the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities by any State or local government or instrumentality thereof —
(I) shall not unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally equivalent services; and
(II) shall not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services.
(ii) A State or local government or instrumentality thereof shall act on any request for authorization to place, construct, or modify personal wireless service facilities within a reasonable period of time after the request is duly filed with such government or instrumentality, taking into account the nature and scope of such request.
(iii) Any decision by a State or local government or instrumentality thereof to deny a request to place, construct, or modify personal wireless service facilities shall be in writing and supported by substantial evidence contained in a written record.
(iv) No State or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the Commission’s regulations concerning such emissions.
(v) Any person adversely affected by any final action or failure to act by a State or local government or any instrumentality thereof that is inconsistent with this subparagraph may, within 30 days after such action or failure to act, commence an action in any court of competent jurisdiction. The court shall hear and decide such action on an expedited basis. Any person adversely affected by an act or failure to act by a State or local government or any instrumentality thereof that is inconsistent with clause (iv) may petition the Commission for relief.
(C) Definitions. — For purposes of this paragraph —
(i) the term ‘personal wireless services’ means commercial mobile services, unlicensed wireless services, and common carrier wireless exchange access services;
(ii) the term ‘personal wireless service facilities’ means facilities for the provision of personal wireless services; and
(iii) the term ‘unlicensed wireless service’ means the offering of telecommunications services using duly authorized devices which do not require individual licenses, but does not mean the provision of direct-to-home satellite services (as defined in section 303(v)).”
Recent articles in local and national press.
- Link to 9/11/18 SF Gate article: Mill Valley Blocks Small Cells Over Health Findings
- Link to 9/09/18 Marin Independent Journal article: “Mill Valley Joins Effort To Constrain 5G Proliferation
- Link to 8/24/18 Marin Independent Journal: “San Rafael Residents Take Preemptive Strike Against Densified 4G and 5G Installations”
- Link to 8/9/18 Sonoma Index-Tribune: “Verizon 4G/5G Antennas Put Sonomans on Edge”
- Link to 5/22/18 NPR Program: “The Nation investigates how big wireless made us think that cell phones are safe”
- Link to 4/19/18 San Jose Mercury News article: “Palo Alto planning director resigns”
- Link to 4/17/18 San Jose Mercury News article:: “Palo Alto: Verizon plan appealed for City Council Review”
- Link to 4/27/18 Medium article: “New Networks Institute Files to Halt Proposed Verizon-NY Settlement”
- Link to 4/12/18 The Guardian article: “I Made the Psychological Warfare Tool for Cambridge Analytica”
- Link to 4/07/18 The Guardian article: “Why I Broke the Facebook Data Scam Story”
- Link to 4/06/18 CBS Report: “Finally! Big Media Takes On Big Wireless”
- Link to 3/23/18 The Nation article: “How Big Wireless Made Us Think That Cell Phones Are Safe: A Special Investigation”
- Link to 3/21/18 Journal of Environmental and Public Health paper: “Brain Tumors Incidence of Glioblastoma Rise in England 1995–2015”
- Link to 3/14/18 CBS Report: “Verizon Wants To Build Cellphone Towers Inside Church Steeples”
- Link to 3/8/18 Medium article: “4G/5G Wireless Is the New Fiber” Bait-and-Switch Scandal
- Link to 3/7/18 Press Democrat article: “Santa Rosa puts Verizon wireless network upgrade on hold amid blowback from residents”
- Link to 3/6/18 Press Democrat article: “Verizon looks to Santa Rosa churches to boost wireless coverage”
- Link to 2/26/18 Medium article: “We Solved Net Neutrality: “$400 Billion Broadband Scandal” Is the Evidence”
- Link to 2/26/18 Report on How to Best Fix Net Neutrality: FTTP
- Link to 2/24/18 Press Democrat article: “Verizon’s 4G rollout paused in Santa Rosa amid public concerns”
- Link to 2/25/18 response to 2/24/18 Press Democrat article
- Link to 1/12/18 Press Democrat article: “New Verizon antennas generate unwelcome buzz in Santa Rosa”
Click to view, then right-click (control-click on Mac) on the image or document to save it to your disk.
- Link to 3/12/18 Hardell Comments: National Toxicology Program Final Results
- Link to 3/12/18 Environmental Working Group Comments:National Toxicology Program Final Results
- Link to 3/08/18 Letter: from Attorney Harry Lehmann to US Senators
- Link to 3/08/18 Medium Article: adapted for US Senators
- Link to 7/19/18 Letter: from Attorney Harry Lehmann to CA Assembly Appropriations Committee re: “Liability Exposure from installation of 4G/5G so-called “Small Cell” cell towers in California”
- Link to 2/14/18 OpEd article: from Tom Sawyer: “No Cell Towers in Santa Rosa’s Residential Neighborhoods”
- Link to Tom Sawyer’s 2/18/18 Review of “Santa Rosa City Council Policy 300-04”
- Link to a flyer one can place on Santa Rosa Utility Light poles or hand out to other residents
- Link to Max Krohn’s pdf flyer for Santa Rosa (large, print-resolution file;)
- Link to Max Krohn’s pdf flyer one can edit for your community
- Link to Max Krohn’s CAUTION! Cell Tower Microwave Radiation Hazard jpg image for flyers for your community
- Link to 3/3/18 Santa Rosa Flyer
- Link to 3/3/18 Sebastopol Flyer
- Link to 3/10/18 My Street, My Choice! Color Flyer (please print color on white paper)
- Link to 5/08/18 Claremont Canyon Flyer (Oakland, CA)
- Link to 5/10/18 Oakland Flyer
- Link to 5/12/18 Palo Alto Flyer (with Generation Zapped Errata)
- Link to 8/10/18 Sonoma Flyer
- Link to 8/14/18 Sonoma Flyer
- Link to 8/21/18 Sonoma Flyer
- Link to 8/25/18 Sonoma Flyer