Latest News
Auto Repair
Blinds
Building/Remodeling
Floor Refinishing
Insulation
Landscaping
Landscaping
Lightning Rods
Moving
Overhead Doors
The loss of a local media outlet is to be mourned at any time. The health of any community depends on a steady flow of good information going out to its residents, whether on the airwaves, on paper, online or by satellite or cable TV. However, in this day of dwindling small-market, independent media, it is particularly difficult for communities to accept such a local closure, especially when an outlet has been a part of the local psyche for years.Lakeville’s Q103 WQQQ FM provided locally based radio for more than 17 years in the Tri-state region and built up a supportive community of listeners during that time. So it was with sadness that many fans of the station heard it would be shutting down its local content as of Feb. 7, switching over to NPR programming provided by WSHU, located on the campus of Sacred Heart University in Fairfield.There has been a lot of public second-guessing of owner Dennis Jackson’s decision to make the change. Why did this step have to be taken? Couldn’t Jackson have kept the station going longer as local, small-town radio? In reply, Jackson made it clear in his interview with The Lakeville Journal last week that it was time for him to simplify his business life.And after all, listeners should understand that a run of 17 years for a radio station in a small market like the one surrounding Lakeville is commendable. That’s especially true since the station was competing with other radio stations, cable TV, and yes, weekly and daily newspapers for advertising support. Joe Loverro, the station’s general manager, has said the station was in the black at its transition and had been all along. Competition, however, was stiff, and it had to have taken more time and effort to keep going as the Great Recession hit the country and the area communities over the past few years.Jackson and WSHU have said there still will be programming geared toward the Tri-state region. But does that mean a direct connection with the local communities as there had been in the past? Only time will tell. The station seemed almost like an old friend, one who made everyone comfortable and was a reliable presence. That will be hard to maintain from afar.The open house held Friday, Feb. 4, during the last Joe and Marie Morning show, brought an outpouring of gratitude from their listeners. Joe Loverro, after so many years at the Q103 microphone, should feel proud of all that he did to create a supportive community around the station. The gap left by all the folks at Q103 will be felt, and they will be missed by their fans. Kudos to them all for providing a local radio station to the Tri-state region for 17 years.Of course, it shouldn’t be forgotten that there is still local radio here, in addition to local print media such as this newspaper: Shall we call them “hyperlocal?” How about “very local?”This area is truly fortunate to have a very local radio station in Sharon, WHDD 91.9 FM and AM 1020, with Marshall Miles and Jill Goodman at the helm. It’s the smallest NPR affiliate in the nation, yet has lots of local programming (including, in full disclosure, a weekly program discussing local news and events with Cynthia Hochswender and Janet Manko of this newspaper.) Miles grew up in Sharon, went to Housatonic Valley Regional High School and has a real local connection to his listeners. He also has national radio experience, and runs a good station. He and Goodman seemingly cover every fundraiser and event of note in the region and have a connection to Berkshire School’s radio station to pull their coverage into Massachusetts. It’s an alternative that such a rural, sparsely populated region with a small market share should be glad to have available.
Related Stories
Get Local News Delivered To Your Inbox
Subscribe to receive stories reported for, by, and about our neighbors, on the issues affecting you.
By signing up you agree to our
privacy policy
.
Telecom Reg’s Best Kept On the Books
When Connecticut land-use commissions update their regulations, it seems like a no-brainer to jettison old telecommunications regulations adopted decades ago during a short-lived period when municipalities had authority to regulate second generation (2G) transmissions prior to the Connecticut Siting Council (CSC) being ordered by a state court in 2000 to regulate all cell tower infrastructure as “functionally equivalent” services.
It is far better to update those regs instead, especially for macro-towers given new technologies like small cells. Even though only ‘advisory’ to the CSC, the preferences of towns by law must be taken into consideration in CSC decision making. Detailed telecom regs – not just a general wish list -- are evidence that a town has put considerable thought into where they prefer such infrastructure be sited without prohibiting service that many – though not all – citizens want and that first responders rely on for public safety.
Such regs come in handy when egregious tower sites are proposed in sensitive areas, typically on private land. The regs are a town’s first line of defense, especially when cross referenced to plans of conservation and development, P&Z regulations, and wetlands setbacks. They identify how/where the town plans to intersect with the CSC process. They are also a roadmap for service providers regarding preferred sites and sometimes less neighborhood contention. In fact, to have no telecom regs can weaken a town’s rights to protect environmental, scenic, and historic assets, and serve up whole neighborhoods to unnecessary overlapping coverage and corporate overreach. Such regs are unique to every town and should not follow anyone else’s boiler plate, especially industry’s.
Connecticut is the only state that has a centralized siting entity for cell towers. The good news is that applicants must prove need for new tower sites in an evidentiary proceeding and any decisions have the weight of the state behind them. The bad news is that the CSC used to be far less industry-friendly and rote in their reviews, which now resemble a check list. There is an operative assumption at CSC that if an applicant wants a tower, they must need it, otherwise why spend significant money to run the approval gauntlet? This reflects a subtle shift over the years at CSC from sincere willingness to protect the environment toward minimal tweaking of bad applications with minor changes. The bottom line is that towns really cannot rely on the CSC to do all the work for them.
What CSC issues telecom providers is a “certificate of environmental compatibility” after an evidentiary proceeding (not unlike a court case) with intervenors, parties, expert witnesses, and the service provider’s technical pro’s sworn in and subject to cross examination. Service providers get to do the same with any opposition from intervenor/party participants – like towns and citizens -- and their experts. It’s an impressive process whose ultimate goal is the fine balancing between allowing adequate/reliable public services and protecting state ecology with minimal damage to scenic, historic, and recreational values. They unfortunately often fall short of their mandate – like approving cell towers with diesel generators over town aquifers -- evidenced by CSC only rejecting about five cell towers in the past 15-20 years.
The CSC was founded in 1972 and clarified its mission in the 1980’s to prevent the state from being carved up willy-nilly by gas pipelines, high tension corridors, and broadcast towers. With the sudden proliferation of cell towers beginning in late 1990’s, it became the most sued agency in Connecticut by both an arrogant upstart industry if applications were denied and by towns/citizens when bad sites were forced on them. CSC gradually formed a defensive posture that drives their decisions toward industry with deeper pockets and attorneys on retainer.
For citizens, nothing can wreck one’s day like the CSC. It behooves towns to protect what little toolkit they have, and understand the legal parameters of the CSC’s playing field. The CSC is not a “normal” government agency where municipal/citizen redress is based on logic and local support. Their process is largely immune to everything but specific kinds of evidence – like town regs with setbacks/fall zones, radio frequency transmission signal strengths, sensitive areas identified, and detailed wildlife inventory, among others.
There is a current cell tower fight involving two intervening towns -- Washington and Warren; both with good cell tower regs – over a tower site within 1200’ of a Montessori School, near Steep Rock’s nature preserves with comprehensive geology/wildlife databases that include endangered, threatened and special concern flora and fauna, on established federal/state migratory bird flyways, within throwing distance to a historic site capable of being listed on the Underground Railroad, and with an access road on a blind curve entering a state highway that will permanently damage wetlands, vernal pools, and core forests. There are well credentialed environmental experts, including Dr. Michael Klemens, former chair of Salisbury’s P&Z, as well as the former director of migratory bird management at the US Fish and Wildlife Service, and an RF engineer testifying to alternative approaches, plus three attorneys representing intervenors. It is the most professional challenge I have seen at CSC since Falls Village successfully mounted one that protected Robbins Swamps several years ago.
The hearing is ongoing, with uncertain results. To see what it takes today to stop an inappropriate tower siting, see Docket #543 under “Pending Matters” at https://portal.ct.gov/csc before removing local cell tower regs – the lowest hanging fruit that any town can possess in case it’s needed.
B, Blake Levitt is the Communications Director at The Berkshire-Litchfield Environmental Council. She writes about how technology affects biology.