image description
Neighbors of the South Street cell tower hold signs urging the Board of Health to take action and protect their help.

Pittsfield Health Board Ordering Verizon to Remove Cell Tower

By Brittany PolitoiBerkshires Staff
Print Story | Email Story

PITTSFIELD, Mass. — The Board of Health on Wednesday unanimously agreed to send Verizon a cease and desist order to remove its cell tower at 877 South St.

It will be held in abeyance for seven days and if the wireless provider does not agree to have a meeting with the board and demonstrate a desire to cooperate to the board's satisfaction, it will go into effect.

Board members acknowledged that this action is a long shot and would be expensive to the city if it has to go to court, but they said they felt it is their duty to do everything they can to protect the health of residents.

Since the tower's erection in August 2020, Alma Street resident Courtney Gilardi has spoken during open microphone about negative health effects from electromagnetic fields (EMF) generated by the antennae on the 115-foot pole. Other residents have recently joined her protests.

"There is a very good chance that we will not win this, and in some ways, we know that Verizon is following the FCC guidelines in some way, which right now we know are not protective enough of public health," Chair Bobbie Orsi said.

"One of the options that I talked about with [City Solicitor Stephen Pagnotta] was interesting to me, and he called it a halfway option, what that means is that we vote to do a cease and desist order and if Verizon does not come to the table in seven days, that order becomes real.

"So we basically vote to issue a cease and desist order and then give them seven days to notify us that they will come in and have a conversation that will show and demonstrate a sufficient commitment to resolve the issues that we're having at that cell tower address."

The board would like Verizon to agree within the order's deadline to a meeting in two weeks.

After a cease and desist is issued, the proof of harm will be on the board. Pagnotta advised them to have ample support and evidence.

Recently, Orsi received one document from a medical professional of a patient in the area of the cell tower that has electromagnetic hypersensitivity, or microwave syndrome.

She felt that this, testimony from Gilardi and her family, and testimony from other residents in the neighborhood is substantial proof of harm. Eight people spoke of symptoms or in opposition to the cell tower during the meeting.

One resident who abuts the tower reported having unexplained tinnitus, or ringing in the ears, from the EMF.

"It is just very disruptive to our neighborhood, even if they're getting sick or not, they're kind of worrying, thinking 'is this going to happen to me next?' because it took a little while before mine kicked in," he said.

"And I think that's really what everybody is looking for is feeling safe about it and we could really use your help in setting a standard going forward, wherever it may take us."



Orsi also pointed to a legal handbook for Massachusetts boards of health released in 2020 that includes a chapter on cell tower radiation exposure. The handbook reads "the fact that towers are ubiquitous must not be confused with the presumption that they do not present certain health risks."

Verizon can either appeal the order or ignore it, which could result in a preliminary injunction. Orsi acknowledged that legal action would be expensive to the city. Board members are hopeful that this will be a nudge to "be good neighbors."

BOH members have had two meetings with the wireless company in regards to the cell tower. In January, they said "no" to removing or moving the tower.

Though he is in support of the action, member Brad Gordon said it is "extraordinarily unlikely" the city could win this case in court.

"I also don't want to do something just for the sake of being symbolic, I think that ultimately we'll strengthen Verizon's position not weaken it, and so I think we want to really be deliberative and thoughtful in how do we approach this," he said. "And it maybe that's our only option, but then I think people need to understand that, I don't think based on our conversations that that's going to magically change Verizon's position, and I think we'll end up in court, I think again, I don't see how they don't prevail in court."

Orsi, who is hopeful about the order, pointed out that this would at least prompt the company to respond in some way.

Member Steve Smith pointed to the role of the panel, stating that even if the battle is lost, he would like to know he made every action he could.

"As a member of the Board of Health, I'm here to safeguard the health of residents of the city of Pittsfield," he said.

"So on some level for me, win or lose this long battle with a company that's going to look at this on a global scale, at some point, I'm going to have to sit back 20 years later and say, did I do everything I could to safeguard the residents in Pittsfield when I was in that position or did I not? I guess that's the way I have to think about it."


Tags: BOH,   cell tower,   

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

Lanesborough Looks to the Future of Zoning Bylaws

By Breanna SteeleiBerkshires Staff

LANESBOROUGH, Mass. — The Planning Board is reviewing the town's zoning bylaws with an eye to amending zones to align with planning documents and projects. 

Members started at last week's meeting to at priority zoning projects that align with the Open Space and Recreation Plan and the Master Plan that was adopted last year. Earlier in the meeting, the board accepted the Berkshire Regional Planning Commission's draft of the OSRP, which the Select Board accepted late last month.

Town planner Andrew Groff informed the board of upcoming projects that will need to be looked at for zoning purposes to try and stay ahead of the bylaws that aligned in both the OSRP and Master Plan.

"Principally, would be going back and thinking about this idea of a mixed-use zoning district for the northern part of town that's responsive to the growth of outdoor recreation as it is really an industry. So you've got Shaker Ridge, you've got the folks at Donnybrook that proposes a glamping resort, Ramble Wild, and Brodie Mountain just over the town line in New Ashford with some new ownership and expanded interest in some development there, so that's one item that's called for in both."

Groff also explained they need to look into agriculture zones to help local farmers 

"Seeing if we can't do something to better support our farms because we have a couple great little farm clusters in Lanesborough. You know, zoning for agriculture is pretty expansive in Massachusetts. The exemption for agriculture is pretty wise, but we want to take a closer look and talk to some of our farmers and figure out there's some tweaks we can do that would make their lives easier."

He also brought up how they can help fix the zoning bylaws around the lake that are nonconforming and want to look into grant funding to help.

"Work that's going to be done to further protect Pontoosuc Lake, and we have a lot in our master plan regarding the zoning issues on Pontoosuc from the issue that you had mentioned to me, bringing back the citizens who were concerned about building heights down there, but you know, more fundamentally identified in the master plan is the problems with how everything is basically nonconforming. The zoning doesn't conform to what the actual built environment is. That's something we probably want to look into talking with folks in the community planning office," he said.

Groff mentioned there is a ballot question that, if it passes, would mean changing zoning regarding public water and sewer, and affect properties near the lake. 

"There is going to be on the ballot in November a question that will essentially require any community in Massachusetts that has built an environment that's on public water/sewer, you're going to have to reduce your lot sizes to 5,000 square feet. So I feel like if that passes, that has massive implications for that part of town. So, just another one to put out there, but maybe we want to wait to really tackle that with some grant funding once we know what the Legislature's done."

Chair Leanne Yinger said she lives in that area and it already seems very congested, meaning that the passage of the ballot question could have big implications.

She also mentioned another implication for the health of the lake she would like to see happen.

"I would like to see us ban pesticides and people treating their lawns," she said. "Part of the problem of the health of the lake is that when I say that out loud, and I'm saying it out loud to anybody who will listen to me, it is not a popular thing to say. But it is killing the lake."

Yinger said she would like to clarify who governs the sewer system around Pontoosuc Lake, noting the new owner of a friend's house needed to purchase access to the sewer from a private party. Groff said he couldn't remember if it is water district or town, but that there is something "funky" about the governance over there.

"I need to understand what that looks like, because the way it came down was interesting. The line comes in from Pittsfield, but there are people claiming that they have rights to it because they bought into it originally. I just want to understand what that's like and who's saying you're in charge with it, because it seems to me that that's a town-managed situation," Yinger said.

View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories