Latest News
Auto Repair
Blinds
Building/Remodeling
Floor Refinishing
Insulation
Landscaping
Landscaping
Lightning Rods
Moving
Overhead Doors
MILLBROOK— Problems with ambulance service have been mentioned at several recent Village Board meetings.
It came to the attention of the mayor that a resident, having fallen at his home, was reportedly left for more than 30 minutes while awaiting an ambulance to transport him to the hospital. His neighbor, Kevin McCraken, attended last week’s board meeting to discuss the problem.
Mayor Rodney Brown said he would very much like to have 24/7 Emergency Medical Services (EMS) coverage for the village.
However, Millbrook rescue crews and firefighters are mostly volunteer. There is paid coverage for the area. Many municipalities in the area use Northern Dutchess Paramedics (NDP), but for a cost.
Brown has said that the board is working on ways to save money, and work on the village budget in hopes of being able to provide full-time paid Emergency Medical Technicians (EMTs) to its residents. He praised the good work of volunteers, but said volunteers have their own jobs and often struggle to get to the scene of an emergency when they’re away at work or on their commute to or from home.
It was also said that some people in the village use the ambulance service as a bus service to get to the hospital or doctor for non-emergency problems. Green Briar Adult Home has been criticized for using emergency services for non life-threatening calls.
The subject will continue to be discussed by the board, and with the fire department and rescue squad.
In other business, bids for the Water Tank Rehabilitation were discussed, with a low bid of $427,350 from Worldwide Industries. Three other bids were received: Atlas Painting and Sheeting for $585,000; Rover Contracting for $536,500; and Amstar of Western New York, Inc., for $594,500.
A letter from Delaware Engineering stated that the lowest bidder meets the proper board requirements and is a qualified contractor. Delaware recommended that the board award the bid to Worldwide, which was done.
Village Highway Supervisor Bob Collacolla reported a major road repair is necessary on Church Street near Manzi Drive.
Collacola also reported that various reports have been submitted at Village Hall, regarding removed downed trees, repaired and newly installed catch basins and other repairs made and maintenance done throughout the village.
The tennis courts were again mentioned. The courts were converted into a play area; there is now hope that the village will be able to make use of the courts. There are many possibilities, and the discussion is ongoing.
Maps were also discussed. It seems there are many maps, and they all differ to a degree. In some, changes may not have been recorded or were not properly recorded. The board agreed the errors need to be rectified.
Police Officer Jared Witt reported for the month of August there were 60 calls for service, including traffic tickets, parking tickets, auto accidents with property damage and one hit-and-run.
The Millbrook Police Department assisted other police agencies and the fire department twice each and assisted EMS in the village nine times and in the town six times.
The next meeting will be held on Tuesday, Sept. 25 at 6:30 p.m. at Village Hall.
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.