Letter: Lenox Planners Should Consider Residents in Cell-Tower Siting Bylaw

Letter to the Editor04:00PM / Tuesday, November 29, 2022Print Story | Email Story

To the Editor:

I have been attending meetings in regard to the new wireless zoning bylaw for the last 18 months. As a Lenox resident, the biggest concern is that the new bylaw is not protective of its residents. The new bylaw is industry-friendly and makes it difficult, if not impossible to push back on an application if you find one being proposed for next to, or on your home. The only recourse that was shared with us, if an application is approved, is private litigation.

Private litigation would be against the town and against the telecom company. Hiring an experienced attorney who specializes in fighting inappropriately sited wireless installations is cost prohibited for many, especially elderly, low-income and disabled residents who don't want cellular antennas on the roof of our home at the Curtis.

Private litigation may or may not be more affordable for those on Delafield Drive, whose closest property line is 250 feet from a hypothetically proposed cell tower at the wastewater treatment facility, a site that was identified to offer additional coverage to Lenox Dale.

Well-resourced neighborhoods may be able to afford litigation, whereas less-resourced neighborhoods may be stuck with a cell tower they are not comfortable with.

All residents should be protected. Many of us live in Lenox for the natural beauty, the historic qualities and the peaceful enjoyment of this town. While everyone deserves cell service, we equally deserve to be protected from the blight, real estate devaluation, and RF emissions — which are classified as a pollutant, hazard and environmental toxin.

I acknowledge the work the Planning Board has put into this bylaw revision, but it simply is not written in favor of the residents. Shelburne, Great Barrington, Stockbridge and others have significant setbacks from schools and residences from 800 feet to 3,000 feet.

Lenox must expand setbacks, have comprehensive design standards and re-instate your existing strong purpose statement "to locate towers and antennas so they do not have negative impacts such as, but not limited to, visual blight, attractive nuisance, noise and falling objects, on the general safety, welfare and quality of life of the community" as well as to "preserve property values." These changes would go a long way to making the bylaw balanced for all.

Diane Sheldon
Lenox, Mass.

Tags: cell tower,

iBerkshires.com Text Ads

Greylock Youth SummerFest

Come join in on the wealth building fun! August 3-8. Click for event details. Insured by NCUA.

www.greylock.org

rk MILES Blding Materials

Are You Ready to Update Your Home? Start With rk MILES. 4 Locations (800)670-7433

www.rkmiles.com

If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Fenton: Governor's Council Must Deliver for the Berkshires

Community submissionGuest Column
10:22AM / Friday, August 28, 2026

I am a Springfield lawyer running for Governor's Council and I am asking for Berkshire County residents to support me over an incumbent from North Adams.

Here's why: Last year I learned about staffing issues in our regional courts that I could not ignore. In 2025, it was reported that four of Western Massachusetts' 11 Superior Court judgeships were vacant, all at the same time. A few weeks later, that grew to five vacancies. This meant there were only six Superior Court judges serving all of Western Mass at a time when Berkshire, Hampshire, Franklin, and Hampden counties had more than 100 pending homicide cases.

Those numbers were alarming to me, so I started to engage with leaders in the community who work most closely with the court system and I came to learn that these vacancies were only the tip of the iceberg here in Berkshire County.

I learned that no Superior Court or District Court judge had been appointed from the Berkshires since the current incumbent took office. As a result, there is not a single Superior Court judge who lives in the Berkshires today, and several of the District Court judges drive in from other counties to support Berkshire courts in Pittsfield, Great Barrington, and North Adams. Court staff also informed me about severe staffing shortages at the Berkshire Clerk of Courts office resulting in other counties needing to loan staff to the Berkshires just so hardworking employees can take a brief and planned summer vacation. This is not normal. These issues are a reflection of genuine problems with the Berkshire County court system and show a lack of proactive attention from our Governor's Councilor.

Instead of focusing on regional equity, I watched as the current incumbent celebrated that she has voted against the governor's nominees more than any other councilor, without much explanation as to why. Most recently, she voted against two extremely qualified former prosecutors for the Parole Board. This was despite an in-person plea from the governor and a letter of support from all the three of the district attorney's from Western Mass. Those votes do not show independence or standing up for principles, they demonstrate naivete, and an unwillingness to work with the key stakeholders.

I had seen and heard enough. I decided to jump in the race and challenge the incumbent to address these problems head-on.

I am a partner of a regional law firm. I understand our courts and the importance of having qualified, fair and hardworking judges. And I know how important it is to have judges from the Berkshires serving the Berkshires. To achieve that, you need strong relationships with the legal community and local stakeholders. You need to know how to use the power of the Governor's Council to fight forcefully for our region. And you need to be laser focused on identifying vacancies before they occur so that they can be filled quickly with local candidates.

View Full Story