Write the facts, not the hype, on SpaceX site
After reading your article on the SpaceX wireless backhaul site in a recent Sunday edition of the Bonner County Daily Bee, I was left with many questions.
I was wondering why someone would use over half the article to restate the same FCC position two times with a slight word change? Kinda makes it appear you are supporting the FCC position for safety and not making any additional counterpoints (other than the initial quote by Robin Hunding).
The main thrust of the folks for Save Selle Valley is that the Bonner County Planning & Zoning Department made the decision to put a commercial entity in an area zoned AG/Rural/Forest. They did this by twisting the rules (trying to liken this wireless backhaul site to solar panels) to avoid a conditional use permit and the public hearing that goes along with it.
It doesn't take a whole lot of digging to see the covering of tracks by P&Z Director Milton Ollerton, county lawyer and the county commissioners to fail to recognize this was zoned incorrectly. By issuing a building location permit (under Title 11), the commercial backhaul site could be put in and avoid dialog with affected local residents. The county commissioners who are elected by the public should want and encourage public discourse before making any decisions, especially when it comes to something as critical land use.
We appealed the P&Z decision with clear and factual facts and the appeal was denied quickly by all three commissioners as if to say "Nothing here to see folks just move on." Doesn't seem right to me and many others in our community.
It is also very important to look at data (other than FCC data and Elon Musk) that doesn't support the FCC's conclusions about health risks to the public when it comes to these sites and 5G. Wouldn't it be great if the public actually got reporting that looks into all sides of an issue honestly (I know this is a stretch), reports it and then leaves it to the public to further research and decide for themselves. I hope (stretch number 2) that you still believe that that is what real journalism should consist of and not just reporting what fits the popular media narrative.
The article you attempted to write was a start (albeit a weak one), but there is so much more to the story than what you and your paper chose to print. Give it another shot and actually talk to the people who have a vested interest in SpaceX being in their backyards and have multiple layers of data that support that this technology is not safe and or tested thoroughly by the FCC or Elon Musk. How about some serious journalistic effort (stretch number 3)?
Save Selle Valley