KOWS-FM Sebastopol low power radio tower application

Misleading information is being distributed by chemical grape growers Bob & Nancy Jenkins regarding KOWS radio’s harmless antenna moving from the top of a tree at the Occidental Arts & Ecology Center, where it has been for years, to Pleasant Hill Rd. If you support community radio expanding its local listenership, please come to the Planning Commission meeting Feb. 23, Tues., 7 p.m. at the Youth Annex at the end of Morris Street, next to the Sebastopol Community Center, on Morris St.

Following is a letter scheduled to be published this week in Sonoma West, the Jenkins letter published last week, and my comments. Our intention is to have a non-confrontational presentation of the many benefits of KOWS to the West County and beyond.

If you want to see for yourself, go to the corner of Pleasant Hill and Elphick, where you will see the signs the Jenkins have posted. Also note the evidence, such as the brown dying grass, that their vineyard is a chemical vineyard that uses the cancer-causing Roundup. Ironically, it is also the corner where the former Twin Hills Apple Farm was converted into a vineyard, which recently had a winery approved. This is a football field away from two schools and a mile or so from Paul Hobbs Watertrough Rd. vineyard, which is at the side of schools with around 500 children.

You can also write letters to Sonoma West, the North Bay Bohemian, and to the Planning Commission, whose address is at the end of the Jenkins letter. The Jenkins have apparently sent postcards to Sebastopol residents with their misleading accusations. Help us point out the contradictions between what they are falsely accusing KOWS of versus their own documented damage by having a chemical vineyard that causes cancer. I have driven by this site almost everyday to get to town for my more than two decades here operating a vineyard, using organic practices, that grows boysenberries.

Editor: Here are the facts about the proposed KOWS 107.3FM Community Radio low-power antenna at Sebastopol’s water reservoir site on Pleasant Hill Road.

· KOWS is an all-volunteer, non-profit radio station with nearly 90 local show hosts, broadcasting from Occidental since 2007. We recently moved our studio to Sebastopol and are planning to move our antenna to reach many more listeners, as approved by the FCC. In addition to providing entertainment and airing important public issues, KOWS is this area’s designated Emergency Alert System. The antenna relocation will help make West Sonoma County safer by informing and connecting our community during emergencies and times of need.

· The entire antenna relocation process is public and transparent, the result of a Sebastopol City Council meeting, with over 60 spectators present, with a unanimous 5-0 vote to allow our application to proceed.

· We have complied fully with every step of the application process, and twice provided Pleasant Hill Road neighbors with detailed project and contact information.

· The see-through antenna structure is designed to minimize any visual impact. The large red balloon and flags that were erected near the proposed site are not representative of the antenna structure, or the color it will be painted to blend into the surroundings. The antenna will be less visible than the antifreeze fan towers on the adjacent vineyard property, the city water tanks, and the many telephone poles along the road.

· Radio waves are safe: This is NOT a cell tower project. Unlike cell phone transmissions, FM radio waves are not ionizing. In over 70 years of use, low-power FM radio broadcasts have not been shown to be dangerous.

Support community radio and free speech in Sonoma County!

KOWS Antenna Relocation Committee: Arnold Levine, Laura Goldman, Stuart Goodnick, David Dillman, John Parry, Donald True, Randy Wells

Antenna Tower Redux https://www.sonomawest.com/sonoma_we...b8b53cb79.html
EDITOR: The City of Sebastopol is once again in the antenna tower business. In a private meeting, the City Council gave the “green light” for KOWS-FM to apply for a use permit to erect a 72 foot antenna tower on the island of city property used for water storage at 1281 Pleasant Hill Rd, in the West County. 



They gave the okay knowing how strongly and vocally our neighborhood opposed, and ultimately defeated, a very similar attempt in 1994, when they proposed putting a 75 foot cell tower on the site.
Simulation photos showed that such a tower would be an ugly eyesore, visible from roadways and porches all over our area.

We like our rolling hills, trees and mountain vistas the way they are, without industrial monolithic intrusion. We chose to live here for the beauty of the area and the healthy nature of the outdoor life style most of us enjoy cycling, walking and jogging.

A tower of this size would be a blight on our landscape and a quality of life demotion for those of us in this part of the county. 

We are assured that the RF radiation emitted continuously, day and night, by these towers is safe, yet there are no definitive safety standards. Some countries, like Switzerland, are opting for a “precautionary” approach; meaning “assume that there are unknown adverse health effects.”

Their guidelines are 100 times more restrictive than ours, particularly in residential areas. We live here. The cumulative, long-term bio-effects of radiation exposure are not known. Why would the city take unnecessary risks with our health? 

We hope our city neighbors and fellow county residents will respect our concerns and will encourage the Council and Planning Commission to reject this use in our neighborhood.


The Planning Commission public hearing on this issue is at 7 p.m. on Feb. 23 at the Youth Annex next to the Community Center. If you share our concerns, please attend, call 823-1153 or write the Planning Commission and/or Council members (PO Box 1776, Sebastopol, 95473) voicing your views.

Nancy and Bob Jenkins, Sebastopol

I urge the residents of this neighborhood and the surrounding areas to do some serious research about the possible health consequences of non-ionizing radiation ...

from our government:

https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/radiation_nonionizing/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-ionizing_radiation

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shepherd:

Misleading information is being distributed by chemical grape growers Bob & Nancy Jenkins regarding KOWS radio’s harmless antenna moving from the top of a tree at the Occidental Arts & Ecology Center, where it has been for years, to Pleasant Hill Rd....

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shepherd:

...Radio waves are safe: This is NOT a cell tower project. Unlike cell phone transmissions, FM radio waves are not ionizing...

---

I share your position on this. But I think that the belief that radio waves are safe and cell phone transmissions aren't is more related to the fondness for radio and distaste for cellphones than any understanding of the science behind either.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by arthunter:

I urge the residents of this neighborhood and the surrounding areas to do some serious research about the possible health consequences of non-ionizing radiation ...

---

sorry, another thread digression.. but if you read the publications linked here, the first lists damages which are essentially limited to tissue heating and sunburn-type damage from the highest energy (e.g. UV-range) radiation. The wikipedia includes this:

"The International Agency for Research on Cancer recently stated that there could be some risk from non-ionizing radiation to humans.^[5] But a subsequent high-quality study reported that the basis of the IARC evaluation was not consistent with observed incidence trends.^[6] This and other reports suggest that there is virtually no way that results on which the IARC based its conclusions are correct.^[7]"

actually, somewhat to my surprise, there's some interesting recent research from a university in Texas that does support the claims EMF sensitivity in some individuals. I'm curious to see where that goes.

So that you will know what kind of neighbors the Jenkins are--who are leading the charge against the harmless KOWS antenna--following is an email from one of their neighbors. It goes back 27 years ago, when the Jenkins were spraying their apples while she had an infant. They make promises and do not keep them.

Also following are some additional facts about the KOWS antenna, and another letter that has been sent by a neighbor. Please come to the Planning Commission public hearing, which starts at 7 p.m. at the Youth Annex on Morris St., Feb. 23, Tues.

Begin forwarded message:

Date: February 17, 2016 6:14:49 PM PST
Hi Shepherd,
I am so glad to see your letter. Nancy and Bob Jenkins are the same neighbors of mine, who 27 years ago, when I went to them to ask for help regarding toxic spray of an apple orchard across the street from me, (asking only that I be informed of when their foreman or lessee was going to spray, so that I could take my infant son and leave the area for a day or two), told me, finally, that they would, and never did.

They also told me that the spray was harmless and they had used it around their own kids! I had of course researched it, and knew it to be quite harmful, AND could not only smell it strongly when they sprayed, but found it irritating to my eyes and throat. But by then it was too late.

On top of their irritating note, I got a knock on my door from two neighbors, telling me what an eyesore it would be for them - they live across the lane that is next to my driveway - Lawrence Lane - how dangerous the radio waves are (!!), but most of all, and my neighbor's most strident argument - is that years form now when this council is gone, another council will permit the already existing tower to become used for a cell tower.

Basically that once we allow this, most certainly, no matter what single use regulations or promises are made, those will be broken, and this tower will pave the way for it to be used as a cell tower and worse.

If you could address this argument, I would be most grateful. No matter what I said, she had an irrefutable comeback. It certainly felt like fear tactics. There was a lot of neighbor peer pressure. I said I would attend the meeting, and would just need to feel secure that regulations were in place that this tower was to be used for this purpose.

She kept insisting that no matter what was said, the fact that it existed would certainly mean that the cell tower was next. Whew . . .

We are leaving for Mexico for dental work on the 24th, hope to get to that meeting, but would really like to be in touch about it when we return, if we cant make it. You have my permission to present my support as a neighbor involved if I am absent. And I would like to support any way I can. I love Kows, and I am not afraid.

From a KOWS person:

1. We cannot add any other antennas to the structure. It is not designed for it structurally, so it cannot be leased by others.

2. We feel the view is already “industrial” and compromised. The see-through tower will be less intrusive than the Jenkins own antifreeze fan towers, water tanks, and the telephone poles along the road.

3. Jenkins lives 500’ + away; it will not be that visible from there.

4. We cannot afford to place our antenna on another commercial tower, it costs $1000’s of dollars a month to lease that space.

5. We cannot place the antenna on another city antenna tower. We looked into it. Because of FCC rules, the location would be physically too close to stations in Santa Rosa, if we put our antenna downtown say at the police station or city hall.

6. This is not a cell phone transmission tower.

From another neighbor:

It seems to me that of late there is way too much misinformation and emotionally-driven combative actions occurring in regard to the already approved and impending relocation of the KOWS antennae to Pleasant Hill Road.

As our City Council Representatives, you are aware of the facts versus the fallacious and false statements and claims expressed by the Jenkins and others. I am requesting that both at the February 23rd meeting and in any future correspondences and communications, you clearly articulate to the community the honest and transparent process that was followed; the details of the see-through tower and its low visual impact; the facts about the safety of low powered radio waves vs cell tower transmitters; and all the great benefits of having a local radio station in our midst; especially one that is an Emergency Alert Station informing residents and sharing information during local, regional or national emergencies.

I support the construction of the KOWS antennae on Pleasant Hill Road not only because Sebastopol needs an Emergency Alert System in place. I support this radio station because it promises to be a community centered and community based entity that will be a unifying presence in our town. Think of the possibilities......

Imagine the gift to our high school students hosting a radio show of their own, working together and talking about their issues, concerns, current events, music.........The students will be getting real, hands-on experience as they learn tech, communication and leadership skills.......

Local radio stations are a dying breed. Won’t it be wonderful to have our very own local station in town to talk, dialogue and have forums about local, national and international events that we are facing. We have the chance to talk to one another, share our ideas, confront our challenges and build bridges between divisive issues.

Think of the wonderful opportunities KOWS brings to showcase and highlight the talented members of our community.......We are a rich community of writers, storytellers, songwriters, singers, musicians, poets, authors,, naturalists, environmentalists, farmers, scientists, etc. etc. etc, who have so much to offer and now KOWS becomes the stage from which we can hear and learn from our neighbors who get to tell their stories........

And think of the myriad of shows that offer alternative music from every conceivable genre, conversations with local authors, activists, politicians, and public discourse on important issues of the community.

KOWS offers our community a multitude of possibilities, many as yet to be discovered. As the host on KOWS, I was given the opportunity to create my own show, Wise Woman Storytime, a year and a half ago.........With no previous history in radio, each week I give voice and visibility to older women and invite them to share personal stories from their lives. I have met the most amazing women - Holocaust survivors, authors, poets, women overcoming abusive childhoods, illness, sexism....... the list goes on and on. But it’s not about me....it’s about what each of these women has to offer to others; life lessons, courage, information and hope.

Just like for me, the show can be the same gift to others. Whether one chooses to embark on a show for him or herself or just to tune in, this is a wonderful opportunity for our community.

Our community will be richer, more informed, more connected once the KOWS antennae gives us the radio receptivity to listen easily from home or when driving around.

Please continue to support KOWS.

The Planning Commission public hearing on this issue is at 7 p.m., Feb. 23 at the Youth Annex next to the Community Center. Please attend or write the Planning Commission and/or Council members (PO Box 1776, Sebastopol, 95473) voicing your views.

Dear Shepheard
Mudslinging and personal attacks is your answer to people objecting to your proposed tower? I had to think long and hard about responding as I clearly will open myself and my family to your personal attacks.

My family and I are also opposed to your proposed tower location. This structure is clearly visible 40 to 50 feet above the trees, from several rooms in our home, including our dining room. We do not wish to dine with your structure on a daily basis. The tower is visible from many of the gardens on our property as well. Many of my neighbors have the same issues as I, yes including the Jenkins.

From what I have read in your post, you seem to believe that this is sometime type of assault on KOWS radio and that if we do not support this project we are anti community. This was the proposed site of a cell tower in 1994 that was not approved for many of the same reasons that this tower is being opposed, manly visual impact on our environment. It also seems to me that you believe your structure to be more “noble” in its cause than a cell tower or another commercial application. So, what if this was a commercial radio station that was willing to pay more for this lease, would that mean their proposal was less valid? If that’s the case, then aren’t you asking for something as a special interest?

Your response to my Pleasant Hill neighbor had 6 answers I have comment on each one of them:

1. Are you a structural engineer? What is the tower designed for? Are you telling me that in the future there is no possible way this tower could have any other type of antenna placed on it? Are you able to list all of the types of antennae that are now in use or maybe in use in the future?

2. I don’t care what you feel our view is! I don’t want to have my view degraded by your tower. When I look towards the west I see trees and grape vines, not an industrial view at all.

3. I also live 500 feet away and this tower is clearly visible.

4. Because you station cannot afford the rent on a commercial tower is no reason to degrade my life. This goes back to you feeling your cause more noble than mine, my family and my neighbors.

5. I would like to see the regulation from the FCC. I looked at the tower map on the FCC web site and there are many towers closer together than Santa Rosa. It’s less than 2 miles from Pleasant Hill to the Police station.

6. It’s still radiation transmitting.

Here is what the view is from my near Logan Lane. I live closer to the site, as do the Jenkins, This photo is over ¼ mile away and the tower will be clearly visible. This photo is about the same distance as the Eucalyptus trees in the KOWS mock up.( photo below)

And I do feel that KOWS radio was trying to put the best possible face on the structure as that they could, lipstick on the pig so to speak. The photo mock up is the most advantageous position to try and convince people that this antenna would be nestled into the trees, those trees are over a ¼ mile away.

The last minute notification to the fewest people in the area as possible is disingenuous. We had no notification from KOWS even though we are closer to this proposed site then the trees in the photo, as are many of our neighbors. As I read over the KOWS web site they had been fundraising for over 6 months and never gave any notification to the area residence of their plans. While the “process” may have followed the City Council guidelines, it most certainly did no more than it was absolutely required to do.

In the letter that you reposted the author request you, with certainty, that there will be no other use of this site or structure. I want to go one step further, how will you guarantee that KOWS is still a radio station in 10 years? And if the is no station and just a spare tower, then what….how can you possibly know the answer to that question. You can’t!

The best beliefs are informed. We have way more history with radio. Cell phone tech is new and evolving rapidly. Once again you confuse human motivation with science. I know it amuses you...

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by podfish:

I share your position on this. But I think that the belief that radio waves are safe and cell phone transmissions aren't is more related to the fondness for radio and distaste for cellphones than any understanding of the science behind either.

---

Podfish,

I purposely tried to present different opinions regarding the dangers of non-ionizing radiation so thank you for picking up on that .... if this was being built next to me I would be doing a lot of research ... I have two friends who are so EMF sensitive that their lives are greatly compromised ... I'm not saying that this tower is dangerous, just that it could be ....

https://www.cwa-union.org/pages/Micr...ency_Radiation

Indeed, the process is public and transparent.

As a neighbor of the proposed installation, I only learned about it when the Jenkins let me know.

Perhaps I should have been more civic-minded and been watching each City Council agenda, looking for things that might affect me, but alas, I have not. But now I know.

From my property I don't see any defrosting towers, I don't see the water tanks, I don't see the telephone poles along Pleasant Hill. I will, however, see the proposed radio tower every day I drive home to my house. What now is a clear view of the horizon, and trees, will have what amounts to me as an eyesore. Painting it a color to match the trees doesn't do much to hide it against open sky, after all.

So ultimately, I am glad that the public transparent process has made me aware. I am also glad that I have the opportunity to follow due process and make sure my concerns are heard by the Planning Dept and/or the City Council, as the public and transparent process allows.

Having said that, I think low power FM stations are great. I also think webcasting is great. I think they all are, they contribute to community, and they are valuable.

I am disappointed, however, that the visual impact that I foresee was not considered, or at least I did not get any notification about the proposed tower location. Granted, it is not required by FCC radiation studies. But that's part of the rub here for me -- I feel that it appreciably changes the environment around me, but not necessarily from a radiated emissions standpoint. Not because I have better information than anyone else on radiation effects, or at what power spectral density causes ionization, and whether non-ionizing power densities present risks. But because it affects my environment in a negative visual way.

I am very interested in some of the comments made elsewhere in this discussion. That's nuts that it's $1000's per mo to simply co-locate on someone else existing infrastructure. But, I get it, cell tower and big dollars and big corporations, why should they share/care about small local community communication, right?

I am surprised to learn, however, that locating near the Police station, for example, is against FCC regulations. I am assuming that the KOWS proposal is an LPFM thing. And I thought that LPFM only had to worry if they spilled over into existing "full power" FM spectrum. Maybe the comments passed on above from a KOWS person mean that, in fact, physical location closer to downtown Sebastopol would impinge on "full power" FM spectrum to the point that it would interfere? If anyone has insight, I'd like to know.

I do agree with some of the commentary regarding the gift to school students that a community radio station can provide. Has KOWS considered whether any of the local school would host an antenna? Whether they would host a 70 foot tall antenna or not, I don't know, but it seems like there are other options to vastly increase KOWS' reach beyond the transmitter in a tree of today. And, to my selfish self, I wish there were a way to do that doesn't plant a radio tower in my sunset view on the way home.

Although perhaps a different cost profile, have repeaters been considered to broaden KOWS' coverage, versus reaching higher into the air from a single transmission location? Could be cost prohibitive, I don't know.

Lastly, FWIW, I was not aware that Sebastopol was without an Emergency Broadcast System? I was under the impression that many of the FM and AM stations that we receive today participate in the EBS. I, for one, have needed EBS access about 25 years ago in the midst of a California Wildfire. AM was my go to station, thinking that AM has the farthest terrestrial reach...but I did hear the EBS signal on many stations that night. To help me understand more clearly, is it true that without KOWS, we have no EBS coverage in Sebastopol?

Anyhow, hope everyone finds a way to live with everyone else, and everyone feels they got a little something along the way.

SebCat (who remains anonymous, for fear that my emotional reaction to seeing what the tower looks like from my house might attract some of the ire I read elsewhere in this thread)

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shepherd:

...The Planning Commission public hearing on this issue is at 7 p.m., Feb. 23 at the Youth Annex next to the Community Center. Please attend or write the Planning Commission and/or Council members (PO Box 1776, Sebastopol, 95473) voicing your views.

---

The meeting Agenda is here.

The Staff Report is here.

I guess the only question I have right now is:

Are FM radio waves more dangerous than Roundup™?

:Champagne::dragonfly::urgtgslpy::lotsopeople:

I've been thinking the same thing. But the problem is, the tower is visible, Roundup isn't, so it's much easier to dismiss. I do wonder if the people who are upset about the tower obstructing their view, are as upset about Roundup so close to their neighborhood.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Ted Pole:

I guess the only question I have right now is: Are FM radio waves more dangerous than Roundup™?

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:

I've been thinking the same thing. But the problem is, the tower is visible, Roundup isn't, so it's much easier to dismiss. I do wonder if the people who are upset about the tower obstructing their view, are as upset about Roundup so close to their neighborhood.

---

If you think the tower is a Grand idea, put it your back yard and not mine

Aw....That's kind of a silly statement. I'm not putting up the tower. But I'd rather have the tower, than RoundUp sprayed close to me. Do you believe that the tower is equally as dangerous as RoundUp? Or maybe you think it's worse? Would you use Round Up in your garden? Why or why not?

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Garden lover:

If you think the tower is a Grand idea, put it your back yard and not mine

---

Just wondered if this was being built next to you, and you did a lot of research, and found either conclusive or inconclusive evidence of danger, what would you do?

People who are EMF sensitive unfortunately do live compromised lives, as do many other "sensitives". I'd even venture to say that most people are sensitive to one thing or another that compromises their lives. Some haven't even made the connection between their symptoms and the potential undiscovered causes.

People that live close to vineyards and want to protect their views, may have their health compromised in ways yet to be discovered by them, and their children. I wonder if these same people believe that fluoride in the water systems protects their teeth, or that GMOs are beneficial, or that Monsanto products benefit their neighborhood by providing a beautiful view.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by arthunter:

Podfish,

I purposely tried to present different opinions regarding the dangers of non-ionizing radiation so thank you for picking up on that .... if this was being built next to me I would be doing a lot of research ... I have two friends who are so EMF sensitive that their lives are greatly compromised ... I'm not saying that this tower is dangerous, just that it could be ....

https://www.cwa-union.org/pages/Micr...ency_Radiation

---

What if the antenna is built by Patrick Amiot and painted the color of the sky?

:idea::wink::Yinyangv:

I have been a KOWS broadcaster since the station opened. I believe In free speech community radio as an important resource for political awareness and action as well as vital in an emergency. I understand that you are attached to your view being free of a tower. But I must say it reminds me of when I lived offshore from Sausalito as an anchor-out. The people on the hills launched a legal crusade against the anchor-outs because we blocked their view of the pristine Bay. Now technically, the people on the hills' houses blocked my view of the hill... But because the people living anchored out on boats were poor -- our claim of the view of the hill was not taken seriously while the people on the hill were able to get us boat people redefined as "landfill" in order to regulate us!

Now I mention this because while I respect your right to prefer a view without a tower -- I gotta say, no one owns the view. If you want to fight it on the basis of environmental justice due to the radiation -- then perhaps you have a case (I say as I compose this post on my iPhone which no doubt is generating radiation that may or may not give me cancer).

Bottom line -- we need a better positioned antenna to generate greater sound to Sebastopol, a town known for being a progressive voice in the right-wing racist wilderness that is America these days. If you feel the tower should not be in your backyard view, then most likely any where we go, will be someone's backyard view.

Now my white privilege tells me that it would be easier to locate the tower in an area where poorer people live and don't have much of a view to protect. But I don't like white privilege! So if we stick to our ideals, we shouldn't even try to move the antenna for it will impact someone wherever we go and there is still the myth of equal rights in this country. What a conundrum.

Well, the anchor-outs are still out there blocking the hill people's view of the Bay and the hill people are still building houses on the shores blocking the view of the hills -- and a shitload of money went to the lawyers and really made no difference at all. Bottom line, there is no right to a view, it is simply preference. That said, money and power can provide the means for owning the view....

I always want everyone to be happy. So we'll just have to keep communicating with each other to find a solution. KOWS wants to reach more listeners and if we can't move the antenna then our station's free speech will not be available to Sebastopolians unless they can afford wi-fi. Just my 2 cents worth... Kym

---

From Barry:

The Sebastopol Planning Commission will be considering the tower application tonight (Feb 23rd)

The meeting Agenda is here.

The Staff Report is here.
:waccosun:

"Lipstick on a pig"???

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Ted Pole:

What if the antenna is built by Patrick Amiot and painted the color of the sky?

:idea::wink::Yinyangv:

---

The vote was 4-3 by the Planning Commission last night to approve the KOWS antenna. Good points were made by both sides and it was a civil discussion. The opposition can now appeal, which would apparently go to the City Council. I will be talking about this victory for free speech community radio on my Feb. 29, Mon. "A Better World IS Possible" KOWS program from 5-6 p.m., which you can hear at www.kows.fm. There may be something brief in tomorrow's Bohemian, with a follow-up article later, and perhaps something in Sonoma West about last night.

Dear Sebastopol Planning Commission members and director, City Council members, Mayor Sarah Glade Gurney, & City Clerk,

I drove by the corner of Pleasant Hill and Elphick roads this morning, as I do many days of each week from my nearby organic vineyard, where I have grown mainly boysenberries for the last two-dozen years. I went to see with my own eyes what I had been told at the Planning Commission meeting last night—that signs objecting to the harmless KOWS antenna were taken down before the hearing. They were indeed down.

Someone who works on that land, where Steve Dutton owns a vineyard, informed me on Monday that the signs were not put up with his permission, since he supports the location of the tower in that neighborhood. Members of other local groups, such as the Bloomfield/Lone Pine/Cunningham Neighborhood Association and the Sebastopol Grange, some of whose farmers live on Pleasant Hill, testified in favor of the antenna.
However, the signs remain in front of the vineyard next door, which seems to belong to the Jenkins, who have been leading the charge against the KOWS antenna.

I want to publicly appreciate both sides for the thorough discussion last night for making good points in a civil discourse. The staff report and the Planning Commissioners deliberations addressed many complicated issues. I appreciate the 4-3 decision to grant KOWS’ application. If the opposition appeals within 5 days, I hope that we will be able to have another informative, educational, and civil discourse, this time before the Sebastopol City Council.

There was even some good humor last night, especially by a man objecting to the antenna. He pointed out that the wonderful former Twin Hills Apple Farm at the corner has been transformed into a vineyard and recently been approved to be a winery as an event center, which would increase traffic and tipsy drivers at that place, within a football field of two schools. Though I disagree with him about the KOWS antenna, he brought smiles to my face. I hope that he and other neighbors currently objecting to the KOWS antenna may join us in objecting to that winery as an event center.

I would like to add a point to my testimony last night. It was claimed that it is easy to hear KOWS online, so no need to hear it on the radio. I listen to community radio every day, without fail, mostly for independent news. I have never listened to it online. At 71-years-old, I am low-tech and already spend too much time online with emails, writing, and web research. Radios, on the other hand, can bring comfort. There are many elders who were raised on radio, with its music and stories. I hope someday soon to be able to turn on my radio, rather than my computer, and hear free speech, independent, community KOWS-FM.
Sincerely,
Shepherd Bliss

https://www.waccobb.net/forums/wacco...6_17-10-04.png

The Sebastopol Planning Commission approved KOWS antenna on Pleasant Hill Ave, however Bob Jenkins is appealing that decision at the May 3rd City Council meeting at the Sebastopol Community Center. Meeting starts at 6pm at the It's the first agenda item after all the regular stuff.

If you support genuinely community radio, attending this May 3 meeting would be the time to show it. We should have some KOWS stickers for you, and welcome any member of the public speaking. KOWS presents local programs such as no other station can. One example would be the on-the-air memorial for local poet Gor Yashwen, with about a dozen of his friends in the studio, now located in the Sebastopol Methodist Church.

Moving the harmless antenna from the organic Occidental Arts & Ecology Center, where it has been for nearly a decade now, closer to Sebastopol, as approved by the Planning Commission, would increase our reach from 20,000 listeners to a possible 200,000 listeners.

The Sebastopol City Council will hear KOWS application tonight, Tues., to move its harmless low-power antenna to Pleasant Hill Rd. The meeting will start at 6 p.m. at the Community Center on Morris St. The KOWS item is likely to start around 6:30. Please consider coming and expressing your support for this harmless antenna to be moved closer to town, thus expanding the potential listeners. KOWS could report on emergencies, such as fires, road closings, power outages, flooding, etc., as well as provide good music and entertainment to West County residents. Today's PD article follows:

https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/5...ws-radio-tower

Dispute over KOWS radio tower goes to Sebastopol City Council
MARY CALLAHAN, THE PRESS DEMOCRAT | May 2, 2016, 6:09PM

The Sebastopol City Council will wade Tuesday night into a dispute over plans to install a 65-foot-tall radio tower and antenna on a plot of city-owned land south of town, surrounded by rural county residences.

Neighbors from the area are asking the council to overturn a vote by city planning commissioners narrowly approving use of the property for a latticed, stainless steel tower that would boost reception for KOWS 107.3 FM, a nonprofit community radio station that serves west Sonoma County.

Supporters of the 8-year-old station say the project is needed to reach more people — including potential listeners in Sebastopol and west Santa Rosa — outside the range of an antenna currently perched in a Douglas fir tree at the Occidental Arts and Ecology Center.

They say they approached the city of Sebastopol about its 3.39-acre municipal lot at 1281 Pleasant Hill Road last fall in part because the location would enable the station’s low-power signal to get beyond a north-south ridge line along Grandview Road. The site between Elphick and Lynch roads already is used for two 3 million-gallon water storage tanks and related structures and equipment. The antenna would be set back 500 feet from the road at the furthest, southeast corner, in an attempt to limit its visual impact.

In deference to unexpected community opposition to a 70-foot-tall, 24-inch-wide structure, station members recently proposed a 60-foot tower that tapers to 12 inches at the top and has a 5-foot-long, 2-inch pipe at the top.
“We just hope to squeeze the profile and the silhouette and the size down so we can minimize the impact, the visual impact,” steering committee member Arnold Levine said.

But neighbors are opposed in principal to placing a towering antenna in the middle of a countryside that includes adjacent vineyards, orchards and rural property. They say the city would be imposing the unsightly structure on county landowners whose properties surround the city lot, an island in the county.

Neighboring vineyard and orchard owner Bob Jenkins and his wife went so far as to acquire a 6-foot-wide, red weather balloon that they filled with helium and tethered 70 feet in the air to mimic the appearance of the tower, taking photographs from the surrounding terrain.

Citing everything from property devaluation to inadequate environmental review to health concerns related to electromagnetic fields, at least 160 individuals have reportedly joined him in opposing the project.

One of them, middle school teacher Andrea Hagan-Schmitz, said a fundamental complaint is the planning commission’s assertion that a structure so out of keeping with the neighborhood did not warrant full environmental review.

“This is an industrial, ugly tower that serves such a small portion of the community, and it would negatively affect so many,” Hagan-Schmitz said.

“Is KOWS a valuable part of the community? You bet,” she said. “Are they so valuable that we can afford to put a tower on Pleasant Hill Road? No!”

But they also argue that those interested in listening to KOWS could do so through live streaming on the Internet.

Levine said the debate has been fraught with misinformation and misrepresentation. He believes the visual impact of the narrow antenna structure — which will be painted flat green toward the bottom and gray-blue toward the top to further camouflage its appearance — has been overstated.

“If it was a commercial radio, fair enough,” he said, “but a ridiculously low-powered community radio is a whole other universe.”

Tuesday’s 6 p.m. council meeting has been relocated to the Sebastopol Community Center, 390 Morris St. It also will be live streamed on https://bit.ly/sebcctv.

You can reach Staff Writer Mary Callahan at 521-5249 or mary.callahan@ pressdemocrat.com. On Twitter @MaryCallahanB.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shepherd:

If you support genuinely community radio, attending this May 3 meeting would be the time to show it. We should have some KOWS stickers for you, and welcome any member of the public speaking. KOWS presents local programs such as no other station can. One example would be the on-the-air memorial for local poet Gor Yashwen, with about a dozen of his friends in the studio, now located in the Sebastopol Methodist Church.

Moving the harmless antenna from the organic Occidental Arts & Ecology Center, where it has been for nearly a decade now, closer to Sebastopol, as approved by the Planning Commission, would increase our reach from 20,000 listeners to a possible 200,000 listeners.

---

May 10, 2016
From: Alexandra Hart
TO: Sebastopol City Council
RE: In favor of KOWS Radio Tower

Gentlefolk:

To be transparent, I am a KOWS programmer with a monthly 2-hour show called “Growing an Elder Culture” which I consider to be of importance to Sebastopol because we are able to interview people live, locally, nationally and internationally via telephone, on topics that are of concern and on breaking new information useful to aging in general. Since Sebastopol has quite a large population of people 50 and older, and many of the older ones are now being confined to home for various reasons, having this access to this information expands their and all of our information about safety, capacity, medical research, emotional factors and other factors of well-being in an aging body. Some do not have internet access. Many other of the KOWS programmers provide information and entertainment useful to this growing portion of our local population. All are volunteer workers.

As a public access radio station and an emergency access information station, KOWS provides a wide variety of safety and other valuable functions that weigh it strongly toward the public good. My exploration of the resistance group’s website startled me with the narrowness of their vision and the slant toward personal preference and property values, but even more their misinformation about radio frequency emissions and their apparent intention to degrade the character of KOWS personnel and purpose.

I wanted to see an image of what the tower looked like, so was interested when I found a tower apparently erected for residential use that conforms rather closely to the projected one, over on the Rodota Trail where it intersects Hurlbut and where East Hurlbut connects. Photos attached below. One passerby whom I stopped said he rather enjoyed the break in the usual visuals and didn’t mind the tower. Together we estimated the height at about 60 ft. I took the photos below on that day, May 2.

On May 9, I went back to walk the trail and decided to inquire of other walkers what their opinion of the tower was. My question was intended to be neutral: "Does the presence of this tower bother you at all?” None of them found it disturbing or disruptive. One walker passed it again, looking at it more closely this time, and when she found me again, down the path further, she said “It is ugly…” but she hadn’t ever noticed it before I asked. No more negative impressions were stated.

All photos taken from the Rodota Trail. The tower is located about 50 yards back, as far as I can estimate - though my distance gauging is uncertain.

Notice that the full length of the tower is shown, the ground is higher than the path, and the tree is behind the tower but hardly shows.

In this photo the tree is to the right of the tower and you can barely see the upper 10 ft. against the sky. I conclude that foliage both in front and behind will disguise a great deal. I also discovered that if foliage is in the nearer foreground it covers more of the tower, and if the tower is farther away on a site, foliage will obscure a great deal of it.

I was trying to get shots while the light was in an awkward position, and to get much of the tower in sight. Here is a mixed view. Again, we are relatively near the tower. When I was back on Gravenstein Hwy, about a block away, I could see nothing at all of the tower.

My conclusion is that, while I am in favor of the KOWS tower as a programmer, I am also an environmentalist and prefer a low profile on industrial imagery and care about natural beauty. In spite of all this, I would have to fall heavily on the side of the greater public good in the case of this minimal structure. I really believe that it will not end up being an eyesore for the residents of the area. I live on Lone Pine and would not be able to see it from here. I am a member of a community neighborhood group which is near the Sharp group area - the "Bloomfield/LonePine/Cunningham" area residents and all but one of our group is in favor of the tower, from what I know. I believe that the Sharp group is convened specifically to defend perceived property values, and that they will be surprised by how little they are actually affected in the end.

Sorry this turned out to be so long…

Sincerely, Alexandra Hart

TY for these shots.

I hope the City Council approves it, for the public good.

It would be unfortunate if a NIMBY attitude of a few were able to deprive the greater public of this improvement in KOWS station.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Valet Posting Service:

RE: In favor of KOWS Radio Tower...

---

Having grown up in this town and having lived here since I was 3 years old, I'm embarrassed by the way people are trying to get this antenna tower erected - which is classed as a "Major Telecommunications Tower".

Most everything I've read here, on this site, and have heard at the planning meetings regarding this issue is riddled with flawed logic, fear mongering, and name calling. It makes a mockery of public voice and "civil" liberty. I will point out the flawed logic below.

If you don't have time to read what's below, then PLEASE at least educate yourself here: sharpwatch.org/

The means and the methods that the KOWS have used to manipulate public opinion and gain votes:

ILLOGIC (Abusive / Ad hominem fallacy) and (Poisoning The Well)

To say that the tower is "not as bad as Roundup" so THEREFORE we can proceed with building an antenna tower, is like saying: You did something bad, so I'm going to do something just a little less bad - and call it good! You might as well be saying: "I shit in the community well, but not as much as you did, so it's OK."
It's a flawed logic, it's a red herring: Trying to distract people with another issue you think is worse so that they won't look deeper into the real issue regarding the antenna tower.
(Read more here: Abusive fallacy and, it's actually called: Poisoning The Well - I didn't make that up!)


KOWS NOT CONCERNED ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT
CEQA experts have seriously questioned the application, which requires the removal of multiple truck loads of earth, 44,000 pounds of concrete, 300 feet of trenching for electrical lines, solar panels and a housing structure.

Peregrine falcons have been seen around the Pleasant Hill site. It is home to eagles and other raptors, badgers, bats, deer, foxes and many other species.

Where's the environmental impact report? Just because an organization can't afford an environmental report does not exempt them from needing it or caring about it.

APPEAL TO FEAR
“If the City Council doesn't approve this one location, then they are killing the community’s only radio station!”
This is an Appeal to emotion – where an argument is made to manipulate emotions, rather than relying on valid reasoning.

Not only is this argument flawed for it’s emotional appeal, but anyone with a smart phone or web browser can listen to their radio show online.

Even their business cards advertise this fact with their URL printed right on them urging you to:
“Listen online at www.kows.fm”.
I'll help you by giving you the actual URL: https://kows107-3.org/listen/

In other words - if their primary argument are either
“We won’t exist without an antenna”
or
“We need reach a larger audience”
Then there is no larger audience they can reach right now, today, than the world wide audience they already reach online.
Conclusion, there is NO NEED for a tower.
(read more about the Appeal To Fear)

MORE FEAR MONGERING and MISINFORMATION
At the first meeting the KOWS made a big deal out of being THE Emergency Broadcast Station (which is another appeal to fear). But what KOWS failed to state was that ALL radio stations are Emergency Alert Stations - as required by the FCC. KZST’s website states that KZST is the official Emergency Alert System for Sonoma County.

So, if Sebastopol is already covered by KZST and many other station, and KOWS is currently covering West County around Occidental - then who is going to cover West County if KOWS moves their antenna?
Will west county then suffer in an emergency?

A more beneficial strategy would be to continue to serve the hard-to-reach spots and pocket canyons of west county and expand to other areas that don’t have WiFi, Cellular service, or Radio stations. It would be a strategy that would help unify our entire county, possibly making KOWS the one-of-a-kind, indispensable service to our community that it hopes to be.

But for KOWS to move to an area, that is already covered in more ways that one, while leaving people behind is not adding a service but taking one away.

FAIRNESS TO OTHER SEBTOWN BUSINESSES
Does any like monopolies?
How many businesses in town have been leased property, indefinitely, for $1 a year?
How is it fair (or even logical) that a small group of people (many of which don't even live in Sebastopol) are given property for $1 a year?
All other businesses in town should be asking for equal "community" treatment by the city.

It begs asking: What is the city's larger plan for this tower once built? An income stream from Cell tower colocation? If that's the case, KOWS will be know as the "people who sold us to AT&T".
If it's not the case, then KOWS will be known as the people who seek unfair advantage over the other businesses in town. Or perhaps there's something I'm missing. Can someone please explain how $1 a year for one organization is fair to all? How is that "community minded"?

NO PROOF of being the "GREATER GOOD"
It was said:
"It would be unfortunate if a NIMBY attitude of a few were able to deprive the greater public of this improvement in KOWS station."

1) The City of Sebastopol has outlined what it thinks is the greater good in this regard many times in their general plan:

"Action COS-11a: Assess public views and ridgelines as part of the project review process to assure that projects protect natural resources through proper site planning, building design, and landscaping."
(read Sebastopol's General Plan here)

Nowhere in Sebastopol's General plan is the mention of a "Major Telecommunication Tower" as part of "the greater good".

2) I was at both of the city meetings for this issue. At the last meeting I counted only ONE person who was NOT a KOWS programmer who said they were in favor of the tower - and they lived in Santa Rosa - so they probably won't be getting the broadcasts anyways (but anyone can listen online from anywhere in the world!).

So it begs the question: Who? and Where? is this "greater good". The people who have been speaking in favor of the tower are almost all programmers and announcers for the station.

Let me rephrase it: It is constantly put forth that the antenna will serve the "greater good" with ZERO proof. How many people listen? Nobody knows. How many people spoke in favor of the antenna (who don't work for the station)? I counted 1 (one).

From this you could possibly conclude that the "NIMBY" attitude comes from KOWS themselves. They are the small group of people. They don't want the antenna in their backyard (Shepherd you live near the proposed site, why not put it in your yard?). So, because "it's better than round up", they want to erect a monument to urban blight which would be going against the actual "Greater Good" of the entire county by destroying the country side - permanently.

3) Sadly, I agree with you one thing: Only a few people stood up to ask the proper question. It was the NIMBYs who stood up to ask: "Where is the Environmental Impact Report??".
Yes, it was the people who own that actual backyard who stood up, who care for the land, the environment, and the impact that this project will have on it. Perhaps only NIMBYs care about the environment?
OK, it's not entirely true. It wouldn't be in my backyard, but I still care as a long standing member of Sebastopol and all it stands for. Oh, and, come to think of it, over 200 other people have signed an online petition - and it's not their backyard either.

But it is a very sad thing to say and to hear: That only NIMBYs care about the environment. It's not what I would expect someone from Sebastopol to have said.
But there you have it: If you own the land or live near it, then you care about it.
If you don't live near the affected land, then you can destroy it - for the "greater good".

IDEALS vs COMPROMISE
OK, I hear you saying: "But we can't put it in our backyard because it's not the "ideal" location."
This is know as the Nirvana fallacy (perfect solution fallacy) – when solutions to problems are rejected because they are not perfect.
What this translates to is: "We want a PERFECT radio antenna location. And we don't give a F*¢k about your property, your loss, or anything else. We want a PERFECT tower location and we're not concerned with compromise or being good community players or citizens".

The KOWS haven't told you (here at least), but there are, and have always been, other locations and options:

a) Leave it at OAEC: The KOWS said they were "asked to leave" but this is not true, as I talked with Dave Henson of OAEC and verified that for myself. KOWS was asked to form their own 501c3. But they were happy hosting the antenna. So that was either a lie or a huge omission of truth.

b) Respini Ranch: You can either read about this option here:
https://sharpwatch.org/an-alternative-site-respini-ranch/
or here, in KOWS own words:
https://kowscom.wordpress.com/2015/0...-notes-6-2-15/

OK, let's just say that the location on Pleasant Hill road would be the best for transmission, by some small factor. Is this worth dividing the town over? Is it worth telling the people who live there: F-U!
Can you really go forward in the future telling everyone how much a great community radio station you are when the very roots of your efforts translate to telling an entire community that they don't matter, that they should just "look the other way".

"JUST LOOK THE OTHER WAY!"
At the last meeting one of the KOWS broadcasters came up to me and said:
"Are you with them?!"
My first thought was: Who is "them"???
Second, haven't we already come to the conclusion that there is no "them" and no "us" we are all just "us".
After clarifying that I'm neither "them" or "us", that I'm just a concerned citizen who wants to know why the KOWS didn't complete the proper environmental report and that I think a major telecommunications tower is out of place in the countryside....
She concluded with "well they can just look the other way".

Wait, what?!?!? "just look the other way"?!?!

So, neither the KOWS nor the City of Sebastopol has done a proper environmental report and the KOWS response is: "Just look the other way"
Is this how justice should be dealt with? "Just look the other way" ?
You don't like CVS downtown??? Just look the other way!
You don't like police brutality?!? Just look the other way!
You don't like the fact that most of the KOWS arguments are flawed and all tend down the path of "we just want what we want and we're not willing to make any compromise to make anyone happy except ourselves" well... Just look the other way!
***

I grew up in this town. It's nice because it's so blessed by nature, good food, good views, and the intelligent people that care for her.

I will not die in this town "looking the other way". Nor should you.
And I expect a "community" radio station to have more pride and integrity than it has, thus far, been presenting.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by SebTownRaised:

Having grown up in this town and having lived here since I was 3 years old, I'm embarrassed by the way people are trying to get this antenna tower erected - which is classed as a "Major Telecommunications Tower".
Most everything I've read here, on this site, and have heard at the planning meetings regarding this issue is riddled with flawed logic, fear mongering, and name calling. It makes a mockery of public voice and "civil" liberty. I will point out the flawed logic below.

---

after that intro, the rest of your post was the exact opposite of what I expected! I guess I saw 'fear mongering' and went too quickly to electro-sensitivity... and had similar misunderstandings as to what you meant by name calling and flawed logic.

I'm not too far from the site myself, and will see it every day. Actually, I don't expect to see it every day. It'll blend into the background pretty quickly. I also have a bias towards people actually doing things, especially beneficial things. The people behind KOWS fit that. I have much less sympathy for the right of us neighbors to sit on our porch, admiring the view, but picking and choosing what that view might be.

Hi all,

That the campaign against the proposed KOWS antenna structure on Pleasant Hill Road has been marked by controversy should come as no surprise - this is a fairly common response to any new construction project in a neighborhood. A friend described to me the recent opposition to a proposed traffic circle in Forestville at the intersection of 116 and Mirabel Road and said the reaction seemed as though there were a proposal to put a nuclear reactor in that spot. People don't like change.

The primary organizer for the neighborhood opposition to the KOWS antenna went on record today in the public comments to the recent City Council hearing to suggest that "in this post 9/11 world" it might be prudent to ask whether a disgruntled KOWS programmer who lost their show might be inspired to commit a terrorist act against the two 3 million gallon water tanks on the Pleasant Hill city property if KOWS had the sort of access to the site that would be required if KOWS had an antenna structure there. The conversation on this matter has grown exaggerated beyond the point of absurdity.

The following is an excerpt of the statement I presented on behalf of the KOWS Antenna Relocation Committee during the May 3rd City Council meeting reviewing the appeal to the approved Use Permit granted by the Sebastopol Planning Commission (the referenced City of Sebastopol City Council Staff Report can by found here and the full range of submissions both pro and con can be found here):

To begin, KOWS-LP Community Radio would like to thank the Sebastopol City Council and the City Planning Director for this opportunity to come before you and discuss our proposed antenna relocation project. As you know, KOWS is an FCC-licensed Low Power FM radio station that began broadcasting in 2008 in Occidental. The mission of KOWS from its inception is to provide a unique voice in West Sonoma County that highlights the diversity of talent and sources of information available in our community. We are an entirely volunteer organization supported through a combination of membership dues from all hosts, underwriting support, community memberships, and grants.

As the number of KOWS listeners, show hosts, and underwriters has increased over the last eight years, we have found growing interest to improve the broadcast reach in key areas of West Sonoma County such as downtown Sebastopol.

Our current antenna is located in a tree on the OAEC property on Coleman Valley Road in Occidental. Though this antenna location has served the Occidental area over the years, it has limited reach in Sebastopol due to the shadowing effect of the ridge line between Occidental and Sebastopol. So over the last several years, the KOWS Steering Committee and Antenna Relocation Committee have worked diligently on a plan to bring greater KOWS coverage to the larger Sebastopol community.

This meeting tonight really is about a possibility and an opportunity: The possibility we invite the City Council to consider is: a Sebastopol-based community radio station that acts as a magnet that draws and brings together the many different voices and talents of West Sonoma County; a community radio station that enhances the brand of the City of Sebastopol as a cultural center and a destination. We ask you to consider a Sebastopol-based community radio station that showcases our local musicians and artists; acknowledges the support of local businesses; hosts in-depth conversations about the region’s top political, social, and spiritual issues; and gives voice to members of the community who might not otherwise have avenues for expression.

With the recent move of our studio from downtown Occidental to the Sebastopol Methodist Church, we have already seen the growing ability of our community radio station to touch the lives of the local residents. KOWS recently coordinated with students from Analy and El Molino, creating the monthly High School Students Forum where students discuss issues of concern to youth – and our extended community. KOWS also provides a regular forum for older members of our community, called “Growing an Elder Culture.” In addition to a wide range of innovative music and talk shows, KOWS also provides live coverage of local events, including the Apple Blossom Festival and California Bluegrass Festival. The mission of KOWS-LP is to support and expand community in the City of Sebastopol and the surrounding West Sonoma County. The possibility that we invite you to consider is the possibility of an authentic voice of Sebastopol on the airwaves.

The opportunity that we invite you to take action on here tonight is to sustain the Sebastopol Planning Commission’s approval of a Use Permit to relocate the KOWS antenna to the Pleasant Hills reservoir property and to deny the appeal submitted against that considered decision. When KOWS radio leadership began the process of exploring alternative antenna sites to the current OAEC location, our criteria included what is allowable by the FCC and sites that maximize potential listenership in the West County area. The details of this process, the constraints that limited possible sites, and the many alternatives we explored are described in the supplemental material we presented in response to the Appeal. In this process, we identified an ideal location on City-owned land, zoned only for community facilities, that provides a significant boost to KOWS signal coverage in the Sebastopol area.

The purpose of this Use Permit is to locate a 70-foot, 24 inch wide, lattice structure on the site of 1281 Pleasant Hill Road and to mount a 4 bay low power antenna on this structure that will provide an FM signal to effectively reach all of Sebastopol and the surrounding West County area. The multi-bay antenna structure is designed to minimize the RF (radio frequency) field strength in the local residential area to levels significantly below that of EMF field strengths typical in modern households. By shaping the signal with the multi-bay design, this structure will still retain the ability to reach a primary population of 210,000 potential listeners and a secondary population of another 110,000. This represents a significant increase over the number of listeners we reach via the existing antenna structure at OAEC. For an effective Sebastopol-based community radio station, the signal must be capable of reaching as many community members as possible. Our proposed antenna structure on the Pleasant Hill reservoir site achieves this result with a minimal impact on the neighboring community.

KOWS acknowledges the concerns raised by the Appellants who seek to reverse the approval for the Use Permit granted by the Planning Commission on February 23^rd. We recognize the appellants on their organization and energy. However, we also maintain that in their enthusiasm, the appellants have exaggerated the situation out of proportion to the facts and turned this antenna proposal into an existential battle. The City Council Staff report does an excellent job in responding to the key issues raised in the appeal and shows that each of the concerns has been addressed by the Planning Department and the KOWS Use Permit application.

We would like to clarify a detail regarding the potential impact of Electromagnetic Frequencies emitted by the antenna. The City Council Staff report is clear that the proposed KOWS antenna design approved by the Planning Commission is significantly more conservative than the FCC Radio Frequency emission safety requirements for residential areas. KOWS submitted with its original Use Permit application a Non-Ionizing Electromagnetic Radiation (NIER) report written by an FCC-certified radio engineer. In addition to conducting a NIER study on our approved 4-Bay antenna design broadcasting at 25 watts, the engineer also did a study on a single bay antenna, broadcasting at the hypothetically maximum allowable Low Power FM level of 100 watts. The Appellants confuse this study and the accompanying data in their attachment to their appeal, seeking to imply that the hypothetically maximum case figures were somehow representative of what the proposed antenna would produce.

We ask the City Council to allow us to clarify this situation with actual numbers from the report. Though the City Council Staff report is correct in stating that the proposed KOWS antenna meets the FCC NIER requirements for general population/uncontrolled exposure, we want to emphasis that our proposal is in fact less than 1/2500^th of the FCC NIER requirements for the residents in the vicinity of the antenna. The Appellants raised a concern in their attachment about the strength of the RF signal on an undeveloped parcel immediately adjacent to the proposed antenna site. The KOWS NIER report shows that at the fence line, the power density from the antenna is less than 1/750^th of the FCC NIER requirements and that this value quickly falls off to less than 1/2500^th of the FCC requirement at any likely home site on this parcel.

Another area of concern the Appellants raise is the environmental and visual impact of the proposed antenna structure. The City Council Staff report does an excellent job in putting the proposed antenna structure in context with the realities of the rural residential environment around the Pleasant Hill reservoir. 50-foot high PG&E wooden utility poles carrying high voltage current with large step down transformers line Pleasant Hill Rd, Blackney Rd, and Elphick Rd with a density of about one pole every 150 feet. These utility poles traverse the nearby open landscape with far more visual exposure above the surrounding vegetation and they disrupt the natural landscape much more thoroughly than the proposed antenna. As the simulated views that KOWS presented in its response to the Appeal show, it is virtually impossible to find a vista in this area that is not dominated by one or more of these utility poles projecting far into the skyline. The City Council Staff report indicates that our proposed 24” wide lattice antenna structure even at a height of 70 feet will not be significantly distinguished from the many utility poles lining the rolling hills of the area.

The Appellants go so far to claim in their attachments that it is by virtue of the large number of utility poles that no one in the community notices them. They claim the KOWS antenna structure will be singular and therefore draw undue attention. We suggest this is actually an example of a more general phenomenon: the typical response to any proposed construction change in a neighborhood is for residents to exaggerate the impact of what will be different and to discount the impact of what has already been present for years. This is why no one in the neighborhood notices the 60-foot antenna structure at the Gold Ridge Fire Station right around the corner of Pleasant Hill Rd from the reservoir property. This antenna is clearly visible at the corner of Pleasant Hill and Watertrough Roads, and is located next to two schools. This is why the many PG&E utility poles in the area are virtually invisible to residents. The simulations that KOWS provided in its response to the Appeal also show that given the varying terrain of this area and the over 500’ setback from the road, the proposed antenna structure will not in fact be easily visible from most viewpoints. Additionally, the requirements imposed by the Planning Department - to paint the structure to blend in with the background - will further enhance the antenna’s integration into the surroundings.

Notwithstanding all of the aforementioned, KOWS sincerely wants to minimize the visual impact of the proposed antenna structure. We want to be the best neighbors we can while still achieving our goals. So even after gaining the approval of our Use Permit from the Planning Commission, KOWS continued to research different options for antenna structures to further limit the visual impact of our installation. After much research, we have developed an option, detailed in the Staff report, which represents a 60- foot tapered lattice structure from Trylon that starts out with a 30” width at the base, tapers to 21” at 30 feet, 15” at 50 feet, and 12” at 60 feet. On top of this will be a 2” wide 5’ extension pole for a total height of 65 feet. This structure will be lower in height, thinner in profile, and yet afford a similar signal reach to the greater Sebastopol area. In addition, this structure is sized so that no additional antennas may ever be added, thus eliminating the potential for co-locating future antennas on this structure. As the Staff report states, we offer this solution as a way to mitigate concerns about visibility and impact of the proposed antenna.

I would like to make the following concluding comments:

On December 30th, 2015, KOWS Community Radio submitted an Antenna Use Permit Application to the Sebastopol Planning Department. In this Application, KOWS specifically addresses a number of issues and concerns directly related to our proposed antenna project. These include: existing site uses; rationale for location; neighbor notification; construction steps; reduction of visual impact; broadcast operations, equipment and signal; tower specifications; antenna specifications; benefits to the Sebastopol community; and more.

The Sebastopol Planning Commission approved our Use Permit on February 23rd of this year. KOWS has recently submitted to the Planning Department a comprehensive, detailed Response to the Appeal of this decision, filed by some neighbors. This Response is included in the City Council Staff Report. In our Response, we directly address a number of issues raised by the Appellant: CEQA; co-location; radio frequency emissions; KOWS listening audience; other possible locations; notification of neighbors; KOWS financial stability; visual impact; and other concerns.

We very much appreciate your consideration of our antenna project proposal. We ask the City Council to sustain the Planning Commission’s approval of the KOWS Use Permit and deny the appeal. We have demonstrated in our extensive documentation for this project that the Radio Frequency electromagnetic radiation emission levels fall significantly below even the most conservative safety standards; the visual impact is minimal and can be further mitigated with an alternative design; our proposed use is appropriate for the zoning of this property; and the benefits for the Sebastopol community are many, varied, and substantial. We ask you to take advantage of this opportunity to support the KOWS antenna relocation project and make the possibility of a Sebastopol-based community radio station a reality.

Thank you for your consideration

- Stuart Goodnick, KOWS Antenna Relocation Committee

Community non-commercial radio is one of the best platforms for participatory democracy. A small-town radio station is an exercise in community sharing and bonding. It can help give a town a personality, providing community members with on-air opportunities in the field of radio, including having their own show which can be anything they want it to be. It’ll be the only radio station that Sebastopol citizens will have easy access to, in terms of expressing their opinions, performing their music, sharing their lives, especially for those more isolated from the mainstream, like seniors and youth.

Only a very small minority will actually see the station from their homes. The antenna will effect only a small % of Sebastopol’s population. I’ve listened to all the scientific data, and it seems that the EMF radiation effects of this signal will be less than the effect of carrying a smartphone with you. About 75% of household radiation is caused by the devices and appliances we have. This antenna will make that figure 75.01%.

The tradeoff is providing Sebastopol with its own radio station, Imagine if the first radio transmissions, over 100 years ago, had been blocked by community skepticism.
Robert Feuer

There must be a Latin term for this kind of argument: take a good proposition, that benefits the vast majority of people, and construct a huge lengthy argument against it, from many angles, many different kinds of arguments... to basically overwhelm, and obscure the truth.

Ok, I looked it up: "Argumentum Ab Inconvenienti Plurimum Valet In Lege: Latin: An argument ..... that those infamous wretches may be overwhelmed with the severest punishment, ..."

The antenna will have about as much effect as another telephone pole in the area, of which there are many.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by SebTownRaised:

Having grown up in this town ...

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by tommy:

There must be a Latin term for this kind of argument... ...

---

You're so close!

But it's the KOWS themselves who presented so many different arguments for "need".
For your convenience, here are a few, and I'll start with your new one:

The antenna will have about as much effect as another telephone pole in the area, of which there are many.
False Analogy – an argument by analogy in which the analogy is poorly suited.

This analogy is poorly suited because:

• There are telephone poles everywhere. Major Telecommunication towers are NOT everywhere.
• Telephone poles are about 30'. This tower would be 65' - over twice as tall.
• Telephone poles are made of wood and at least mildly blend into natural settings. Major Telecommunication towers are so vastly different I'm not even going to continue. It's obvious.

We must have an antenna at Pleasant Hill Road because we are The Greater Good
Moral high ground fallacy – in which one assumes a "holier-than-thou" attitude in an attempt to make oneself look good to win an argument.

There is NO proof that the KOWS are the "greater good". Can the vast majority of the community please stand up and SHOW how KOWS is so great that they don't need to perform the proper environmental report?

Our antenna MUST be installed at this ONE location
Nirvana fallacy (perfect solution fallacy) – when solutions to problems are rejected because they are not perfect.
(it can go almost anywhere, they won’t get as good of coverage, perhaps, but that’s not our problem)

The KOWS has had other locations and they refuse to choose another location that will please everyone - those showing their true colors that they are not "community minded". Instead their actions show selfishness and narcissism.

If the City Council doesn't approve our ONE location, then you are killing the community’s only radio station!
Appeal to emotion – where an argument is made due to the manipulation of emotions, rather than the use of valid reasoning.

KOWS MUST have an antenna - or we can’t continue!
False dilemma (false dichotomy, fallacy of bifurcation, black-or-white fallacy) – two alternative statements are held to be the only possible options, when in reality there are more.

KOWS is streaming WORLD WIDE RIGHT NOW! It's amazing! have a listen!
kows107-3.org/listen/

Note that their business cards even promote listening online.

But we provide an Emergency Alert service!
Appeal to fear – a specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is made by increasing fear and prejudice towards the opposing side.
and
False dilemma (false dichotomy, fallacy of bifurcation, black-or-white fallacy) – two alternative statements are held to be the only possible options, when in reality there are more.

ALL radio stations are required to to provide emergency alerts. So.... yeah.

The KOWS MUST stay in business!
Appeal to tradition (argumentum ad antiquitatem) – a conclusion supported solely because it has long been held to be true.

No, this operation is not a necessary public service, like the water tanks, it is a luxury and it doesn’t have to continue at all.

But don't forget, you can't kill KOWS because they're streaming world wide:
kows107-3.org/listen/

Moving the tower means SO many more people will be listening to us
Anecdotal fallacy – using a personal experience or an isolated example instead of sound reasoning or compelling evidence.
(there’s been NO data collection or survey to suggest that they will have ANY new listeners or that anyone beyond themselves even cares)
and
Regression fallacy – ascribes cause where none exists. The flaw is failing to account for natural fluctuations. It is frequently a special kind of the post hoc fallacy.
(just because a station is available to new customers it doesn’t mean they will listen)

And as if all these false premises weren’t enough, then there is the matter of the blatant lie:
KOWS claims that they “had to move from OAEC”. But in reality: No. No, they were not kicked out of OAEC. KOWS decided to abandon their OAEC antenna in hopes of gaining a larger listenership.

Let’s be clear: Radio is a LUXURY, not a necessity, as they so continually imply with every word. As such, one can hardly conclude that the City of Sebastopol is obliged in anyway to destroy the beauty that is Sebastopol and the surrounding area just so people can play music and interview each other.

Everyone keeps repeating things like:

"radio is an exercise in community sharing and bonding"

But so far the "sharing" and "bonding" is just the act of dumping their 65 foot trash in someone else's neighborhood. Is that going to bring the community together?

And it's not just the neighbors who are offended:
Over 200 people have signed a petition against dumping this tower in the country side:
https://sharpwatch.org/

And finally,
Until there has been a proper Environmental report, the KOWS are the worst kind of developers I can think of. Hell, I believe even CVS did the proper Environmental report!

What kind of "community service" or "greater good" tries to bypass the required Environmental Report?

My dear, there is so much factual inaccuracy and exaggeration in what you have presented here it's frankly overwhelming. I can't even begin to address it all with the small amount of time I have available at this moment, but I, like you, cannot "look the other way."

I, too, was born and raised in Sebastopol. This is my home. Even after living all my life here I am still in awe of the beauty of its hills, in which I also reside not far from the proposed site (which I too drive by sometimes multiple times a day).

I have reviewed the relevant information, both KOWS' and SHARP's. I have listened to both sides presented at the last city council meeting. I have come away feeling more certain that KOWS is the side of this controversy with the most integrity and the most to be proud of. Please do not claim to represent the best interests of the entire community. Your cause certainly doesn't represent my best interests.

If this antenna is allowed, which I hope it is, please try to find it in your heart to see it for what it really is: a symbol of the voices of the people in this community, which is loved by all of us.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by SebTownRaised:

Having grown up in this town ...

---

Thank you for the free lessons on logical fallacies.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by SebTownRaised:

You're so close!...

---

I will listen to KOWS if they get the antenna up, or at least check it out, it is the kind of station I listen to, and I listen to lots of radio, often hours a day, almost never on computers, and it isn't available where I generally work and drive. Also most construction, many much larger projects are done without environmental impact reports.

The only sharp argument which makes any sense is the cell phone piggyback probability. KOWS supporters don't address that one. Fortunately people don't live right next to the tower location. It's actually a good place for that kind of thing, unlike right above the sebastopol library.

Can you explain why the ranch site with the antenna in a tree wasn't picked? Is it really almost as good and 10 not 30k?

There are a couple of issues you raise that have been addressed in the City Council Staff Report and in materials that KOWS has provided to the City Council:

Co-Location of Antennas
Here is an excerpt from the City Council Staff Report:

There are Federal requirements that place restrictions on State and Local government's ability to regulate co-location of wireless facilities. However these are not applicable to the KOWS antenna situation. FCC Report and Order FCC 14-153 clearly states that co-location mandates do not apply to State and Local governments when they are acting as property owners. That is comparable to the rights of other property owners to control uses on their property. This interpretation is supported by a May 2016 legal analysis of FCC wireless rules prepared for the League of California Cities.

The FCC Order states: "...we conclude that Section 6409(a) applies only to State and Local governments acting in their role as land use regulators and does not apply to such entities acting in their proprietary capacities. As discussed in the record, courts have consistently recognized that in "determining whether government contracts are subject to preemption, the case law distinguishes between actions a State entity takes in a proprietary capacity - actions similar to those a private entity might take - and its attempts to regulate." As the Supreme Court has explained, "[i]n the absence of any express or implied implication by Congress that a State may not manage its own property when it pursues its purely proprietary interests, and when analogous private conduct would be permitted, this Court will not infer such a restriction." Like private property owners, local governments enter into lease and license agreements to allow parties to place antennas and other wireless service facilities on local-government property, and we find no basis for apply Section 6409(a) in those circumstances. We find that this conclusion is consistent with judicial decisions holding that Sections 253 and 332(c) (7) of the Communications Act do not preempt "non regulatory decisions of a state or locality in its proprietary capacity."

Thus, if the project moves forward, there would be no requirement that would force the City to allow other telecommunication operators to install antennas on the property. However, the California League of Cities analysis notes that cities should protect their proprietary rights. Thus, in allowing a telecommunications installation on a public property, jurisdictions should consider whether to restrict a lessee's ability to sub-lease space at the facility. One of the Planning Commission's conditions of approval specifically restricts use of the tower to KOWS, and it is Staff's understanding that any lease with KOWS will impose a similar restriction.

This is a bit technical in its legal language, but the bottom line is that the City would be making space at the Pleasant Hill reservoir site available to KOWS in its capacity as a property owner. As such it has full discretion over structures on that site. The FCC cannot force the City to locate more and bigger antennas there.

Alternative Ranch Site:
Much has been made in the SHARP material about the alternative ranch site for the antenna. They show excerpts from the KOWS online Steering Committee minutes in which participants state that this is a good site for the antenna. This so-called "gotchya" is akin to serving up a half baked cake. As the KOWS Antenna Relocation Committee delved into the technical details, did site tests, and reviewed alternative locations, the ranch site was not the best location for the antenna. Though the ranch site provides slightly better coverage in Sebastopol than the current antenna site at OAEC in Occidental, there is a shadowing effect from the ridge between the ranch site and downtown Sebastopol that limits good coverage. The Pleasant Hill site is by all measures a better location for a low power, low profile, antenna to reach downtown Sebastopol and other parts of West Sonoma County than the many other alternatives we reviewed. Our goal in proposing the Pleasant Hill site is to provide the best quality signal to the largest possible audience consistent with the very many constraints that the FCC imposes on the location of FM antennas.

Thanks! Stuart Goodnick - KOWS Antenna Relocation Committee

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by anatuesday:

My dear, there is so much factual inaccuracy and exaggeration in what you have presented here it's frankly overwhelming

---

i don't know, I thought that was pretty a thorough and accurate analysis of the arguments. 'Course I still don't have a problem with the antenna. The 'anti' arguments aren't any different in quality. I think peoples' positions on this, like on most civic issues, is shaped more by subjective feelings than by balancing the various arguments. Applying logic to it is the planning commision's job.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by podfish:

i don't know, I thought that was pretty a thorough and accurate analysis of the arguments. 'Course I still don't have a problem with the antenna. The 'anti' arguments aren't any different in quality. I think peoples' positions on this, like on most civic issues, is shaped more by subjective feelings than by balancing the various arguments. Applying logic to it is the planning commision's job.

---

I don't see the analysis as compelling. To pick one example, he critiques the analogy to telephone polls and considers it ridiculous, like comparing apples to oranges. But he leaves out that the telephone poles carry telephone wires, so it's not just the poles we are talking about. The telephone poles, with their wires, in the area in question would seem to impact the view and the sense of technological, man-made, presence to a greater degree than the proposed KOWS antenna tower. By leaving out the full impact of the telephone poles, with their wires, he can argue that the analogy is false; but if you consider the full impact of the poles with the wires it would appear that the analogy is actually a good one. (Analogical arguments can be valid to a degree; they usually aren't simply valid or invalid.)

I found similar evasions in the other arguments as put forth.

It is true that subjective feelings play a significant role in these kinds of discussions. However, subjectivity does not mean that the disputing sides have a carte blanche on whatever they want to say; it is not an excuse for the kind of hyperbolic rhetoric that one side seem to be indulging in (like bringing in 9/11).

I think KOWS is a great, community based, service to the West County, and specifically Sebastopol area. I urge the City Council to grant the permit for the KOWS antenna.

Thanks,

Jim

P.S. I forgot to mention that agricultural alterations of the landscape are, in my opinion, of the same kind as alterations by telephone poles and antenna towers. I drive through the area in question frequently; it consists mostly of orchards and wineries, with a graveyard in the area as well. All of these are man-made alterations of the natural landscape. We tend not to notice this because we are used to it. But I suggest that the agricultural alterations are more significant and more extensive than either the telephone poles or the proposed antenna tower. I'm not criticizing wineries, orchards, or graveyards; I am pointing out that the change to the landscape from the proposed antenna tower is likely the most minor of changes when you compare it to agricultural changes and telephone poles, even with their wires..

The following 2 letters appeared in this week's Sonoma West on the KOWS antenna. Note the reference to the "vineyard owners" in the first line of the first letter, who lead and finance the opposition to non-corporate local radio extending its free speech throughout West County.

There are many vineyards on Pleasant Hill Rd., where KOWS wants to place its antenna. They are chemical industrial vineyards who use Roundup and other killers. They place regimented metal stakes in the damaged soil to extract profit for a few, and kill bees and other life forms, creating a green desert. The opposition is another case of the power of the wine barons, who spent hundreds and perhaps thousands of dollars to hire slick lawyers and others to lobby against KOWS application. Meanwhile, KOWS is proposing only one antenna.

Please keep those letters coming, which can challenge the false claims by the opposition and give the City Council the courage to support KOWS in the face of a threatened lawsuit. Letters can be sent to the editor at [email protected]. And join your only local radio station on May 31, Mon., for the Seb. City Council decision, at a meeting which starts at 6 p.m. in the Community Center.

SHARPS’s tone
EDITOR: Your story about the May 3 Sebastopol City Council evaluation of the KOWS antenna proposal fails to mention the stunningly negative, condescending tone of the remarks by the vineyard owners and many (not all) of the other neighbors who spoke in opposition, as well as their misstatements of fact.

Vineyard owner Jenkins brandished in outrage a book no KOWS member had ever heard of and accused KOWS volunteers of using it to orchestrate a campaign of misinformation. And when the SHARP representatives warned City Council members not to allow relationships with KOWS volunteers to sway their decision, they were implicitly accusing KOWS volunteers of improper behavior.

Yet, shortly thereafter in the SHARP presentation, KOWS was demoted from a Machiavellian monster, to a self-involved “private” group (it’s actually a 501(c)(3) recognized nonprofit) that in SHARP’s view is really just a sorry little “radio club” with no money and no staying power (actually KOWS has a 9 year history as a community radio station committed to providing space for little-heard voices and discussion of important local and wider issues).

In contrast, the response co-written by KOWS volunteers spoke of exciting new projects giving voice to high school students and elders, and of the benefits to Sebastopol of having a community radio station. Concerns expressed in the written appeal by SHARP to the Planning Commission decision were systematically addressed. A number of SHARP misstatements were refuted calmly, without rancor or emotional baggage.

SHARP reps spent nearly an hour and a half vilifying KOWS and the motives of KOWS volunteers, while the far more concise and positive KOWS response treated the concerns of opponents with respect, while disagreeing with their conclusions. I submit that the quality of the KOWS response offers a model for how contentious community issues can be addressed without making enemies of neighbors.

Rob Schmidt, Sebastopol

Dear City Council

EDITOR: I live in the community where the proposed KOWS antenna has become a source of friction and controversy in our community. I am also a KOWS show host so I can honestly say I have seen both sides of this issue. I am writing to you today to voice my total and unequivocal support for the approval of this project.

I am becoming deeply dismayed and concerned by the growing misinformation, distortion of facts, innuendos, veiled threats of lawsuits to influence your decision to deny the antennae relocation to Pleasant Hill Road.

Equally disturbing, is SHARP’s demeaning and condescending attitudes questioning KOWS integrity, honesty and transparency in this process.

SHARP’s sleek, very well organized and orchestrated 1 1/2 hour presentation with endless visuals, prepared statements, letters from attorneys and “expert” opinions, obviously cost a lot of money and took a lot of time to organize. While the KOWS team is totally dedicated to local public radio, our members volunteer tirelessly to keep the station up and running and bringing the best programmers on board. Our financial resources are limited and pale to those working against this project, which creates an uneven “playing field.”

As members of the city council, you have a lot to sort through. What IS the truth about the radio waves that will be emitted?

Issues around CEQA and property devaluation, is the tower a visual blight on the neighbors? How do you ensure a neighborhood that there would be no co-location of cell towers? What is the real value of an FCC approved Emergency Alert local community radio station to the community? Is it worth the wrath and potential litigation by a small group?

I support moving the antennae to Pleasant Hill so that KOWS can fulfill its mission of being the voice of West County providing opportunities to showcase and highlight the talented members of our community

Local community radio is a dying breed. I hope this is not true in our town and that in fact, Sebastopol gives KOWS new life with it’s sorely needed antennae with greater access for all.

I know that you have the best interests of our community at heart. Thank you for all that you do.

Roberta Teller, Sebastopol

My appreciations to the managing editor for Sonoma West Publishers for the following balanced column in this week's paper.
Shepherd

https://i.imgur.com/yv1Iu.png

Newsroom Notebook

Go ahead, shoot the messenger

The first known death associated with a radio tower was when former Michigan Governor Kim Sigler flew a small plane into a tower in 1953, killing himself and three passengers.

No known deaths or disasters have occurred because a radio tower annoyed a neighbor.

Radio towers are safe. They are efficiently designed and engineered, and inspected regularly. Community radio stations are generally safe, too. They broadcast quirky music and community events that commercial stations ignore.

Often, a small station is like a small newspaper, digging deeper into local issues and telling us more about local personalities than we would hear on anything originating in a big city like Santa Rosa.

We think most small communities would be proud to have their own little radio station, especially one with a track record of being extra quirky, like KOWS, which features weekly music programs like “Soultree Sounds” and “Live from the Double-wide.”

Not Sebastopol. Or maybe Sebastopol. Which is it, anyway? Our newspaper is in the interesting position of being criticized no matter what we write about the efforts to locate a 65-foot antenna on city-owned land at the western edge of town.

A vocal group of antenna opponents is fighting the city’s initial approval of the antenna, and the anti-antenna crowd is fighting back.

What amuses us in the newsroom, is that the only thing everyone can agree on is to attack the messenger. SHARP Watch, the group that opposes the antenna, doesn’t like our news coverage, and the other half of the argument doesn’t like the fact that we took SHARP’s concerns seriously.

If we can paraphrase, you can enrage some of the people some of the time, but you can’t enrage all of the people all of the time – except on this topic.

We hope that a compromise can be reached, where those who live in and around Sebastopol can enjoy peace, quiet, serenity and a little dose of “Soultree Sounds.”

— Ray Holley is the managing editor for Sonoma West Publishers

I'm wondering. Has anyone suggested putting the antenna on the existing water towers? Combining the visuals, and requiring less digging? Just asking...

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shepherd:

There are many vineyards on Pleasant Hill Rd., where KOWS wants to place its antenna. They are chemical industrial vineyards who use Roundup and other killers. They place regimented metal stakes in the damaged soil to extract profit for a few, and kill bees and other life forms, creating a green desert. ...

---

I'm disturbed by the amount of conversation focused on pesticides in this debate. I fail to see what it has to do with the concerns of over 200 people regarding a tower being erected in a scenic rural neighborhood. Why is it considered acceptable behavior that a member (or members) of a community radio station personally attack two individuals out of such a large group on an unrelated topic because they have voiced concerns about an unprecedented addition to the neighborhood? I too am extremely concerned about having a tower in the beautiful hills of Sebastopol and the future implications of such an addition. I'm an organic farmer and work for a local nature-focused non-profit, and I'm sure you could find something that I am doing in my life that someone will not approve of. Should I expect to be attacked next because we don't agree on where a radio tower should be placed? KOWS - you should be better than this.

Vineyards and wineries, like the one going in at the corner of Pleasant Hill and Elphick, are industrial development. They are far worse than a single antenna that has the capacity to save lives by being the only West County-based local Emergency Response System to report on the fires that follow droughts, road closures, floods, etc.

Nine vineyards already exist on that short part of Pleasant Hill, with more to come, with apparently two more new houses that will block views. Chemical vineyards spray poisons that have been proven to cause cancer that reach nearby schools. Some of their fences reach dangerously within a few feet of the road and destroy habitat for wildlife. They kill bees that we food farmers need, but grape growers do not. They replace the beautiful redwoods and oaks with their rigid, regimented stakes into the ground. Vineyards are green deserts. They pollute my neighborhood with their ugly lack of diversity. It saddens me every day to have to pass by them and remember the good old days.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by hknoll:

I'm disturbed by the amount of conversation focused on pesticides in this debate. I fail to see what it has to do with the concerns of over 200 people regarding a tower being erected in a scenic rural neighborhood. ...

---

Following is more evidence about the dangers of RoundUp, which the wine industry is the top user of in Sonoma County. This is from another Wacco thread that starts with the words "Scientists--Pesticides..." Now I need to get back into the field on my food farm, where we love bees, beneficial insects, and do not spray anything. I will soon be harvesting boysenberries. YUM! YUM!

https://theintercept.com/2016/05/17/...antos-roundup/

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by hknoll:

I'm disturbed by the amount of conversation focused on pesticides in this debate. I fail to see what it has to do with the concerns of over 200 people regarding a tower being erected in a scenic rural neighborhood. ...

---

I have to agree with hknoll. Whether or not the local farmers use pesticides has nothing to do with whether or not a KOWS antenna should be erected in the neighborhood.

I agree that the vineyards and their pesticides are a separate issue. What I'm seeing is some KOWS members trying to highlight what they see as selective outrage and hypocrisy over the "dangers" to health the antenna might present to their workers and children, while meanwhile those same workers and children are exposed to pesticides from the vineyards, sprayed by those same opponents would have to agree pesticides are irrefutable threats to health. Which is a valid observation in my opinion, but I agree. Shouldn't be a major part of the discussion. It brings the conversation down a level, approaching SHARP's low-level and desperate suggestion that KOWS members might try to "terrorize the water reservoirs" if they're given a permit and have access to the city-owned land.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Barry:

I have to agree with hknoll. Whether or not the local farmers use pesticides has nothing to do with whether or not a KOWS antenna should be erected in the neighborhood.

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shepherd:

Vineyards and wineries, like the one going in at the corner of Pleasant Hill and Elphick, are industrial development. They are far worse than a single antenna that has the capacity to save lives..

---

The argument that

"A major telecommunications tower is the lessor of two evils"

suggests that it is ok to punish many other community members because of the actions of one community member.

Is that what you're suggesting? That there is one person I don't like so; Punish them all!


Also, "the capacity to save lives" is not equal to either "saving lives" or "lives saved".
Any human or inanimate object has the "capacity to save lives" - give the proper circumstances.
But just saying, for example: "this medicine could save your life!" does not imply that everyone should immediately go out and start taking it, for it's use and it's "life saving ability" are completely circumstantial.
Otherwise, we'd have arguments like these:
"I might save your life one day! So vote for ME as president!"

We want what we want. And there is no shame in it.
Personally, I would LOVE a radio station in Sebastopol.
But I'm not going to vote for or accept that first thing that comes along just because I want it.

We can have a radio station in Sebastopol that comes into the town in a peaceful and respectful way.
We can have a radio station in Sebastopol that follows proper environmental laws to get here.
We can have a radio station in Sebastopol that everyone will be happy and overjoyed about!

So why are we allowing our standards to go so low?
Why do we find it acceptable to punish an entire neighborhood for our greedy pleasure - especially for something that isn't even a necessity? (Radio is a luxury, not anecessity)

We are SEBASTOPOL.
We should insist on having a radio station that is mindful, respectful, and that cares about the environment.
Otherwise - who would listen to it?

How excited are you to listen to a station who's news comes from people with arguments that mislead and misdirect, that are faulty, and that point the finger of blame and shame on topics unrelated?

I do want a radio station. I want a goodly radio station.
And I'm not in such a greedy hurry that I'm willing to debase myself and piss off an entire neighbor hood to get it.

Sincerely,
- Peter, "Kindly awaiting a good-neighbor radio station", van Gorder

The reason why the issue of pesticides came up is because they’re extensively used by the two individuals who are leading the battle against KOWS, claiming to be worried about the antenna's effect on the environment. Seems a bit hypocritical to me.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by hknoll:

I'm disturbed by the amount of conversation focused on pesticides in this debate....

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by robert777:

The reason why the issue of pesticides came up is because they’re extensively used by the two individuals who are leading the battle against KOWS, claiming to be worried about the antenna's effect on the environment. Seems a bit hypocritical to me.

---

I am concerned about the environmental impact of this tower, and so are 220 other people. I drive a car, and I'm concerned about the environment. I'm clearly a hypocrite and so are most people. Do you think I should stop standing up for environmental issues, stop recycling, stop gardening because I am not a perfect person?

My point is that it's doing a disservice to the community to derail the actual focus of this conversation. I'd love to see us talk about this in a way that stays on topic if we really care about communicating with each other. Targeting and criticizing two people out of a large group, even if they are leading one side of the debate, is poor form and does not address the concerns of the rest of us. And it certainly doesn't make KOWS look very good.

I think it's fair to raise the environmental credentials of someone arguing a position based on a supposed concern with an environmental impact. And yes, if you're needlessly driving a combustion engine with no awareness of your carbon impact then if you're a GreenPeace supporter, I'd definitely point out where your own behavior might be contradicting your social stance.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by IgorGold:

I think it's fair to raise the environmental credentials of someone....

---

Even if this were a valid approach,
You're either forgetting, or intentionally omitting, the fact that 2 people don't make the entire community/neighborhood that is being effected.

You are arguing to punish an entire neighborhood/community, and the view of everyone who drives the scenic corridor, just so you can punish 2 people.

Even if this was sound logic, it seems barbaric, cruel, mean, ill spirited.... etc.


That aside;
Shall we all start comparing each of our "evildoings"? Shall we compare our energy usages or carbon footprints? Shall we start public punishment for the worst offenders? Do I need to look in your sock drawer to ensure that all your clothes were made of organic hemp - all grown and then hand sewn by workers living in Sebastopol? If you used more plastic or paper bags than I did last year, do we get to ignore everything you have to say? NO.

We should be striving to use REASON and LOGIC to make well formulated arguments - least we be reduced to barbarians flinging sticks and stones at each other and punishing entire groups of people because we don't like one person.

Sticks, Stones & Sock Drawers

I don't really know if there are vocal anti-antenna campaigners who are knowingly and regularly introducing hazardous insecticides into the environment that they share with their neighbors. I do know of one Sebastopol resident who was one time neighbor to a grape vineyard and swears that the onset of the symptoms of her neurological disorder and ultimate decline were precipitated by her being exposed to the intensive use of chemicals on the vines she lived next door to.

More info on hazards of pesticides in Sonoma here.

Does the proposed local radio antenna pose a comparable level of risk? Because if it does than this should be proven instead of distracting from the issue of whether or not Sebastopol can tolerate the erection of a public access antenna.

There's a fine balance between preserving the trappings and lifestyle of a rural idyll and disappearing into a sepia tinged nostalgia for an agrarian paradise only affordable to a minority.

There's a big difference between living the good life and insisting that everyone else live that same life.

Community radio gives voice to both cultural and economic diversity and the diversity of interests that co exist in the same environment. And nowhere does it encroach as much as the commercial developments that surround this environment. This very forum WaccoBB.net is evidence that local communities like to communicate locally.

What could be better than airing a debate between the main proponents for the antenna and it main opponents?

The debate could be aired at an appropriate time to attract live call ins and later archived on the station website for all to hear. Make use of what you have.

:wink2::Yinyangv::wink2:

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by SebTownRaised:

Even if this were a valid approach,...

---

Robert Feuer's "Free Speech Radio" Open Mic is now online and in the print edition of the Bohemian and follows. I am including the link, in case you might want to pass this information on to friends. Later this eve Sonoma West is likely to have letters to the editor.

https://www.bohemian.com/northbay/fr...nt?oid=2961700

Free Speech Radio--KOWS public radio needs your support, BY ROBERT FEUER

The communities of Sebastopol, Santa Rosa and surrounding areas need community radio. Community radio means a wide range of creative shows, produced by local volunteers, in the areas of music, art, spoken word and open-minded discussions of aging, healing, gardening, astrology, fitness, feminism, LGBT concerns—all commercial-free.

KOWS radio has been providing this for nine years. Its doors are always open for people to drop in and air their views, or for musicians to play on-air. Stay awhile and produce your own show. You will be trained. It doesn't take long. KOWS is free-speech radio, and other than FCC limitations on foul language, there's no censorship.

The problem for these nine years is that few people can hear KOWS on the radio (107.3-FM). The antenna is in a tree in the Occidental hills, with many geographical impediments to transmission. KOWS streams from its website (www.kows.fm), where anyone can tune in, or view the station's schedule and see what opportunities it offers. You can sign up as a volunteer there. But streaming has limitations, due to slow or no connectivity. Many can't afford it.

Currently, KOWS is seeking approval from the Sebastopol City Council for a new antenna on a hill above Sebastopol. It is small and not comparable to a cell phone tower. Emitted radiation, in the area, is about 1/2500th of FCC limitations, significantly less than the smartphone many people carry in their pockets. The antenna will be partially visible from fewer than 20 adjacent homes.

KOWS has won approval from the city planning commission for a use permit to build an antenna support structure at a utility facility owned by the city, but this decision has been appealed, and won't be finalized until a May 31 city council meeting at 6pm at the Sebastopol Community Center. Public support is invaluable. Please attend and express your interest in radio that will belong to you. Alternatively, you can send a message to [email protected]. Please stand up for the greater good, and the cultural needs of the community.

Robert Feuer is a KOWS volunteer broadcaster and a music writer.Open Mic is a weekly feature in the 'Bohemian.' We welcome your contribution. To have your topical essay of 350 words considered for publication, write[email protected].

My apologies if this has already been addressed...I know I'm coming in late here.
Just wondering if other sites were considered...could have saved all this contentiousness.

Other sites have been considered extensively. We did have other possibilities that fell through. This issue, which has been brought up many times, is much more complicated than people realize. For one thing, the FCC has many requirements for an antenna site, and we had to get their approval for this one. We have spent a lot of time and money on engineers who made studies as to what locations would get us the needed amount of coverage.
This process has taken at least three years. Locating another site would put us right back at the beginning. And, we would most definitely have problems with THOSE neighbors.

Robert Feuer

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by BeckyS:

My apologies if this has already been addressed...I know I'm coming in late here.
Just wondering if other sites were considered...could have saved all this contentiousness.

---

It is hard to understand how people in the area around the proposed tower are listening to KOWS on the air since so many of the post encourage to listen on the internet. For example I got a message yesterday from the Hospital foundation announcinfg a presentation that would be available on KOWS, but only read as follows:
"The BEST way to 'tune in' is to go to the KOWS website and click on 'listen' to hear 'live streaming' on your computer!"

Maybe cause that's the only way to listen around sebtown. KOWS presently does not project much beyond occidental. Beyond that, sucks on old school radio, good on this. How many people do you want to listen?

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Dwight:

It is hard to understand how people in the area around the proposed tower are listening to KOWS on the air since so many of the post encourage to listen on the internet....

---

https://i.imgur.com/yv1Iu.png
Proposed KOWS antenna needs environmental review
Posted: Wednesday, June 1, 2016 3:39 pm
by Amie Windsor Sonoma West Staff Writer [email protected]

In the continuation of a public hearing on a rural neighborhood group’s request to overturn a Feb. 23 Sebastopol Planning Commission decision granting a use permit for the construction of an antenna tower at 1281 Pleasant Hill Road, the Sebastopol City Council voted unanimously to uphold the appeal and order staff to prepare the scope of an environmental impact review.

The project is for KOWS Community Radio Station, which proposes to construct a 70-foot antenna tower on the city-owned parcel located in an unincorporated Sonoma County neighborhood on Pleasant Hill Road. The new antenna tower, according to Arnold Levine of KOWS, would allow the station to expand its listenership into Sebastopol.

However, Bob Jenkins, a homeowner in the Pleasant Hill Road neighborhood, and founder of Sebastopol Hills Alliance for Rural Preservation, or SHARP, appealed the planning commission’s decision, and began a campaign against the construction of the tower.

On May 3, the city council opened the public hearing for the appeal. SHARP spent 90 minutes, offering emotionally charged arguments and accusing the community radio station of consistently misleading the city council and the planning commission with incorrect or conflated facts.

“I see the value of having KOWS in the community,” Vice Mayor Una Glass said Tuesday. “But seeing the contention it has caused and the great deal of information presented to us, we need to pursue getting additional information to see what is pertinent and accurate for an appropriate decision.”

Councilmember Patrick Slayter said it was important to have all the information necessary before making the best possible decision.

“This community is well aware of the importance we place upon full analysis of issues. We like things to be studied,” Slayter said. “To make the best possible decisions at all times we need more information.”
Councilmember John Eder, who made the original motion, agreed.

“As policy makers it is incumbent on us to separate facts from emotions,” Eder said. “And a lot of what has been presented to us is emotionally-based. That’s why we need to go to a different, a higher level, of environmental review on this project.”

City staff will begin work on the environmental review, then return to the city council in July or August with the next steps.

A top concern that came out of the SHARP’s presentation on May 3 was the lack of a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review for the project. City staff recommended the project, classified as a major telecommunications facility for its height, be exempt under Class 1 and Class 3 CEQA exemptions. A Class 1 exemption considers the structure to be built on an existing facility, therefore it does not require a CEQA review. Under a Class 3 exemption, the project is exempt because the structure is small enough to be exempt from a CEQA review.

According to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the fee for an EIR is $3,070. An additional county clerk processing fee of $50 is added for each CEQA document. KOWS is the responsible party for paying the fee of the EIR.

“I hope conducting this review wouldn’t be insurmountable and that the radio station would still have an opportunity here,” Mayor Sarah Glade Gurney said.

Emotions were still high Tuesday night at the Sebastopol Community Cultural Center Main Hall, where the meeting was relocated to house the large crowd in attendance. After the council’s decision, as the crowd was clearing, a man in support of KOWS radio station attacked a member of SHARP.

Attending Sebastopol Police officers intervened and separated the men, taking them both outside. The victim told police he was all right but wanted to submit a complaint.

https://i.imgur.com/yv1Iu.png

Study scheduled for KOWS radio tower
Posted: Wednesday, July 6, 2016
by Amie Windsor Sonoma West Staff Writer [email protected]

City staff uncertain who will pay for costly environmental review

The contentious saga over a proposed radio tower continues. On Tuesday, July 5 the Sebastopol City Council directed staff to gather requests for proposals for a potentially costly environmental impact review (EIR).

The project entails KOWS Community Radio Station constructing a low power FM radio antenna standing at 65 feet high on a city-owned parcel on Pleasant Hill Road.

The project was initially approved by the Sebastopol Planning Commission, but that decision was successfully appealed by a Pleasant Hill neighborhood organization, SHARPWatch.

According to preliminary work conducted by Sebastopol Planning Director Kenyon Webster, who also serves as the city’s California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) liaison, the EIR needs to address potential aesthetic impacts, including any adverse effects of scenic vistas, substantial damage to scenic resources and substantial degradation of the existing visual character. Additionally the EIR needs to determine if the project has the potential to degrade the quality of the environment for plants and animals.

“City staff has prepared an initial checklist, with the idea that prospective consultants would review it to see what should be studied,” Webster said.

The checklist does not bind consultants, he added, and could potentially find and study the impact of additional CEQA issues.

Typically with EIRs, the applicant bears the cost of the studies. City attorney/manager Larry McLaughlin explained that, since the city would be the entity engaged in a contract with a consultant, the city is legally responsible for the costs. However, those costs could still be passed onto KOWS, the applicant.

“It would be appropriate to see the cost of the EIR and then the council would make the decision [of who would pay for the study],” McLaughlin said.

According to CEQA, the initial document filing fee for an EIR is $3,069.75. With the additional cost of the consultant, an EIR can range between $34,000 and $50,000 — a potentially daunting cost for the radio station that operates on donations and KOWS volunteer host fees, which are as low as $25 a year, according to the KOWS website.

“Ya know, we never imagined an EIR would be necessary,” said Laura Goldman, KOWS radio host. “It’s really a shame that somebody is going to have to pay for an EIR on something we worked so hard on to minimize impact.”

Requests for proposals are due back to the city by Aug. 8. City staff will research and interview candidates and make a recommendation to the city council at their Sept. 6 meeting. Once a consultant is chosen, they will have 75 days to develop a preliminary draft EIR. City staff will have two opportunities to make edits on that document before a draft EIR is released to the public. The public comment period on the draft EIR will last 45 days. After the comment period is over, the consultant is required to respond to all substantive comments and create a final EIR.

“It could take about six months,” Webster said, adding that the timeline could be shored up, depending on the work pace of the consultant. “This is a quality document and we don’t want to rush it.”

This will most likely be appealed to the City Council to be considered in as soon as November 1st.

https://i.imgur.com/yv1Iu.png

https://www.sonomawest.com/sonoma_we...20aa58d91.html

Appeal against KOWS tower denied

Posted: Wednesday, October 12, 2016 11:21 am
by Amie Windsor Sonoma West Staff Writer [email protected]

https://www.waccobb.net/forums/wacco...5_16-52-30.png

In a 3-2 vote Tuesday night, the Sebastopol Planning Commission upheld administrative approval for the proposed construction of a low power 35-foot radio tower to be located on a city-owned island on Pleasant Hill Road.

The proposal comes from KOWS Community Radio Station and is a compromised alternative to the station’s previous two attempts to construct a tower on the site. Those attempts asked for approval of use permit applications for a 70-foot, then a 65-foot tower to help the radio station reach downtown Sebastopol more effectively.

Both use permit applications were appealed by a Pleasant Hill Road neighborhood group called SHARP, whose mission is to “protect the scenic hills adjacent to Sebastopol from industrial blight and health related hazards caused by telecommunication towers and other industrial structures.”

Despite SHARP’s concerns about potential collocation of additional towers, visual blight and electric magnetic field (EMF) health hazards and its allegations that the city’s planning director, Kenyon Webster was “stretching credibility” and “shoehorning” Sebastopol zoning code and General Plan policies, the planning commission found the administrative approval to be acceptable and accurate.

Continues here

For all those who have shown interest in this topic, there is now a related, but different topic over here:

Illegal-Trenching-Destroys-Trees

Watch a video and see the entire 300 foot illegal and un-permitted trench here:
https://youtu.be/ZfqH9s78O_8https://www.waccobb.net/forums/images/youtube.png

If you don't have time to check out the other thread, I'll summarize it for you:

With NO Permit: KOWS Trench 300 ft, Displace 1800 cubic feet of Soil, and Cause Permanent Tree Damage.