Letter to the editor: Maple Hill parent horrified by wireless tower

I am a parent of a first grade student at Maple Hill School.  I just learned of the plan to place a wireless internet tower on top of the school and frankly I am horrified.  I find it disturbing that the town would even entertain the prospect of placing any type of tower on a school, particularly an elementary school with our community’s youngest children who are more susceptible in general due to their active, ongoing physical development.  I am shocked that this plan would be set into motion without notifying, nor soliciting feedback from, the staff of Maple Hill School or the parents/guardians of Maple Hill’s students.

Over the years we have learned that various types of frequencies have been determined as known carcinogens.  I do not accept Clearwire LLC’s claims that the wavelengths are minimal and not strong enough to cause any effects.  How do they know?  There is no definitive proof.  Robert Sanford, a spokesman from Clearwire LLC, was quoted as saying “when no one is on their computer the signal is not transmitting.”  That is far from reassuring: with wireless devices and smart phones becoming increasingly common I would imagine that the tower would be constantly engaged. Why would our town’s Zoning Commission agree – unanimously! – to put the health and safety of numerous citizens at risk?  This is wrong.

In reviewing the Borough of Naugatuck’s Zoning Regulations, I see that transmission and communication towers may be placed in all of the town’s zoning districts – if granted a “special permit” from the town’s Zoning Commission – except for one district: under no circumstances can a transmission or communication tower be placed in a Regional Shopping Center (“RSC”) district.  Why is it OK to place it directly on top a school and not near a store?  I also found in the regulations document that there is a law preventing “adult oriented establishments” from being located within 1,500 feet from the property line of any school, daycare center, playground or any other educational facility which provides services to individuals under the age of 18 years.  I believe that these potentially harmful towers should be kept significantly further than 1,500 feet away from our children.

I understand that Naugatuck will benefit financially from this rental agreement.  Is money the sole motivator?  I cannot imagine any other seemingly positive reason to agree to this arrangement.  Is it worth the potential health & safety issues a tower like this can instigate?  Definitely not from our point of view.  We urge you to reconsider and reject the proposal to place a tower on any of our schools.


Jennifer Ross


  1. Hey Jack Wagon!!! I wonder if you have any small kids at home???? My son means everything to me. Maybe you did not get enough hugs as a kid????