somegridplayer

somegridplayer t1_ix7l408 wrote

In the case of my town, the location was absolutely perfect for my part of the town. The only catch was a massive douchebag across the street trying to sell their abomination multi million dollar home. So they took up the reign of "towers cause cancer! it'll fall down and set the day care not actually near where it would fall on fire and kill your children!" and shit like that.

A shitty website and a couple street fairs later and lots of mailers, AT&T noped out after listening to their bullshit at a town meeting about it and decided to put it elsewhere, which did not improve our neighborhood's reception at all.

And nobody still wants to buy the douchebag's house.

1

somegridplayer t1_ix7jtu5 wrote

Federal law allows local governments to deny construction permits for cell towers, however, such denial must be based on a reasoned approach; otherwise the FCC is authorized to preempt the local decision and grant the permit. The 1996 Telecommunications Act preserves local government zoning authority as it relates to cell tower siting, but it provides three key protections for firms seeking to erect a tower:

Local ordinances may not “unreasonably” discriminate among providers of functionally equivalent services. Tower siting policies must not favor one company, or one technology, over another;

Local government may not impose a blanket prohibition against the placement of telecommunications towers; and

Local ordinances may not impose more stringent “environmental effects” limits on radio frequency emissions than those adopted by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

Stolen from... I just closed the tab. Anyhow, in some cases the carriers will just throw up their hands and say "fuck, we'll put it somewhere else, enjoy your shitty service" if the locals are piss babies.

1

somegridplayer t1_ix52d2t wrote

Those regulations existed before the fat orange turd and didn't stop drilling. Go back to fapping in conservative and pretending you know anything about oil.

Also you're too daft to know oil supply isn't the issue, it's cracking prices are still through the roof. Again, having nothing to do with regulation but the fact that demand was so low during the pandemic that they spun down the plants, and now that prices are skyrocketed and they're making money hand over fist, there's no reason to bring them back online.

3

somegridplayer t1_ix3e1ur wrote

It wasn't environmentalists that shut down Pilgrim, it was Entergy citing economic reasons. They could have easily spun it down but they're not in the business of keeping assets around it seems. They pick up plants at pennies on the dollar run them for a few years, then sell them off to decommissioning companies, amusingly enough, making a profit.

The only thing now that's making life difficult by environmentalists is dumping of water. They think it's going to irradiate their dunks ice coffee and kill their dog.

5

somegridplayer t1_ivt7vks wrote

If I had to guess it's highlighting making that section of road more efficient and bringing in more customers to businesses. Look at the shitfight that is a Market Basket parking lot. Most people don't want to walk across a parking lot to get to a store, nevermind a couple blocks.

2

somegridplayer t1_ivpkmq1 wrote

Took civil rights pamphlets from HIS CHURCH and sent them to Stephen Miller.

Ignored living conditions at both the New Bedford jail and Bristol County.

Highest suicide rates in prison under his watch.

Wanted to send Bristol County prisoners to Texas to build the wall for Trump.

Got New Bedford officers fired for arresting his daughter for obstruction. She was in their face impeding an investigation into a shooting at a local club throwing around "don't you know who my father is? i'll get you fired blahblahblah".

Which of those make him "not a bad guy overall"?

54