Latest News
Auto Repair
Blinds
Building/Remodeling
Floor Refinishing
Insulation
Landscaping
Landscaping
Lightning Rods
Moving
Overhead Doors
WEBUTUCK — On Saturday, Oct. 1, Webutuck High School hosted its annual alumni soccer game to raise money for the booster club.
Despite the damp weather and unseasonably frigid winds, 22 alumni turned out for the game.
The players divided themselves into teams based on whether they graduated in an even or odd year. The odd-year graduates outnumbered the even-years, so a few odd-years filled out the other team.Classes from 1979 to 2011 were repesented in the game.
Normally, the game is played with a certified referee, but since the ref was unavailable this year, the game was played without one.
“It can be a serious game, but they were out there having fun,” said the booster club president, Michele Adrian.
This year, local alumni business owners sponsored the game and gave each player a shirt — either green or white — that helped distinguish the teams on the field. The players were allowed to keep the shirts after the game.
The money raised through the entry fees will help fund the many activities of the booster club, including the sports awards dinners and the year-end scholarships.
Girls varsity soccer
The Webutuck girls varsity soccer team was scheduled to play against Dover on the Webutuck home field during the school’s homecoming festivities on Saturday, Oct. 1, but the game was canceled due to inclement weather.
On Wednesday, Sept. 28, the team played a home game against John A. Coleman Catholic.
It was their second game in as many days, and the coach acknowledged that the girls were a bit tired from the previous day’s match, but the girls were able to eke out a 2-0 win in overtime.
Both goals were scored by Danielle Stoetzner, with one assist by Victoria Cullinan.
Coach Mark Moren said that goalie Leslie Robertson made “the save of the game” when she was able to stop a penalty kick from going in, which ensured that the scored stayed tied at zero. “That’s how we even got to overtime,” said Moren.
“We had a lot of good chances. We probably should have won in [regulation time], but the girls kept pounding away and working hard trying to get the goals, and eventually we did,” he said.
That game brought the girls’ record to 4-2-1 overall.
The day before, on Tuesday, Sept. 27, the team faced Spackenkill on their home field.
Robertson had several great saves during the first half, keeping the score at 0-0 at halftime.
Spackenkill made the first goal during the second half off a corner kick. Webutuck’s Cullinan scored eight minutes later to tie the score at 1-1.
Then, in the last minute of the game, the coach said the girls had a “mess up.”
“A [Spackenkill] girl hit it with her head and we kinda lost it and it went in the net,” he said.
The final score was 2-1 with Spackenkill taking the win.
“We got a little disappointed at the end that we couldn’t at least get into overtime,” said Moren. “Spackenkill was kinda pushing us around a little bit. They had some pretty good scoring chances, but like I said, [Robertson] came up great.”
The coach said that the girls played great until the end of the game and fought back hard.
“It was a great match by both teams,” he said.
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.