Cell tower neighbors suing over alleged health problems
Company's owner says there's no proof of harmCOMMENTARY
By NANCY J. SULOK
![[SIG]](mailbox-message://000462870122072432129300%230001%40t-online.de@mailin.t-online.de/Inbox#417282837?header=saveas&part=1.2&filename=Sulok.jpeg)
 A telecommunications tower sits about 12 feet from the
corner of Leslee and Brett Onnink's home on the east side of South
Bend. They are party to a lawsuit against the cell tower company,
contending that the tower has devalued their property and caused
various health problems for them.
Tribune Photo/NANCY J. SULOK |
Leslee Onnink says her home has suffered from noise, light pollution, litter, dead birds and electrical surges ever since a cellular tower was built next door in 1998.
The 187-foot tower, she said, is just 12 feet from her River Park home on South Bend's east side.
She and her husband, Brett, are among a group of county residents who are suing Charles S. Hayes Inc. to recover damages allegedly caused by cellular towers and the microwave antennas they support.
Charles S. Hayes is not convinced that his towers are the cause of any problems.
His company owns 20 towers in St. Joseph County. He owns the towers and leases space on them for communications companies to place their antennas.
Hayes estimated there are 80 to 100 sites in the county where antennas are. Some are attached to water towers, buildings and other structures instead of free-standing towers, he said.
Hayes said the lawsuit lists only three of the tower sites. Most people live near the towers and antennas with no problems, he said.
The tower near the Onninks' home was built in an area zoned for commercial development, he noted, and communications towers are an allowable use.
The Onninks bought their house in 1996 for $64,000. They obtained a second mortgage for $30,000 to fix it up.
Then came the tower.
Ever since it's been there, Leslee Onnink said, she and her family have suffered health problems. She has had three tumors removed and suffers from migraine headaches. She and her family, which includes two young children, have experienced nausea, sleep apnea, skin burns and other ailments.
Extensive studies have been done worldwide to see if electromagnetic waves can cause such health problems. The studies repeatedly have shown that they pose no significant health hazard, Hayes said.
Leslee Onnink said her family's symptoms go away when they go on vacation.
During power surges, she said in a court affidavit, they have lost appliances in their homes, including a blender, a toaster and three hair dryers.
"When the surges occur,'' her affidavit says, "each of these items did not merely stop operating; they burst into flames. At the same time that they burst into flame, light bulbs (for example one in the oven and others in a vanity mirror) also exploded.''
The worst part is that they can't sell their home, Leslee said. No real estate agent will list the house because of its proximity to the tower, she said.
Other residents who are part of the suit are William and Bonnie Hicks of Mishawaka; Paul and Peggy Barber of Roseland; and LouAnn Pennington of Mishawaka.
All of them live in the shadow of cell towers. All of them say they have suffered problems because of them.
Their lawsuit claims a reduction in property values, as well as personal injuries including multiple tumors, weakened immune systems, sleep disturbances, loss of peripheral vision, recurring headaches and chronic fatigue.
Hayes said he doubted that any of the alleged problems resulted from his towers.
His company, he said, did a test in Roseland in which a radio frequency engineer measured the electronic fields near his tower. A measuring device was calibrated from 1 to 100, with 100 the maximum, he said. At the base of the tower, the readings were only two and three. Hayes said the engineer got a higher reading from a fluorescent light than from the tower.
The World Health Organization's Web site includes magnetic field measurements for a variety of household sources. A hair dryer held 6 inches away had a median reading of 300 units of milligauss. An electric shaver had a median reading of 100 mG. A microwave oven had a median reading of 200 mG.
The fields diminish in strength as one moves away from the source.
County Councilman Raphael Morton, D-District D, recently agreed to create a task force to examine the health implications of electromagnetic fields and low-frequency noise.
Meanwhile, the county is updating its zoning ordinance, which includes a section on wireless communications facilities.
New telecommunications towers would be permitted in areas zoned for agricultural, light industrial and manufacturing districts, when located more than 500 feet from a residential district. A tower company would need a special use permit to place it closer than that or in a residential area, according to Bob Sante of the Area Plan Commission.
South Bend passed a new zoning code about a year ago. Its section on telecommunications towers is similar to the proposed county code. The city ordinance also prohibits new towers within 500 feet of a residential district unless the applicant can demonstrate that no other locations are available.
The city ordinance limits the height of cell towers to 200 feet. The county ordinance has no height restriction.
Both ordinances acknowledge the need to facilitate the comprehensive provision of wireless communication to residents and businesses in the county.
After all, everyone wants the convenience of a cell phone.
Nancy J. Sulok's columns appear on Sundays, Mondays and Thursdays. You can reach her at nsulok@sbtinfo.com, or by writing c/o South Bend Tribune, 225 W. Colfax Ave., South Bend, IN 46626, telephone (574) 235-6234.
Folks:
I am sending this to everyone -- though I realize that perhaps
only about 10% of
you will actually make use of it...... Please forgive
me. I never know which 10%
it will be......
This document is an excellent example of two things:
1.) The legal document, itself. Which many
of you have never seen, I'm sure.
You will see here the kind of information that must go into the
Complaint to file
such a court case.
2.) But more than that. From the perspective of
the whole of society -- this
document graphically portrays the terrible predicament our
society is allowing
itself to get into ... **as the electromagnetic BLUE
WORLD is being allowed to
expand totally unmanaged (unregulated) into
our home and work
neighborhoods......**
The onslaught of this RF/MW (and power line
ELF) electromagnetic explosion
is happening NOW!!!!!
If we (society -- our governments) are
unwilling to grapple with the health
hazards and property value damages
it is presenting, our courts will soon
be swamped with cases like the following.......
Send this to your congressman/woman.
They will understand...... They may
RUN from it....... They may rush to the
telecom and power companies to get
more $$$$$$$ for their campaign chest.......
But ... THEY WILL UNDERSTAND!!!!!!
Cheerio.........
Roy Beavers (EMFguru)
roy@emfguru.com
http://emfguru.com
**Never doubt that a small group of
committed citizens can change the world.
Indeed, it is the only thing that ever
has........ Margaret Mead**
[.......Sorry, that I was not able to
totally vent the MicroSoft format I received
of all of its "code" hieroglyphics.....
But what you have below is very readable.......
.........guru.....]
-------- Original Message --------
| Subject: | Re: hicks doc] |
|---|---|
| Date: | Mon, 6 Aug 2001 21:19:37 -0500 |
| From: | "Bill Hicks" <hicman@msn.com> |
| To: | "Roy Beavers" <roy@emfguru.com> |
Roy: I am glad you have the complaint now. Yes, please circulate it to the whole list and anyone whom it might help. Sorry it took so long. Thanks Bonnie
----- Original Message -----From: Roy BeaversSent: Monday, August 06, 2001 2:33 PMTo: Bonnie HicksSubject: [Fwd: hicks doc]Bonnie:I have this now..... Is it OK to circulate to the EMF-L list.....?
I will also want to put it in the leagal file on my website......Roy-------- Original Message --------
Subject: hicks doc
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2001 13:27:45 -0700
From: Brendan Beavers <webmaster@emfguru.com>
Organization: EMFguru
To: roy@emfguru.com
STATE OF INDIANA, ST. JOSEPH COUNTY
ST. JOSEPH CIRCUIT COURT
WILLIAM HICKS, BONNIE HICKS, )
BRETT ONNINK, LESLEE ONNINK, )
PAUL BARBER, PEGGY BARBER, and )
LOUANN PENNINGTON, )Plaintiffs, )
v. Cause No. 71C01-0107-CP-
CHARLES S. HAYES, CHARLES S. )
HAYES, INC., JACQUELINE L. )
HORVATH and HORVATH )
COMMUNICATIONS, INC., )Defendants. )
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF RE NUISANCE
WITH JURY DEMAND AS TO DAMAGESPlaintiffs William Hicks, Bonnie Hicks, Brett Onnink, Leslee Onnink,
Peggy Barber, Paul Barber and LouAnn Pennington for their complaint
allege as follows:Jurisdiction and Parties
1. Plaintiffs William Hicks and Bonnie Hicks own and reside at 55685
Clover Road, Mishawaka, IN within the County of St. Joseph, State of
Indiana.2. Plaintiffs Brett Onnink and Leslee Onnink own and reside at 3112
Mishawaka Avenue, South Bend, IN within the County of St. Joseph, State
of Indiana.3. Plaintiffs Paul Barber and Peggy Barber own and reside at 352 Weber
Street, Roseland, IN within the County of St. Joseph, State of Indiana.4. Plaintiff LouAnn Pennington owns and resides at 55650 Clover Road,
Mishawaka, IN within the County of St. Joseph, State of Indiana.5. Defendants Charles S. Hayes and Jacqueline L. Horvath are each
individuals resident in the County of St. Joseph, State of Indiana.
Such defendants are either the agents of defendants Charles S. Hayes,
Inc. and Horvath Communications, Inc. and are personally responsible for
the nuisances alleged hereafter as such, or they are principals of such
corporations, the corporations themselves merely shells through which
such defendants operate their business of constructing, owning and
operating cellular telephone towers throughout St. Joseph County.6. Defendants Charles S. Hayes, Inc. and Horvath Communications, Inc.
are each a corporation established pursuant to the laws of the State of
Indiana with its principal place of business in St. Joseph County.Facts: Defendants and Plaintiffs
7. Defendants own, operate and maintain cellular telephone towers,
scattered across St. Joseph County, many in close proximity to
residential property, schools and other places of human congregation;
each are equipped with a number of antennae each of which emit microwave
electromagnetic radiation.8. The homes of plaintiffs William Hicks and Bonnie Hicks and Lou Ann
Pennington are located within 700 feet of the defendants'Äô 235 foot high
cellular telephone tower at 2010 Mick Court, Mishawaka.9. Plaintiffs Brett Onnink and Leslee Onninks'Äô property abuts the
defendants'Äô 187 foot high cellular telephone tower which is located at
3108 Mishawaka Avenue, South Bend; in fact defendants'Äô installation
encroaches on the Onninks'Äô property.10. Plaintiffs Paul Barber and Peggy Barbers'Äô property is located within
100 feet of the defendants'Äô 199 foot high cellular telephone tower,
which has as its address 436 McComb, Roseland.11. William Hicks and Bonnie Hicks have one child, Cody, who is 3 years
of age.12. Brett Onnink and Leslee Onnink have two children, Marshall, 4 and
Reid, 3.13. Paul Barber and Peggy Barber have one child Kimberly, aged 6.
14. Lou Ann Pennington has one child living with her, Kris, a college
student, aged 20.Facts: Nature and Impact of Cellular Telephone Towers
15. Growing numbers and varieties of scientific studies of microwaves
emitted from cellular telephone base stations, or towers, have reported
disturbing health effects in areas relatively close to such towers.16. For example a study of generations of laboratory mice placed near
microwave towers in the vicinity of Thessalonika, Greece, show
increasing levels of sterility, until, by only the fourth generation,
the mice subject to the study had shown complete sterility.17. Other research has demonstrated a variety of adverse health
developments associated with microwave towers, including weakened immune
systems, tumors, neurological disorders, learning and memory problems,
sleep disturbances, headaches and even skin rashes.18. The variety of symptoms just recited likely is explained by the fact
that microwave radiation in the vicinity of such towers interfere in a
way similar to cell phone interference with landing commercial aircraft:
they conflict with, or resonate with (or against), the essentially
electrical process of human cells. As to landing aircraft, cell phones
are ordered turned off; no such order exists for humans living under
microwave base stations.19. Scientific studies are already showing some disturbing incidences of
pre-cancerous cell breakdown as a result of microwave impact; in fact
scientists have observed changes associated with microwave radiation in
DNA, the very fabric of life.20. Exhibit A attached hereto is a
listing of studies only through 1997 reflecting microwave effects on
human and animal tissue.21. The foregoing scientific developments are, by process of publication
and growing citizen and political debate, becoming well known, with the
result that the public'Äôs concern about living, or even attending school
or working for substantial periods of time in the near vicinity of
microwave base stations, is and has been growing at an increasing rate.22. That growing concern includes a developing realization among many
that any single or microwave tower may carry a multitude of antennae,
each of which emits its own pattern of microwaves on its own set of wave
lengths, with the result that a single tower can emit several different
patterns of relatively intense signals, or 'Äúlobes'Äù of such signals, some
of which may change on a daily basis, to homes, schools and businesses
within hundreds of feet of the tower.
Count I: Reduction in Property Value Due to
Defendants'Äô Towers as Nuisances (Onninks)23. Brett and Leslee Onnink purchased their home at 3112 Mishawaka
Avenue on December 6, 1996.24. The Onninks purchased their home long before defendants constructed
their 187 foot high tower, immediately next door, indeed such that the
defendants'Äô installation encroaches on the Onninks'Äô property -- in an
area of dense population, a characteristic of many of the defendants'Äô
towers situated in urbanized parts of St. Joseph County.25. The defendants'Äô tower carries several antennae, the total number,
manufacturer, owner or operator and purpose of each of which is unknown.26. Subject to discovery, the number and size of such antennae may be
physically too great in terms of weight and surface dimension for the
tower safely to bear.27. The tower'Äôs emissions interfere with and in some cases make
impossible the operation of the Onninks'Äô electrical appliances and other
electrical products, including but not limited to garage door opener,
radio, television, VCR, cordless phones and the childrens'Äô baby
monitors.28. The tower'Äôs regular operation produces a constant drone of noise
which necessarily affects, and reduces, the Onninks'Äô quiet enjoyment of
their home.29. Because, in the Onninks'Äô case, the tower is so close to their home,
when the defendants have the tower serviced or modified, the Onninks
have been asked, in the interest of their safety from debris falling
from the tower, to leave their own home; the noise created by the
defendants servicing the tower has also injured the enjoyment of their
home; furthermore, service trucks block or interfere with ingress to and
egress from their property.30. In addition, in the Onninks'Äô case, they are required, on a regular
basis, to remove from their property debris fallen from the tower
including cable ties, plastic bags, hats, bolts, cigarettes, electrical
tape as well as a multitude of dead birds.31. Because the tower attracts birds and because the tower is only 20
feet away, the Onninks'Äô home and yard are constantly barraged by bird
droppings.32. In addition to the foregoing, the very existence of a 187 foot
microwave tower next to their home has caused a substantial and
irremediable reduction in the value of the Onninks'Äô home due to the
following characteristics, characteristics shared by any such tower
sited within close proximity to homes, schools and businesses:
(a) the public'Äôs growing concern that sustained microwave radiation,
even at allegedly low levels of intensity, may cause serious short term
and long term harmful health effects;
(b) the tower'Äôs negative impact on the appearance of the neighborhood.33. The foregoing reduction in property value has forced plaintiffs to
discontinue plans to improve or add to their home.34. All of the foregoing, individually or in combination, constitute a
nuisance which has seriously and permanently reduced the value of the
plaintiffs'Äô real property.Count II: Reduction in Property Value Due to
Defendants'Äô Towers as Nuisances (Hicks)35. Paragraphs 1 to 22, 25, 33 and 34 are incorporated.
36. William and Bonnie Hicks purchased their property at 55685 Clover
Road in 1990 and built a home and moved in in July 1993, long before
defendants constructed their 235 foot high tower within 700 feet of the
Hicks'Äô home.37. The tower'Äôs emissions interfere with and in some cases make
impossible the operation of the Hicks'Äô electrical appliances and other
electrical products, including but not limited to their telephone,
television, garage door opener, radio controlled cars and other toys and
their baby monitor.38. The tower'Äôs existence within 700 feet of the Hicks'Äô property has
caused a substantial and irremediable reduction in the value of the
Hicks'Äô home due to its following characteristics:
(a) the public'Äôs growing concern that sustained microwave radiation,
even at allegedly low levels, may cause serious short term and long term
harmful health effects;
(b) the tower'Äôs negative impact on the appearance of the neighborhood.
Count III: Reduction in Property Value Due to
Defendants'Äô Towers as Nuisances (Barber)39. Paragraphs 1 to 22, 25, 33 and 34 are incorporated.
40. Paul and Peggy Barber purchased their home at 352 Weber Street in
Roseland in November 1990, long before defendants constructed their 199
foot high tower within 100 feet of the Barbers'Äô home.41. The tower'Äôs emissions interfere with and in some cases make
impossible the operation of the Barbers'Äô electrical appliances and other
electrical products, including but not limited to telephones, VCR and
television.42. The tower'Äôs existence within 100 feet of the Barbers'Äô property has
caused a substantial and irremediable reduction in the value of the
Barbers'Äô home due to its following characteristics:
(a) the public'Äôs growing concern that sustained microwave radiation,
even at allegedly low levels, may cause serious short term and long term
harmful health effects;
(b) the tower'Äôs negative impact on the appearance of the neighborhood.Count IV: Reduction in Property Value Due to
Defendants'Äô Towers as Nuisances (Pennington)43. Paragraphs 1 to 22, 25 and 34 are incorporated.
44. LouAnn Pennington purchased her home at 55650 Clover Road in
September 1990, long before defendants constructed their 235 foot high
tower within 700 feet of her home.45. The tower'Äôs emissions interfere with and in some cases make
impossible the operation of the Ms. Pennington'Äôs electrical appliances
and other electrical products, including but not limited to telephone,
television and VCR.46. The tower'Äôs existence within 700 feet of Ms. Pennington'Äôs property
has caused a substantial and irremediable reduction in the value of her
home due to its following characteristics:
(a) the public'Äôs growing concern that sustained microwave radiation,
even at allegedly low levels, may cause serious short term and long term
harmful health effects;
(b) the tower'Äôs negative impact on the appearance of the neighborhood.
Count V: Personal Injury Due to Nuisance (Hicks)47. Paragraphs 1 to 22, 25, 33, 34 and 36 to 38 are incorporated.
48. The defendants'Äô tower at 2010 Mick Court, Mishawaka, emits
microwaves in patterns, wave lengths and from antennae owned or operated
by various third parties, all of which is unknown to plaintiffs.49. On information and belief, the foregoing emissions of microwaves
have resulted, since the defendants'Äô tower began operating, in the
plaintiffs Hicks experiencing and suffering the following effects:
- heart palpitations
- loss of peripheral vision
- interference with hearing
- recurring headaches including migraine headaches
- short term memory loss
- repeated sleep disturbance50. In addition to the foregoing observable symptoms, plaintiffs live in
fear of sub- cellular breakdown or change and advanced cellular aging,
another effect of microwave radiation reported in scientific literature.51. The foregoing effects have imposed on plaintiffs medical expenses as
well as substantial mental distress including adverse effects on the
plaintiffs'Äô intra-family relations.
Count VI: Personal Injury Due to Nuisance (Onnink)52. Paragraphs 1 to 34, 50 and 51 are incorporated.
53. The defendants'Äô tower at 3108 Mishawaka Avenue, South Bend, IN emits
microwaves in patterns, wave lengths and from antennae owned or operated
by various third parties, all of which is unknown to plaintiffs.54. On information and belief, the foregoing emissions of microwaves
have resulted, since the defendants'Äô tower began operating, in the
plaintiffs Onninks experiencing and suffering the following effects:
- multiple tumors
- loss of peripheral vision- weakened immune system
- recurring headaches and migraines
- repeated sleep disturbances
- glandular problems
- short term memory loss
- allergies
- chronic fatigueCount VII: Personal Injury Due to Nuisance (Barber)
55. Paragraphs 1 to 22, 25, 33, 34, 40 to 42, 50 and 51 are
incorporated.56. The defendants'Äô tower in the vicinity of 436 McComb, Roseland, IN
emits microwaves in patterns, wave lengths and from antennae owned or
operated by various third parties, all of which is unknown to
plaintiffs.57. On information and belief, the foregoing emissions of microwaves
have resulted, since the defendants'Äô tower began operating, in the
plaintiffs Barbers experiencing and suffering the following effects:
- loss of peripheral vision
- interference with hearing
- recurring headaches
- weakened immune system
- short term memory loss
- repeated sleep disturbance
- learning capacity diminished- chronic fatigue
- heart palpitations
- miscarriageCount VIII: Personal Injury Due to Nuisance (Pennington)
58. Paragraphs 1 to 22, 25, 34, 44 to 46 and 50 are incorporated.59. The defendants'Äô tower at 2010 Mick Court, Mishawaka, IN emits
microwaves in patterns, wave lengths and from antennae owned or operated
by various third parties, all of which is unknown to plaintiffs.60. On information and belief, the foregoing emissions of microwaves
have resulted, since the defendants'Äô tower began operating, in the
plaintiff Pennington experiencing and suffering the following effects:
- recurring headaches
- repeated sleep disturbance
- weakened immune system
- chronic fatigue61. The foregoing effects have imposed on plaintiff medical expenses as
well as substantial mental distress.
Count IX: Injunctive Relief (Hicks and Pennington)62. Paragraphs 1 to 22, 25, 33, 34, 36 to 38, 44 to 46, 48 to 51, 60 and
61 are incorporated.63. Monetary damages are inadequate to remedy the plaintiffs'Äô physical,
mental and proprietary injuries.64. Because emissions from defendants'Äô towers are invasive, chronic and
seriously deleterious as alleged above, plaintiffs are entitled to
injunctive relief that will prohibit the defendants from imposing on
plaintiffs a level of microwave radiation greater than the background
level of microwave radiation in the South Bend-Mishawaka region.
Count X: Injunctive Relief (Barber)65. Paragraphs 1 to 22, 25, 33, 34, 40 to 42, 50, 51, 56, 57, 63 and 64
are incorporated.Count XI: Injunctive Relief (Onnink)
66. Paragraphs 1 to 34, 50, 51, 53, 54 and 63 are incorporated.
67. Because defendants'Äô tower installation physically intrudes on
plaintiffs'Äô property, is a clear and present danger to plaintiffs'Äô
physical well-being as well as, due to the microwaves it emits, an
invasive and chronic source of physical illness as well as substantial
mental distress, plaintiffs are entitled to an injunction prohibiting
defendants'Äô continued operation of the tower as a source of microwave
emissions and mandating removal of such tower.WHEREFORE, plaintiffs pray for judgment as follows:
1. On Counts I through IV, for damages sufficient to compensate
plaintiffs for loss of the value of their real property.
2. On Counts V through VIII for damages according to proof.
3. On Counts IX and X for injunctive relief sufficient to shield
plaintiffs from microwave radiation greater than background radiation in
the South Bend-Mishawaka region by means short of termination of all
emissions from such towers if technically and physically feasible, but
if not, termination of all emissions from such tower.
4. On Count XI for removal of the tower adjacent to the Onninks'Äô home
or, in the alternative, injunctive relief sufficient to shield
plaintiffs from microwave radiation greater than background radiation in
the South Bend-Mishawaka region by means short of termination of all
emissions from such towers if technically and physically feasible, but
if not, termination of all emissions from such tower.
5. For plaintiffs'Äô cost of suit incurred herein.
6. For such other relief as the Court deems just.
JURY DEMANDPursuant to Trial Rule 38 plaintiffs request Counts I through VIII be
tried to a jury.
Respectfully submitted,THE HAMILTON LAW FIRM
John C. Hamilton (7416-71)
Wayne Place, Suite 200
103 West Wayne Street
South Bend, IN 46601
(219) 289-9987
Facsimile (219) 289-8138
Attorneys for Plaintiffs