PTA President Admits Prior Knowledge of Cell Tower Proposal

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Lithonia, GA: Monday, Oct. 24, 2011:

Words were exchanged in anger, tempers flared and PTA President Evelyn Cunningham, wife of school board representative Jesse “Jay” Cunningham, admitted she had been aware of talks with the DeKalb County School System (DCSS) regarding the cell tower proposal for more than a year. She offered no explanation about why the subject was not announced to the parents or community until May, just a month before the school board was scheduled to vote.

Cunningham approached the group of approximately 12 - 14 people who had gathered outside the entrance to Martin Luther King, Jr. High School around 11 am. Monday, Oct 24, to inspect the location where they recently learned a T-mobile cell tower will reside for the next 30 years, thanks to the school board’s approval to lease its property, along with eight other school properties, in exchange for about $400 a month which will be deposited into the county’s general fund. The deal also includes a one-time payment of $25,000 that will also be deposited into the general fund, but those funds will be “directed” by the PTA or a School Booster Club that the school wishes to support.

While the group was assembled outside the school, a spokesperson for the local non-profit group “Get the Cell Out - Atlanta” was also being interviewed by a reporter from WXIA-TV for a story related to SPLOST IV. That story has not yet aired. As the group was disassembling and preparing to return to their vehicles or walk back to their nearby homes, Ms. Cunningham approached them and demanded to know their names and what had been reported to the news media. After several minutes, the group convinced the PTA officer to calm down and discuss her concerns rationally, which is when she admitted to having known about the cell towers for more than a year. When asked if she received the information from her husband, she replied that it was her understanding that lots of people in the PTA were aware of the proposal and it was not specific to anything her husband told her directly.

The DeKalb County Board of Education Administrative Rule O.C.G.A. 20-2-1160 requires: "… public forums from time to time, especially when dealing with controversial issues or matters of deep community concern, to receive input from citizens on policy issues, the educational program, and school administration."

The DCSS official position on the subject of public notification has been that public meetings were held at each of the schools once carrier T-mobile had been selected. Critics claim the flyer sent home with children was vague and did not convey the message that the meeting was to discuss the intent to place cell towers on the school property.

DeKalb County zoning laws specific to the permitting of cell towers has language that prohibit cell phone or cell tower companies from constructing towers, which emit low levels of RF radiation 24 hours a day, within close proximity of residential neighborhoods unless there are no other suitable alternatives. T-mobile representatives stated during the school meetings in May that the schools were selected because they were the “easiest” choice for them to pursue, not the last alternative as required by the county.

T-mobile also reported in the community meetings, according to one parent who attended the meeting at Brockett Elementary in Tucker, that they did not want to build their towers in neighborhoods where they are not wanted. The community members and neighborhood associations near Martin Luther King, Jr. High School have stated that they have been shut out of the process completely, only learning recently that a 150’ tower with a base size of 60’ x 60’ has been approved by the school board.”

At the July 11 board meeting, Jay Cunningham spoke out on the cell tower issue, stating that the community was in favor. In an interview with a reporter from the Crossroads newspaper in July, Cunningham said “Everybody has their view,” adding that he only had one call opposing the proposal. “Everybody had no problem with it. I didn’t hear anything negative from the community.” Read more: CrossRoadsNews - Cell Towers Going to Schools

“It is very disappointing and makes you wonder if you can trust anyone in this school system,” stated one of the people who witnessed the altercation between the PTA President and the community members who say they would like some answers.

“We have fought things like this before,” said one man from a neighborhood right next door to the school. “This is the first time something like this has happened where they plan to allow zoning for something and we do not hear about it until it is too late.”

Update: At a subsequent meeting held Oct. 25, Jay Cunningham admitted that the community surrounding MLK High School did not get adequate notice and agreed to take their concerns back to the other board members. After being well prepared and well armed with information and questions about the cell tower issue, the community was able to collectively prove their points and give Mr. Cunningham no choice but to back down from his earlier claims that the community was in favor of a tower. He said he would ask for a reconsideration of the vote in light of the new information. This meeting has gone the same route as the meeting between Paul Womack and Briarlake, and all involved are still hoping for a reconsideration. They must move quickly, however, as the 30 day period following the permit application has expired and they will now be working against the clock to stop any signs of construction. T-mobile should have the permits all in place no later than the end of January. And, their substandard towers can be built overnight and brought up to code later as a result of their claim to exemption from DeKalb County's zoning laws. This is one of the legal issues that might be contested.

To read our post on a similar meeting held at Briarlake ES, with board rep Paul Womack, click here.

Transcript from the Briarcliff ES PTA meeting with Womack discussing the cell towers

Transcription of 8/31/11
Meeting with Paul Womack at Briarlake Elementary School
Womack = Paul Womack, elected again in 2008, having served for twelve years in the 1970s, currently District 4 Rep - School Board Vice Chair / Acting Chair During July 11 board meeting in which a contract was agreed to that will put cell towers at 9 public schools in DeKalb County. Womack is the district representative for 5 schools on the original list of 12: Lakeside, Briarlake, Brockett, Jolly and Princeton.
Interesting to note that this meeting was assembled on short notice within about two days time and 22 people attended, many of whom were not actually invited and the meeting hosts were unsure how they even found out about it. The meeting that was held in May regarding T-mobile’s proposal that Mr. Womack mentions in the transcript below, was supposedly highly publicized and every attempt was made to let the community know about it. That meeting had only 3 attendees from Briarlake. (The Lakeside meeting was held at the same time one mile away.) The Brockett meeting had 5.

===

Womack: You can use [the money from T-Mobile] for improvements, things for the school, room parties, things like that.  It’s up the community how you’re going to spend that $25,000. There has been no location so far. They have looked at a couple of sites, but I have been assured by T-Mobile that the community will be able to say yeah or nay as to the actual placement. Questions?

F1: The literature from the World Health Organization from December, 2010, mentioning the RF that comes from cell phones as inconclusive regarding damage as well as the RF from cell phone towers.  Five months later they came out with a major study that’s conclusive that long-term usage of cell phones can be (damaging). There’s also a study due out in 2013 about cell phone towers and exposure to those. Shouldn’t we consider waiting until… 

Womack: (Steps on speaker) The contract has already been signed. That’s a given. Uh, you get more radiation from your microwave than you do..

F1: But that’s not constant exposure.

Womack: I understand, but when you use this, that’s your choice.  That will not be your choice. (chatter) Excuse me, one at a time, please. One at a time. Uh, I can’t say that that study is right or wrong, but I know that the federal government says that it cannot be taken into consideration. But there is no concrete, proven fact. I haven’t seen that study, but I will ask the administration to look at it. I will get an answer.

F2: Will you take a look at this study of dairy cows in Germany? It shows a verifiable link between the RF emissions and the cow’s behavior. They were aborting their calves, not producing enough milk, and when they were removed from that range, everything went to normal.

Womack: Ok. Now you had a comment back there.

F2: Well, my point is, if this is such a controversial issue, why are we taking the risk with our children?  Aren’t we supposed to protect children?

Womack: Your name is…

F2: (Answers)  I’m just concerned that we are thinking “oh we’re going to get all this money, so that makes it ok”.

Womack: No.  It doesn’t.  We held a seminar here. We advertised it for a month. Put it on the website. The community was told, but everybody said, “oh it was the end of school, we didn’t have time”. We had about ten people that showed up for that presentation from T-Mobile.  And I only heard one question during that presentation that was anywhere in voicing a concern.  And the community over at Medlock voiced major concern and we took it off of the contract. But their voice was not from the safety, they were mad because Medlock had been closed.  They didn’t want any encroachment.  We’ve tried to follow what communities wanted and very frankly, I’ve only had 4 or 5 questions out of this community as to whether it was safe, why did you do it.  If the community does not speak up,  I can only support or not support what I’m hearing.

F3: I have a comment. Many people didn’t come, because they didn’t know.  Now that people know, I understand that this took place in the summer.

Womack: There was a presentation on May 3.

F3: There was a presentation but it didn’t discuss cell towers on this property.

F4: You’re right here in my neighborhood, in my backyard. I didn’t know anything about this. I’ve spoken with several of my neighbors and nobody knew anything about it.  Nobody let our neighborhood know anything about any possibility of there being any cell phone towers right in our backyard. It’s the first time we’ve known about it right after your vote.

Womack: I’m sorry.

M1: Well it looks like now, it’s a done deal

Womack: It is a done deal.

F4: Unless there’s a protect order.

Womack: That won’t happen cause the county has come to us to ask how we did it cause they want to do it too.  (arguing ensues)

F4: If you did it before we had a chance to know about it that was

Womack: It was on television before the vote, on all of the stations.

F4: What stations?

Womack: The television stations ma’am. It was out in the public. I can only do what I hear, not what I’m hearing after the fact.

F4: Well, if we didn’t know before the fact, then what could we say before the fact?

F5: I could find nothing online.

Womack:  Well, it was on our site. It was publicized through… We had sent notices to uh, I don’t know what to tell you on that.

F5: During the vote on July 11, during the meeting it was brought to your attention that the community was not aware of this. I am very involved in the schools and I was not aware of this.

Womack: I don't know what to tell you.

F5: I do know that you pushed the vote through.

Womack: Yes

F5: You opted. Your name in the meeting minutes opted to push the vote through.

Womack:  Yes

F5: And you say that the contract is now signed, but we’re saying that we didn’t know. You’re telling us we did, but I’m telling you that no, I did not.

Womack: Well, I don’t know how to get it out anymore than we tried. I don’t have the resources personally to do this. We asked the administration to post it on the site. I do know that we got it out the best we could. And I don’t care what issue it comes to a community, part is going to have it and part is not.

M2: I realize that, but at the same time, the procedures that have been used at least since the Roosevelt administration, whenever we have an issue of public necessity, vs the rights of private citizens affected by that alleged necessity, is that we have a period of adequate notice – sufficient to get the message to the members of the community that are affected. I’m just saying that if all you did was notify the PTA and you’re planning on putting a 150’ cell phone tower that’s 50 feet from my property line?  And it’s my property value that’s going to be affected, then you need to notify me and other members of the community that are affected.  I back up to the playground of this establishment.

Womack:  One of your neighbors, I discussed it with him because he, uh, came. And I asked him, “what’s your interest?”  And I said, “are you concerned?” and he said, “Oh, no. no.”  He said, “I’ve put cell towers up all over the country.  Now you may know who I’m talking about, somebody right around here.  I live, not quite as close as you are. I don’t know what to tell you.  I didn’t know why you didn’t know it because we tried to get the message out.

F6:  Well, I’m right next door. We have a neighborhood alert.  We have a newsletter. We have an email alert for the neighborhood.  Nobody in our neighborhood knows about it and we are immediately next door.  My property line is exactly next to the property line of this school.  Nobody in my neighborhood knew anything about it.  Not a thing.

Womack:  Well, I don’t know what to say to you.  We tried to get it out.

M2: Did you put signs up?  I mean, did you put any signs?

Womack:  No, no we did not.  We did not.  No.

F6: So, one meeting and that’s it?  You had like one meeting and pushed it through?  Is that what happened? I mean that’s what it sounds…

Womack:  Well, actually, yes, I would say that is the fact of the matter, yes.

F6:  That doesn’t seem right.

M3: I’d like to try to suggest a rationale for why what happened did happen.  We are at a time when our county is looking for sources of revenue to keep the schools open, not have to cut services while politically it’s the wrong time to be raising taxes and here was a chance to get a hold of a cool, free half a million bucks and if we went and got this thing done without making a lot of noise, it was gonna happen and the county and the school board was willing to take the risk that there wouldn’t be a couple of lawyers living next door that might somehow find their way there might be a rite of notice and run down to the courthouse.  And that’s what happened.

Womack:  Well, let me, let me respond to the taxes.  The school board does not raise taxes… since 2000.  Ah, I was chairmen of the Budget Committee we cut 104 million dollars out of the budget.  A lot of it was in the area that most people were concerned about.  And that was in staff. And we got rid of a lot of things that we shouldn’t have. That we know of.  This year the administration was pushing through another budget and I was able to stop it.  I’m vice chair. And we cut another 15 million.  We are not going into the classroom.  We have increased the number of students.  But we have, I think, as good of a fiscal record as any school system, probably better than most.  We did not do what the county did - raise property taxes, what? 28 percent? We didn’t do that.   But you know, I don’t really buy that the community did not know because Medlock and a couple of areas around the county found out.  They had to have knowledge because they came to the board and said, “No.” And the board said, “Ok.” We listen you.  But nobody came to, from this community and said “no.”

F7: I am new to Decatur, and I met a parent from Medlock.  And, I knew nothing about the cell towers at the school before I met her and she described to me a wooing relationship with T-mobile.  That they came several times and tried to tell them how good it would be, and this was before the school closed, how good it would be for the community, how, ah, they could make it look like a water tower and not like a cell tower, that it could have their mascot painted on it, and so they, in the process of wooing the community alienated the community.  And that’s what I understood from this parent.

Womack:  Well, that could very well be true.  Yes sir?

M4:  Just curious, I’m sorry.  I was a little late.  You may have discussed it earlier.   If it is not a good decision for the three schools that you pulled off the list, and I saw this in a report I recently read and the person in that article quoted a board member as saying if they heard anything at all, then how does the logic follow through that it is a good idea for the other schools?

Womack:  The, the, uh, answer to that, maybe, maybe.  It was that the community came forth and said we just don’t want it.  That was, that was before the vote, sir.

F5:  But, you can change the vote, right?  You can bring it back up?

Womack:  No, no.  The contracts have been signed.  I’m sorry.

F5:  Well, don’t you think if other schools were had a quite a lengthier notice because of T-mobile and..  and we didn’t have any interaction with the school so we didn’t have any notice.

Womack:  I can’t answer that.  I can’t give you an honest answer about that.  If I said “yes” it would be a lie, if I said “no” it would be a lie.

F5:  Well, just personally, I’m just amazed that those other schools were that together and were there at that meeting.  And were, you know, in the…

Womack: They voiced it to their, their, their local boards

F5:  And so, in this report of that meeting, you know, there’s all this stuff about how this school and that school went to the community and this school doesn‘t want it … and it says that cell phone towers especially near developing children could be a danger.  Is there a provision in this 15-year contract if there is something in there that is damaging to children?  Is there some sort of break off?

Womack:  I don’t know about that.  If you would make just a little note for me and I will try to get you an answer.

F5:  Okay

Womack:  But, I can assure you, just as one board member, if this thing proves to be detrimental, and not, uh, an eyesore, if this were detrimental to kids the board would move to break the contract.

(mumbled talking in background)

So, everything we’ve seen so far and I’ve told you the FC - the Federal Communications Act says health cannot be … it is updated… look, I can’t give you the answer.  Look either you are in FAVOR of this, or you are not.   Yes sir?

M5:  Then I have a question.  If this is a private company and it’s not a question of public perception.  And if a private company can go buy private property somewhere.

Womack:  Yes sir.

M5:   And it wasn’t a matter of money as you said so there in your speech a while ago, then what was so seductive about this particular proposal that you had to go for it and after there are three major objections and sneak it through as you did.

Womack:  We did NOT sneak it through, sir.  That’s your definition.  We did not sneak it through at all. The seductive part is we have poor cell service in here.  Over at Lakeside.  Over at Lakeside.  There is no police.  There’s no fire.  There is no cell service across from Briarcliff almost all the way down to Clairemont and back down a great degree down… (unintelligible name of a road).  And in the school last year they had a young lady that had a seizure.  And that community wants a cell phone.

F7: They don’t have a land line?

Womack:  They did, uh, it happened outside.  And it took them something like 10 minutes to get from where they were inside because they were trying to take care of her and the seizure she had. 

(His cell phone started beeping. - which was a little amusing since he was just making the point about no cell service in the area)

Excuse me. (He reaches into pocket, takes out phone and turns it off.)  

Yes sir?

M6:  Can, can you generally explain the electromagnetic spectrum and tell us why 120 towers isn’t sufficient for coverage?

Womack:  No sir, I can’t.

M6:  Because it doesn’t make any sense to have more.

Womack:  You have a cell tower right down here at, uh, at uh, Oak Grove and Lavista.

M6:  Here you can have the addresses. I’ll give this to, you can have the addresses of where all the towers are at.

Womack:  I’ve seen that.  And, I know we’ve got a lot of cells in here.  But the cells - break out.

M6:  How?

Womack:  Sir, that’s a technical question and I’m not prepared and I will not discuss it and I am not talking about it.

M6:  But, you made the decision to put the tower in.  Without knowing?  That doesn’t make any sense to me.

Womack:  That doesn’t have anything to do with…

M6:  (Angry)  It has everything to do with our children!

Womack: We have very limited cell service in this area.

M6:  Do you want me to tell you why it is that way?

Womack:  Why?

M6:  Because they’ve jumbled the airwaves with all the towers in.  You’ve got asymmetrical lines and you’ve got symmetrical lines.  Asymmetrical are for residential areas, meaning we take in…

Womack:  You’re the expert, sir.  I’m not …

M6:  Well then I should have made the decision!  And I would have said No!  Because, to me, 120 is pretty sufficient!

Womack:  Okay, sir, you’ve made your point.

M6:  Thank you.  Appreciate it.

F8:  … (unintelligible - lots of talking going on in background)… and when did the school system start making decisions about cell phone coverage?

Womack:  This started, I guess, last, um, about mid-last year, well, I guess.. And we, uh, discussed it in a couple of board meetings best I can remember… lightly, not heavy, but lightly.  And we said, “We have to go to the community.”  And, we did that as best we could.  I’m sorry we did not contact your association.

F8:  Well, I would like to know where did you go?

Womack:  Well, Maam’ I can’t… I can’t answer that.  I’m not gonna go knock on your door and say, “Hey, we gonna put.. 

F8:  I’m not asking you for that, but what I am asking is that you go to the neighborhood that is immediately next door and give us some kind of notice.

M7:  Mr. Womack, you could have done what’s standard for zoning issues, which is that..

Womack:  Post a notice out here?

F8:  Exactly!

M7:  You could have put up a large sign that everybody notices …

Womack:  Look, we relied on our website.  I’m sorry we didn’t do our job as well as we should.  But, let me tell you something, whether you like what I’m going to tell you or not, I really don’t care…

M7:  Obviously!

(more mumbling from audience)

F9:  That’s the problem!

Womack:  That is not the problem.

F9:  That IS the problem!

Womack:  Ma’am, when you set in my seat and you’re pulled as many ways as I’ve been pulled since I came back on this board, you would run from this job.

F9:  (Angry) That was your choice! That’s not my problem.  I did not force you to do that!

Womack:  I understand, Ma’am.  And I’m not debate that with you.  You’ve got your life… I’m not, because I paid to get this job and the community asked me to do it. Now…

F9:  Then don’t complain!

Womack:  It is the most important job there is in the state.  The school board.  Because it’s charged with educating the future leaders of this country.  If we fall down, the community falls down.  I’m sorry that you did not get the notice that you wanted.

F9:  No notice.

Womack:  I said I am sorry you didn’t get it!  I’m not going to play on the words.    Yes, ma’am?

F10:  Um, I’m not going to say if it is right or wrong because it sounds like it’s already a done deal and really there is no sense arguing over it at this point unless you’re going to bring it to court.  From that vantage point, my question really comes to you is that if this was about money for the cell towers, is there any sort of written information as far as how much Briarlake is going to get for it?

Womack:  $25,000

F10:   And that’s it?  Out of that $250…

F11:  $450 (others also chime in with $450,000)

Womack:  $450.  Now if they put another cell phone, uh, carrier up there, you get an additional $25.

M8:  But, by law, don’t they have to fill the other 120?  Don’t they have to co-locate?  Or do you not know the laws on that either?

Womack:  Sir, I don’t know the answer.  You’re an expert in the math and things..

M8:  Yeah, I am, and I will be more than happy to tell ya… you’re skirting the law!

F11:  That’s right!

Womack:  You need to talk to our people.  I’ll be glad to open that door for you.

M8:  Oh yeah, I’d appreciate that. Thanks.

Minutes from the Briarlake ES community meeting on cell towers

[August 31] concerned citizens met at the invitation of School Board Member Paul Womack to discuss the issue of cell phone towers on DeKalb School properties, specifically at Briarlake ES. Attendance was in excess of 22 individuals including both PTA co-presidents, other PTA board members, parents, neighbors, teachers, employees of the CDC, Mr. Womack and later, Ms. Edler also of the School Board.

The premise of the meeting was to discuss site location on the school campus, however, it quickly turned to vocalization of concerns that the DCSS had entered into a contract without adequate notice and without support of the community.

Mr. Womack began by giving specifics of the background of the project and an idea of the appearance. The proposed cell tower will be 150’ tall topped with a 4’ lightening antennae. It will be contained within a 60x60 foot site including a 8x12 utility building. He did not mention the required 20 foot easement needed to access the site. T-mobile has stated that they will work with each location to ascertain acceptable placement of the tower. Note that the tower would exceed the height of local mature trees by 50-60 feet.
(View an example at Mercer University by clicking here.)

Steve Donahue is the county employee handling the relationship with T-mobile. He was unable to be present at the meeting.

The lease agreement contains a provision to give each school $25k upon installation and the remainder of the money goes to the school system. Mr. Womack was asked how this was determined in light of a Cobb county T-mobile lease example giving 60% to the school itself and 40% to the district. He stated that it was how the contract was set up by T-mobile.
(Click here for a pdf of the contract.)

Click to view larger

On the subject of notification, a copy of the original flyer was presented to Womack. This flyer does not include text indicating that cell towers would be erected at Briarlake or any school. Mr. Womack agreed that this information was not conveyed in the flyer. See attached file. This flyer was not distributed to the community at large. No zoning or public sign notices were issued.

Testimony was given that Medlock parents were “wooed” by T-mobile in advance of county notification. It was stated that this could have been the reason for those communities’ ability to take early action. They were reacting to information given by T-mobile itself rather than being subject to the transmission of information by the county.

Faced with many testimonials from families stating that they would leave the system in avoidance of the risks associated with the immediate proximity of a cell tower at the school, Mr. Womack stated that he was sorry. He stated that the contract is signed and a done deal. It is in fact waiting for permitting in the District Commissioners’ offices.

On the topic of safety studies, many new studies were cited by those in attendance. Mr. Womack was given a copy of a study in Germany showing the detrimental effect on dairy cows.
(Click here to read the study by a German pharmaceutical institute.)

Mr. Womack stated that he had not previously been given any information that there was a danger with the cell towers. He went on to say that he and the board would definitely look at (pulling out of/altering) the contract if significant data showed a risk.

A suggestion was made to use some of the lease money to protect the school in some way, perhaps a metal shield on the roof. It was agreed that the money would be insufficient to do so. It was also suggested that the county provide Health Waivers to parents of attending students in light of possible future lawsuits from radiation exposure.

When asked why the board would enter into such an arrangement with T-mobile, Womack stated that he “did it for the coverage, not the money.” Mr. Womack is an AT+T customer that does not have adequate coverage at his home.

In conclusion, Mr. Womack agreed that there was insufficient notification to those in attendance. He agreed to revisit the issue with the school board and report back to Briarlake’s PTA with his findings.

===
Addendum: Here is an article about a school system that proposed the same plan, but acquiesced to the community and canceled the project.

Proposed Playground Cell Tower Nixed By Effective Public Education Campaign In North Idaho

UPDATE:  For those of you who take the current evidence of the safety of these towers at face value, I thought I'd share some old ads -- highlighting the old thinking that people believed fully at the time:

Click to view larger

Click to view larger

Click to view larger

Click to view larger

Click to view larger

Covert Cell Tower Activity?

So far, it looks like T-Mobile has jumped to attention and gotten right to work building those recently approved cell towers. People report that work on the tower at Lakeside is well under way across from the entrance to Echo Lake by the lower parking lot. We're not sure how work commenced so quickly on this project, as it usually takes at least 30 days to get a permit from the county. T-Mobile has had issues in the past and a group in California is monitoring them quite closely:

T-Mobile accused of installation violations
Company accused of installing equipment in Bay Area cities without proper permits
October 05, 2008|By Seth Rosenfeld, Chronicle Staff Writer

Neighbors wondered why workers waited until late on a summer night to erect an antenna atop a building near the Bon Air shopping center in Greenbrae.

As it turned out, the crew - allegedly working without the required permits - was installing the antenna for T-Mobile, the cell phone giant that has been rushing to set up hundreds of cellular transmission sites around Northern California.

That Marin County installation is one of several in the Bay Area where T-Mobile has been accused of ignoring local zoning rules to set up cell sites, according to building officials and public records.

Other sites allegedly in violation are in San Francisco, Alameda and San Leandro.

In addition, five former employees who helped T-Mobile install antennas told The Chronicle the firm has routinely put up and modified transmission sites without getting permits.

===

If you see construction activity on a cell tower, please tell us in the comments and /or send an email to sayno2celltowers@yahoo.com

===

UPDATE: Watch this new documentary on the subject of cellular technology TONIGHT at 7pm!

"Full Signal" 

Documentary will air on DirecTV and Dish

Today at 7:00pm

DIRECTV Channel 375 | DISH Network Channel 9410

Full Signal talks to scientists around the world who are researching the health effects related to cellular technology. From veteran journalists who have called attention to the issue for decades; to activists who are fighting to regulate the placement of antennas; and to lawyers and law makers who represent the people wanting those antennas regulated.

Get.The.Cell.Out.

Erin Brockovich move over!  We have a mom in town who has posted videos documenting the sheer volume of cell towers in the area in a convincing effort to ban them from school properties (there are at least 86 within a 4 mile radius of Brockett ES already).

As many of you are aware, the board contemplated a 30 year contract with T-Mobile (in the process of being acquired by AT&T) placing cell towers on 12 of our school properties. In exchange, each of the PTAs of those schools will get a one time $25,000 donation and the school system will collect monthly rent on the towers.

After serious community outcry, the board dropped three schools from the list (Brockett, Medlock and Meadowview), however plans were approved to build these monstrous structures on the remaining nine school properties.

Below are my notes from the July board meeting where the subject was discussed and then passed over the objections of Nancy Jester and Donna Edler.

McChesney proposes to remove Meadowview, Brockett and Medlock from the cell tower proposal for 12 schools. Question by Elder to McChesney. Why? McC - we've heard from these communities and they've been clear, so I'm supporting their opinion. Speaks: is there a grace period so that other communities can speak up but haven't had the opportunity [audience claps and Womack admonishes them]. Is there a mechanism for other communities to let the district know that they have an issue? Tyson - no option other than to pull the item. Womack: isn't there a 6 month window? Donahue: T-Mobile has 6 months for [due diligence]. Jester: concerned about many things. I don't like the timing - we didn't get this till Friday. Didn't get financials. Term is too long. I favor an opt in rather than opt out for communities. There may be others we haven't heard from so I am reticent to support. Edler: Happy to speak on this matter - I've had concerns. Communities have cited health reasons. I rep district 7, but also entire county so I'm not one to pick and choose for health of a particular community. So if we take out 3, I suggest we take out all 12. [Applause and Womack again admonishes.] Lots more discussion. Roberts rules out the window. [Sorry - got distracted - missed some.] I think Edler took out all the others but Lakeside, Briarlake and Meadowview(?). I think Walker insisted on Roberts Rules. So Womack puts out original motion and takes off Brockett, Medlock and Meadowview. Vote. Passed 7-1. Whew!

Edler: Amendment to the motion. Remove the remaining schools we identified before: Jolly, Margaret Harris, MLK, Narvie, Princeton and Smokerise ES. Cunningham: we don't have towers at all in South DeKalb - we're losing signals left and right. We want towers. SCW: I agree. Meadowview is smack dab in the middle of a community. Cunningham can have towers since they have a lot of land, but Meadowview is in a community so yes, it needs removed from the list. Edler: It's not the school system's business to provide cell and internet service to the county.

Vote: on Edler's amendment - eliminates all towers. Motion fails.
Main motion with original amendment: Passes 6:2 (Edler & Jester)


Some of these communities are only going to get a cell tower because they weren't aware of the plan and/or didn't have the time or focus to organize a campaign against them. Apparently, there is still time to fight this action. Visit the newly formed Facebook page, Get.The.Cell.Out for more info.

To view a map highlighting the locations of the towers, click here. (The locations removed from the list are indicated by a flag.)

UPDATE: Here's the NEW link to the countywide survey:

Get the Cell Out of DeKalb County Schools

And here's a link to the FOX 5 report on the cell towers:

Opinions Divided Over Cell Towers at DeKalb Schools

Opinions Divided Over Cell Towers at DeKalb Schools: MyFoxATLANTA.com

What is the real reason T-mobile wants their towers at our schools?

Sent in by a DeKalb School Watch Reader (We have been contacted by a variety of groups highly concerned about this cell tower initiative. This is one of several requests to post information about the T-mobile proposal.)

My community would love to see some sort of request for the full details of the cell tower proposal by T-mobile that is being considered by the DeKalb County School Board. The more I think about it, the more I have realized that this proposal is about a lot more than we may think.

The objections of health and property values are valid, yet may only concern the limited few around the schools affected. What we have not grasped is that this is going on right now all over the country, with T-mobile just getting "no's" here and there and moving on quickly, then getting "yes's" and signing deals. Has anyone started putting the pieces together to question the significance of what they are doing and how it relates to the soon-tob-be finalized merger with AT&T?

There must be some limits imposed on technology when there is concern about its safety. We certainly cannot expect corporations, such as T-mobile, to be transparent about their true intentions. It is not up to them to protect children. Their job is to sell what they have been told to sell, especially in light of the fact that they know they will soon be part of a highly publicized, major merger that could potentially leave many of the T-mobile folks without jobs. They are selling at all costs now. AT&T is looking to own the airwaves in terms of roaming and thus prevent any smaller companies from becoming true competitors.

It is not the right time to be doing business with T-mobile. They do not care about their name or reputation because it will be mute within six months. And, AT&T does not need additional coverage in our area. Their motivation is clearly to “hog up the airwaves” so that they can lease space to other smaller competitors in an effort to monopolize the industry.

That will mean higher charges, less bargaining on corporate accounts, fewer deals, less mercy when it comes to every customer they have, including the residents in our community as well as the school system and county government.

Read “AT&T, T-Mobile Merger Bad News for Consumers” at
http://www.newser.com/story/114574/att-t-mobile-merger-reactions-not-good-for-consumers.html

We need full disclouse of the details of the proposal being consider by DeKalb county. And, we need to encourage residents of all ages to show up for the July 11 meeting and work session when this vote will take place. State your case now, before the July meeting, while the topic is under consideration. When it is over, we will not have another chance to voice our opinions on this subject for 15 years, if the deal goes forth as planned.

This is big and we deserve to know why our school system would be in talks with a company that will no longer exist in a few months. If they are talking with AT&T via T-mobile, that could be considered collusion. Our accredidation is already in jepardy... we don't need more scandal especially if we ever hope to get a decent superintendent in here!

And, if they are really trying to do the right thing, then they should postpone the vote. We can wait till school in back in session so parents can attend a true discussion of the pro's and con's involved in the offer. We should wait until the AT&T / T-mobile merger is in place so we can negotiate with the true contract owner. And, we really should wait until our own leadership is in place by way of a new, experienced superintendent. A decision this big should not be made when there is no clear leadership to stand behind it.

I understand that our interim superintendent does not want to be considered for the job. Why, then, would she allow a vote this controversial to take place now? The first study involving children and cell phones is due for release in 2013. We can wait.

If you do not have enough information to make a solid decision, then err on the side of caution. The first rule of medicine is 'First, do no Harm.’ Wise words no matter what the profession.”
- Brian A. Kuzik MD, MSc, FRCP(C) Consulting Paediatrics, Royal Victoria Hospital of Barrie Assistant Professor of Paediatrics (Queen's University, University of Toronto)

T-mobile, or should I say AT&T, we know what you are trying to do and we will not allow it. Can you hear me now?"

Cell Phone Towers

DeKalb County School System will hold community meetings to inform county citizens of the proposal to install cell phone towers in various areas of DeKalb County to improve the communication service in DeKalb.  The presentation will be made by representatives of T-Mobile.  Meeting dates and locations are listed below.  

All meetings will begin at 6:00 pm.

Tuesday, May 3, 2011

• Briarlake Elementary School
• Lakeside High School
• Martin Luther King, Jr. High School

Wednesday, May 4, 2011

• Brockett Elementary School
• Flat Rock Elementary School
• Jolly Elementary School

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

• Margaret Harris Center
• Princeton Elementary School
• Smoke Rise Elementary School

Wednesday, May 11, 2011

• Narvie J. Harris Elementary School
• Meadowview Elementary School
• Medlock Elementary School

As I understand it, T-Mobile is interested in placing cell phone towers on the properties of the schools listed above. If this is your community, you may want to plan on attending.

Be aware that at some schools, they may be looking at putting two towers on the site.