Rogers' Service First sign removed during nationwide Rogers outage
CRHI GROUP LETTER TO ROGERS
The resident citizens of Hornby Island have many questions regarding the Public Consultation Process currently on the table for the installation of a Telecommunications Tower by Rogers on our island. The purpose of a consultation process is to ensure that the public has the opportunity to gain clarity into the exact terms of any proposal; Rogers’s is no exception.
There are many concerns regarding the location (Crown land near highly populated areas and earmarked for low-income housing) of the tower, its present and future purposes, the need for a tower, health and safety issues, the risk of forest fires, the sensory impact of a 200 ft antenna running live for 24 hours, depreciation of land value, and many others. This is a very complex issue and the rushed process taking place over the busy Christmas season has not given the community time to absorb and understand the complexities in a reasoned and convincing manner.
Our local Trustees appear to be in the dark as well, apparently due to a lack of clarity regarding the sharing of information by the Trust office, information that
they’ve had for many months. We can’t help but wonder if our Trustees are being unduly pressured to make a snap decision, without allotting to both themselves and the Hornby community they have been elected to represent, the required time to fully understand the implications of this proposal. As our elected representatives, we count on them to speak and act on our behalf in accordance with our final decision regarding this matter. They should not be hampered in this duty.
The Islands Trust Head Office needs to be held to account when not complying with their mandate to “preserve and protect” the fragile islands it is responsible for. Is it possible that they, too, are being unduly pressured by the corporate/government partnership model that communities all over the world are fighting against? Or is it, perhaps, that the mounting amount of information about substantial damage wreaked by similar tower installations on all organic systems (bees, birds, humans, entire forests), which is rapidly being revealed worldwide, is the primary motivation for rushing this process regardless of the consequences?
Expressions of concern are being raised throughout the community, including the Fire department, the Depot staff, the Elementary School, the social housing committee and a large number of residents. Why orchestrate a process that, willingly or not, obscures the facts, potentially leading the public to accept a type of industrial installation that is yet to be proven necessary or safe and is potentially dangerous? What is the hurry? Shouldn’t protection of our pristine environment and the health of our community—our elders, the hard-working singles and parents of small children and grandchildren, all proven vulnerable to a greater or lesser degree—be paramount?
We are in the process of deciding to seek legal and technical advice. We need to understand what is actually happening. We need to know if our community can legally be forced to follow a process controlled by a large corporation based in Toronto. We need answers to why our community is being caged into feeling that we no longer have any say over our own destiny. This is not what we moved here for. This is not why we chose to raise our children and grandchildren here.
Corporate bullying and government overreach that seek to cut the public out of decisions heavily impacting our lives cannot and should not be tolerated. It is not a far stretch to say that this proposal and the process by which Rogers and its partners are attempting to implement it has crossed a number of legal boundaries. A process that disregards our right to be informed, and either reject or consent to life-altering decisions, has life-long, hence legal, implications.
We implore our Trustees to support the community they were elected to represent and either vote NO to the proposal in the upcoming Trust Meeting, due to a lack of proper consultation, or put forth a motion to POSTPONE a decision to give the community the time it needs to, at the very least, understand the proposal and its implications properly. A vote that truly and dutifully represents the will and interest of the community needs to be one based on informed consent.
Submitted by a large group of Concerned Citizens of Hornby Island
Elspeth Armstrong (has passed the letter to others)
Chris Armstrong
Linda Armstrong
Rex Brown
Christiane Brown
Gary Burtinsky
Heather Caton
Elena Feder
Helen Grond (others?)
Amanda Hale
Jackie Heim
Wrena Holliday
Ed Holliday
Glen Rabena
Jeff Rabena (who will deliver more signatures)
Erin Townsend
William Thomas
Kees Vandervalk
Kelyo Walmsley
Judith Walmsley (more coming)
Ian Walmsley
Christa Yeomans
Our Basic Premises & Objections
Back to Hornby’s Cell Tower Fight