Over the last few weeks, the local papers have been publishing letters to the editor and reporters’ articles regarding the Youngblood residence at 48 Colgate Road. Ms. Youngblood is represented by Tamara Harris who specializes in matrimonial law.
There was also a recent letter published sent in by an individual who belongs to a very small group of laypeople who write the same or similar letters to the local papers of small cities or towns making the same complaints to each of the tows relating to LED street lighting.
It should be noted that LEDs, fluorescent and incandescent bulbs can interrupt normal sleeping patterns. The body’s biology works in rhythms that are set by the amount of light and dark the body is exposed to. This is called a circadian rhythm.
Windowless or individuals who keep their shades drawn have lower test scores on sleep quality. That also is important with reference to others who have also complained such as the resident at 67 Radner Road. Both residences keep all their shades drawn.
Both 48 Colgate and 67 Radner have the same complaint. They state that the LED light in front or across the street from their residence has affected their sleep. The front page of a local paper had the cover page showing this light as it appears just before midnight. The same photographer then wrote an article on the alleged litigation.
The article was written without knowing anything about the function of LED streetlights that are now the major source of street lighting throughout the United States. All other types of lighting for streets are outmoded. When the reporter took the photograph he never looked or took a photograph of the residence across the street about 150-feet away.
The issue is: Do any of the people complaining about the LED street lighting suggest technically correct suggestions or are they just against the LED lighting and making frivolous and fraudulent allegations and claims?
On Feb. 4, a PowerPoint presentation was made at the Great Neck Village meeting on the study made on the two residences stated above and many other areas in the village. Every one of the photographs taken at night of the subject residences and many others documented the fact that all the LED streetlights focused only on the street as they do throughout the United States.
Not one of the subject lights shed any light on the front of the subject residences. The only light that did shed light on the bedroom at 67 Radner was the pole light in the front of their residence containing an incandescent shining light directly on their bedroom and the left side of the front of their residence. The right side had no evidence of light from the LED street lighting.
Conclusions? A plaintiff’s lawyer who did not verify the complaint by the Youngbloods. Their lawyer should have hired an expert to verify the claim before starting a frivolous lawsuit. The reporter who took the photograph allegedly in front of the 48 Radner residence made a false claim inferring that Youngblood’s bedroom and residence were exposed to the LED streetlight as shown on the front page of the local paper.
Consequences? Rumors were spread by the false reporting and the frivolous lawsuit against the village is wasting a lot of time and expense in having the Village attorney reply to a frivolous suit.
Dr. C. J. Abraham
Great Neck
