Dear Representative Liddy:

Chris, thank you for responding to our problem. I was told by a location siting engineer at a meeting with George Benson, director of land use in Newtown, that the 1,450 cell towers in Connecticut will probably double in the next five years. This is a matter for all Connecticut residents to be concerned about, since we all have worked on our homes and property to keep our investments sound. Not only does the physical location of the tower in the center of our neighborhood monetarily devalue to our homes, the mental and psychological impact will be long-lasting…as permanent as the tower itself.

Although AT&T and Verizon think that because they float a balloon at the site when the leaves have come out, this massive structure will be seen through the woods for seven months a year as well as the top. The estate of Mr Lundgren will be inherited by a son and daughter who live in West Virginia and Florida. This beautiful residential land will forever be a site of obvious commercial enterprise with absentee landlords.

Just because our neighborhood isn’t in the center of town in the historical boroughs where no one would think of building a cell tower, we on the outskirts of both Newtown and Brookfield still send our tax money to the town halls located safely in those boroughs. Our neighborhood may be comprised largely of woods, but we all paid for those woods because that’s where we chose to live. Should we not be grated the same representation to ensure the historical setting of two beautiful Connecticut towns?

All of our surrounding areas will soon be facing this same problem of tower location. In fact, AT&T had other sites under consideration; however, it chose not to seriously consider them because two town governments chose not to suggest any alternative sites, or mount any concerns about the 24 Dinglebrook Lane site. Why is that?

Sincerely,

Rufus Ayers

20 Dinglebrook Lane, Newtown                                       May 13, 2009