Subject:  Interesting cell-tower results in Portugal (Saraiva)..
Date:     Sun, 16 Apr 2000 102319 -0500 (CDT)
From:     "Roy L. Beavers" 
To:       emfguru 
--------------------------------------------------


...........Forwarded by EMF-L........

.....It is better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness.....
                    NEW!!! Website... http://emfguru.com
...................People are more important than profits.................

             DO YOU KNOW OF OTHERS WHO SHOULD BE ON THIS LIST???

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 14:14:14 +0100
From: "Saraiva, Paulo" 
To: "Roy L. Beavers" 
Subject: RE: The melatonin hypothesis and other theoretical issues...(guru )

Dear Roy,

I am changing my job and I will have a new email address soon.

So please as from 1400h GMT stop sending messages to this address.

As soon as I have a new one I will ask to be put in the list.

Just to give you feed back on the fight over the cell mast on the roof of
the block of flats where I live, the info provided on this list has been
very helpful. It has helped in making 2 neighbours (out of 14 ) understand
the issue.

We had a 5 year contract that expired on the 28 Feb. 2000.

In order to negotiate a new contract, the mobile phone company proposed a
raise of 10%.

Due to my campaign and the info from your list, 2 neighbours joined me in
the "no" - the neighbours committee refused a new proposal from the
cellphone company ( which is the same and only for services , towers,
etc.didn't ), now to raise to 50% over the previous price.

The phone company was informed of the decision and was notified to dismantle
the tower with 6 transmitters within 30 days.

This decision was questioned by one neighbour on the grounds he was not
present and this type of decision should be made by everybody present.

So we took a new vote. 

In the mean time the phone company raised its offer to 100% raise from the
former contract.

Once again the " Yes" were not enough to accept the proposal. Portuguese
common property laws state that affecting property belonging to more than
one owner needs to have the approval from at least 2/3 of the owners.

So the phone company was notified of the vote on the 31 March and again
given 30 days to dismantle the towers. 

Another neighbours meeting was called on April 12 and again a neighbour that
was not present ( but duly represented, voted against by proxy ) questions
the democracity of the result, since a majority had said no. Again at this
meeting the cell phone, through its mole neighbour, hinted that they would
consider raising the lease to 200% and would include in the contract a
clause that states " that the equipment installed is strict observance of
the law and if the competent authorities declare it unsafe they will change
to whatever will be the prescribed system ".

I am waiting for the end of April and if the tower is not removed I will
take some action, I am not sure which yet. In this country court actions
take up to 3 to 5 years and in many cases they expire before being taken to
a judge.

Is there any thing more practical, I mean technical or otherwise that could
be done? 

So Roy as you see we are in for long fight with the $$$$$!

Thank you for any suggestions you can give us.

Paulo Saraiva
Sterling Software  - Lisbon
COOL:Solutions for eBusiness

email:paulo.saraiva@sterling.com
Telf:+351 21 3138006
Fax:+351 21 3138019




Archive provided courtesy of WaveGuide, http://www.wave-guide.org
Reprinted with permission of Roy Beavers, http://www.emfguru.com