The following Letter by Dr. Ronald N. Kostoff was written to the Montgomery County Zoning Committee. Dr. Kostoff strongly admonishes the County to protect public rights even when these are in conflict with Federal law – in this case, with Section 704 of the 1996 Telecommunications Act. The arguments presented in this letter are compelling and should be brought before every public official making decisions relating to the deployment of 4G/5G “small” cells.

BACKGROUND

On the Montgomery County Government page that presents the Zoning Text Amendment, it is stated:

“Many residents have expressed concern about the health effects of radio frequency (RF) emissions.  Under federal law, the County may not “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 [FCC’s] regulations concerning such emissions.”  In other words, the County may enforce and require compliance with FCC regulations, but not create additional requirements.”

http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/cable/Towers/zta-links.html

GERMAN RACIAL LAWS

In my view, it is an abdication of the Council’s responsibility to hide behind a ‘federal law’, if adherence to that law could bring harm to the residents of Montgomery County.  For example, consider the Holocaust Encyclopedia (https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005681).  It lists tens, if not hundreds, of “federal laws” implemented in Nazi Germany against its Jewish citizens, starting in 1933.  If you were a member of a German County Council in the 1933-1940 time frame, would you be comfortable with such laws?  More specifically, would you be sending out a letter to the residents of that County telling them they have no choice but to obey and implement such laws?

That example is very analogous to the situation today with respect to implementation of small cell towers to support 5G.  We know radiofrequency emissions (RF) are harmful in isolation, and potentially very harmful when combined with other toxic stimuli.  I showed many examples of harm from RF (in isolation and especially in combination with other toxic stimuli) in my book chapter that I circulated to the Council in my previous mailing
(http://stip.gatech.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/371048_1_En_4_Chapter_OnlinePDF.pdf). 

How harmful?  We don’t know. 

Our chapter showed a plethora of potentially fatal and chronic diseases that could result from RF radiation.  But, even the human effects data (horrific as it was) was based on relatively short-term exposure to RF, such as cell phones, cell towers, WiFi.  We know that many diseases, such as cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, etc, can have very long latency periods for some toxic stimuli.  Intense exposures to RF are relatively recent, and we don’t have the long-term human data (in isolation or in combinations) to ascertain the full extent of the damage these exposures can cause.  I cannot rule out that the potential damage from these long-term exposures would not equal, or even greatly exceed, the horrific damage caused by the Holocaust, especially because of the potential world-wide implementation of small cell tower 5G technology.  That’s why I draw the analogy above, even though the Holocaust had strong racial motivations, while the motivations for RF-5G implementation are profit and greed.  It is small comfort for the victims to know that they died from someone’s greed rather than racial motivations!

JAPANESE-AMERICAN INTERNMENT DURING WWII

On 19 February 1942, President Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066, authorizing internment of tens of thousands of citizens of Japanese ancestry and resident aliens from Japan.  That was essentially a Federal law.  We view it from today’s perspective as horrific, and I have yet to see someone in recent times who would defend it.  But, at the time, it was accepted by the majority of non-Japanese Americans.  Should we have followed that proclamation blindly, as we did, causing undue hardship and disruption for a group whose only ‘crime’ was being of a particular ancestry?  And, how is today’s action by the Montgomery County Council different from the actions of those authorities seventy-five years ago who went along with, and hid behind, an obviously harmful Federal Order?

SANCTUARY CITIES

Sanctuary cities limit their cooperation with the Federal government in enforcing Federal immigration law.  In Maryland, three counties are listed as sanctuary counties: Baltimore, Prince George’s, and–Montgomery.  Whether one agrees with their resistance or not, the officials (and residents) of these counties are willing to disobey Federal law because they think it is wrong. 

So, for Montgomery County in particular, why are the officials willing to disobey Federal laws on immigration, but  hide behind the cover of Federal law when it comes to the implementation of the infrastructure for 5G?  Are the consequences of obeying Federal immigration law more serious than the consequences of obeying Federal telecommunications law? 

I would argue the opposite.  While the consequences of obeying Federal immigration law will result in substantial hardship and disruption of their lives for the individuals affected, for most the consequences will not be life-threatening.  The consequences of obeying Federal telecommunications law have the potential of resulting in many severe illnesses and premature deaths.  In short, the Council has shown willingness to disobey Federal law in the immigration situation, but unwillingness to do the same in the telecommunication situation.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

One reason for the schizophrenic behavior of the Council on the above problems of immigration and telecommunications infrastructure could be related to potential conflicts of interest.  For the telecommunications implementation issue, have the Council members been vetted for conflict of interest?  This would include: 1) any elements of their investment portfolio that would profit from operation and expansion of the mobile telecommunications network; 2) any elements of their present business endeavors that would profit from operation and expansion of this network; 3) any elements of pensions received that would profit from operation and expansion of this network; 4) any proposals in the pipeline or being considered that would profit from operation and expansion of this network; 5) any other existing or potential conflicts of interest by which they could profit from operation and expansion of the mobile telecommunications network.  Anyone conflicted should be required to recuse themselves from decision-making on this network.

RECOMMENDATIONS

We are at a critical point in the fight to restrict exposure to very harmful levels of wireless radiation.  Already, studies have shown extensive human damage resulting from the previous generations of mobile telecommunications networks.  Implementation of 5G would raise potential human damage to unprecedented levels, because of the vastly increased density of cell towers required and their proximity to humans.

We need to make a stand: not tomorrow, not in some other location, but here, in Montgomery County, and now, in 2018!  If Montgomery County can claim sanctuary status for immigration, they can certainly claim sanctuary status to be free from the potentially ravaging effects of 5G.  Let’s not do the equivalent of making the trains to the Camps run on time, or of sending innocent people to internment facilities, as we did seventy-five years ago.  Let’s do what is right, for once, and oppose installation of these 5G cell towers!

Dr. Ronald N. Kostoff
https://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/59311