Mayor Davis’s 5G Comments


Dear Editor:

I have to strongly dispute the comments made by Mayor Davis in his BCN article of June 17th. He stated, “the ordinance also requires that cell phone companies must use existing utility poles to the greatest extent possible before building anything new”. If that’s the case mayor, then why was a new pole put 20 yards outside my window, when there are 2 existing poles across the street and roughly 40 yards from the newly erected one?

- Advertisement -

I’m sure that all the other residents in the city, who have new poles being erected, have the same question. Does 40 yards make a difference? In addition, one of the existing poles is higher than the new one, so would have given the antenna, a higher platform. He also stated, “We do not have the power to forbid the utilities from installing the fifth generation (5G) in Bayonne”.

Sorry mayor, but there’s numerous cities that have been able to do so, or have been able to require that it only be placed in industrial areas. This is what should have been done in Bayonne. The city had the power to somewhat regulate where the towers could be put…ie avoiding homes, schools a safe margin.

If someone in the administration had taken the time to do their due diligence, and research, they would have looked closer at the Wireless Communications Act of 1996, and seen that in fact “cities and towns can regulate cell sites based on the aesthetics and placement of the devices”. It’s scary to think that ordinances are being passed without this due diligence.

Recently, during the May City Council meeting, the council president stated that no face-to-face meetings had been held with the principals involved in the Bayonne Hospital dilemma. Yet the council was ready that evening to vote on a bonding issue for $95M and saddle the taxpayers with that debt.

Jersey City at least had the decency that required residents within 200 feet of an installation be notified regarding the location of the installation, equipment to be installed, and safety information for equipment to be installed. Where is our notifications?

5G health concerns are real and serious. The state of New Hampshire commissioned and received back in Nov., 2020 an over 100 page report documenting “ substantial scientific evidence finding harmful health and environmental impacts” from 5G.

Is $270 per pole worth the health and safety of the city’s constituents? Isn’t it time the elected officials start worrying more about the people, then big business and the almighty dollar? To the city’s residents, I implore you to continue to contact the elected officials about this situation. Do it now, or suffer the consequences later.

David Falandys