By JIM KASUBA | jkasuba@medianewsgroup.com | News-Herald, 2 June 2023
(Photo): A group of children gather outside Washington Elementary School on March 24 to protest the placement of a 5G cell tower on the building’s smokestack. (Michael Kuentz — For MediaNews Group)
The motion was granted Friday morning by Judge Adel Harb on behalf of three residents who live near Washington Elementary School, 1440 Superior Blvd.
The plaintiffs are listed as Kathryn Teets, Lisa Beck and Melissa Waara. However, the main group of people who have publicly opposed the cell tower are a large group of parents of children who attend the school.
Among them is Josh Castmore, a Wyandotte-based attorney who resides in the community. His firm, Castmore Law, PLLC, filed the lawsuit on behalf of the plaintiffs. The other law firm representing the plaintiffs is the Law Office of Robert J. Berg, of Scarsdale, New York.
Castmore and other parents opposed to the tower say that there is research indicating that exposure to the transmission of cell towers may cause harmful effects on those in the immediate vicinity, whereas other available research is inconclusive.
Radiation and signal dispersion models have been provided by T-Mobile, however the Federal Communications Commission has not updated their requirements for such high-frequency transmissions in nearly 30 years.
T-Mobile is owned by a German telecommunications corporation, Deutsche Telekom AG, and recently merged with Sprint in 2018.
Several parties and individuals are named as defendants in the lawsuit, including Wyandotte Public Schools, the city of Wyandotte, T-Mobile Central LLC, former Superintendent of Schools Catherine Cost, former school district Business Manager Kenneth Laub, former City Engineer Gregory Mayhew, current City Engineer Jesus Placencia, as well as current and former members of the Wyandotte Board of Education.
School and city officials named as defendants are being sued in their official capacity, not in a personal capacity. That means in all likelihood attorneys for the school district and city will represent them.
The lawsuit states that this “sorry saga” began in the summer of 2017, when a T-Mobile representative approached Laub about a proposed lease agreement that would offer a multi-year deal of “free money” for the school district.
Ultimately, the school board entered into an agreement with the cell carrier in 2018 that allowed the tower to be built, in return for $1,000 a month in fees. That’s why the lawsuit names those who served on the school board at the time the vote was taken.
The plaintiffs state that they find it significant that T-Mobile proposed that the company would be responsible for zoning approval and construction permits.
That’s where the city of Wyandotte enters the picture. Castmore maintains that the city should never have issued a certificate of occupancy and permit because city zoning laws don’t allow cell towers in that location.
The city granted approval after determining that the T-Mobile wireless facility meets the requirements of the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act, with the argument being that the city’s hands were tied in this matter.
As is the case with most restraining orders, this one was filed now because time is of the essence. In a meeting with the Board of Education last March, T-Mobile agreed that it would delay turning on the cell tower until after the school year ends on June 9. The company further stated that it would notify the school board and district in writing at least one week before starting the process to bring the site on-air, which will take up to 30 days.
The judge stated that the plaintiffs will suffer irreparable harm and loss if the defendants are not immediately enjoined from proceeding with any further activity related to the wireless communications facility currently installed atop the school’s smokestack.
However, this offers very short-term relief. The order is in effect for no more than 14 days.
The defendants are expected to present their case at a June 12 show cause hearing where they will argue why a preliminary injunction should not be ordered according to the terms and conditions of the temporary restraining order.
Even though the city and school district are named as defendants, many city and school district officials are on record as stating they do not oppose removal of the tower, leaving T-Mobile as the main defendant expected to make a vigorous argument to leave the cell towers in place.
Castmore said that when an injunction is ordered, it typically speeds up the case “a bit,” but added that “fast” in the legal world and “fast” in the real world are two different things. Under an injunction, the tower could not be activated while the case remains pending.
https://www.thenewsherald.com/2023/06/02/judge-issues-restraining-order-to-delay-activation-of-cell-tower-in-wyandotte/
The motion was granted Friday morning by Judge Adel Harb on behalf of three residents who live near Washington Elementary School, 1440 Superior Blvd.
The plaintiffs are listed as Kathryn Teets, Lisa Beck and Melissa Waara. However, the main group of people who have publicly opposed the cell tower are a large group of parents of children who attend the school.
Among them is Josh Castmore, a Wyandotte-based attorney who resides in the community. His firm, Castmore Law, PLLC, filed the lawsuit on behalf of the plaintiffs. The other law firm representing the plaintiffs is the Law Office of Robert J. Berg, of Scarsdale, New York.
Castmore and other parents opposed to the tower say that there is research indicating that exposure to the transmission of cell towers may cause harmful effects on those in the immediate vicinity, whereas other available research is inconclusive.
Radiation and signal dispersion models have been provided by T-Mobile, however the Federal Communications Commission has not updated their requirements for such high-frequency transmissions in nearly 30 years.
T-Mobile is owned by a German telecommunications corporation, Deutsche Telekom AG, and recently merged with Sprint in 2018.
Several parties and individuals are named as defendants in the lawsuit, including Wyandotte Public Schools, the city of Wyandotte, T-Mobile Central LLC, former Superintendent of Schools Catherine Cost, former school district Business Manager Kenneth Laub, former City Engineer Gregory Mayhew, current City Engineer Jesus Placencia, as well as current and former members of the Wyandotte Board of Education.
School and city officials named as defendants are being sued in their official capacity, not in a personal capacity. That means in all likelihood attorneys for the school district and city will represent them.
The lawsuit states that this “sorry saga” began in the summer of 2017, when a T-Mobile representative approached Laub about a proposed lease agreement that would offer a multi-year deal of “free money” for the school district.
Ultimately, the school board entered into an agreement with the cell carrier in 2018 that allowed the tower to be built, in return for $1,000 a month in fees. That’s why the lawsuit names those who served on the school board at the time the vote was taken.
The plaintiffs state that they find it significant that T-Mobile proposed that the company would be responsible for zoning approval and construction permits.
That’s where the city of Wyandotte enters the picture. Castmore maintains that the city should never have issued a certificate of occupancy and permit because city zoning laws don’t allow cell towers in that location.
The city granted approval after determining that the T-Mobile wireless facility meets the requirements of the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act, with the argument being that the city’s hands were tied in this matter.
As is the case with most restraining orders, this one was filed now because time is of the essence. In a meeting with the Board of Education last March, T-Mobile agreed that it would delay turning on the cell tower until after the school year ends on June 9. The company further stated that it would notify the school board and district in writing at least one week before starting the process to bring the site on-air, which will take up to 30 days.
The judge stated that the plaintiffs will suffer irreparable harm and loss if the defendants are not immediately enjoined from proceeding with any further activity related to the wireless communications facility currently installed atop the school’s smokestack.
However, this offers very short-term relief. The order is in effect for no more than 14 days.
The defendants are expected to present their case at a June 12 show cause hearing where they will argue why a preliminary injunction should not be ordered according to the terms and conditions of the temporary restraining order.
Even though the city and school district are named as defendants, many city and school district officials are on record as stating they do not oppose removal of the tower, leaving T-Mobile as the main defendant expected to make a vigorous argument to leave the cell towers in place.
Castmore said that when an injunction is ordered, it typically speeds up the case “a bit,” but added that “fast” in the legal world and “fast” in the real world are two different things. Under an injunction, the tower could not be activated while the case remains pending.
https://www.thenewsherald.com/2023/06/02/judge-issues-restraining-order-to-delay-activation-of-cell-tower-in-wyandotte/
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.