LETTER: Our Letter to Our School Board Rep. Paul Womack - This Issue is Not About One School, it is About All Schools

Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2011 1:49 PM
Subject: Cell Tower proposal by T-Mobile
(click headline for the full story)
Mr. Womack,

We would like to protest the proposal that was made by T-Mobile to our community at a meeting held at Brockett Elementary School on May 4, 2011. We have copied Thomas Bowen on this email as he is the chairperson. We are also sending a similar letter to Lyndia Maugborne, our school principal. We wish to urge both of you to fairly represent us and vote against the cell tower construction. The focus of our concern involves four areas:

1.) First, T-Mobile has not followed proper procedures of notification to the residents in the affected area or a public forum for discussion by both sides. The parents and guardians of children at the school are not the only ones with a vested interest in the impact the proposed tower would have on the community. Therefore, we object to the improper notification. Even the notice that was given to parents of Brockett Elementary school students was vague and did not convey the true purpose of the meeting.

2.) Second, we object to the cell tower proposal based on issues related to the health and welfare of the residents in the surrounding community including the children who attend Brockett Elementary and other schools as outlined by the cell company proposal.

There has been much research done that indicates prolonged exposure to even at low levels of this radiation causes damage to cell tissue and DNA, and it has been linked to brain tumors, cancer, suppressed immune function, depression, miscarriage, Alzheimer's disease, and numerous other serious illnesses. [1]

Children are at the greatest risk, due to their thinner skulls, and rapid rate of growth. Also at greater risk are the elderly, the frail, and pregnant women. Doctors from the United Kingdom have issued warnings urging children under 16 not to use cell phones, to reduce their exposure to radio frequency (RF) radiation. [2]

At the very least, we urge the school board to delay decision until the results of the study by MOBI-KIDS is completed in 2013. This international study will provide insight as to the effects of cellular use on children. http://www.mbkds.com/

We have read your open letter regarding the need for ethics at this school board and we sincerely hope that you will stand by your words and look at this decision from an ethical perspective, not simply a financial one. Allowing something of this magnitude to fly "under the radar" with parents so that it might be passeed into the hands of a system without a superintendent and a history of mismanaging funds would be a highly distrubing decision. And, to ignore the studies that have been done is irresponsible. The board must consider all available information and put that together with the fact that the simple fear alone that this proposal has generated among those in the community who are aware of it, should be a sign that it is not in the best interest of the school or the children.

Caption for photo at left:
WARNING: Would this be enough warning to keep your 2nd grader from hopping a fence? A T-mobile site we located in Tucker, GA, was found with a warning sign knocked on its side and overgrown shurbs blocking the view. Are these conditions what we can expect once the cell towers go up at our 9 DeKalb Schools? And how many schools will be on the next list? They didn't warn us? What makes you think they might warn you?


3.) Third, we wish to protest the cell tower construction based on the rights of property owners in the surrounding community. The Federal Communications Act of 1996 states that property values and aesthetics are valid reasons for a municipality to deny zoning for a cell tower or antenna. It is our belief that the towers would create an eyesore in the community even if an attempt is made to disguise the tower as a tree. The unsightly tower along with fear of living near one would result in lower property values which, in turn, would lower the amount of property tax collected. A cost / benefit analysis has not been conducted that would take this fact into account.

4.) And, finally, we protest based on the fact that there is not a need for better cellular coverage in our area. T-mobile lists its current strength for both voice and data at or near the strongest levels possible. The coverage can be verified for both voice and data by entering the 30084 zip code on this page:

http://www.t-mobile.com/coverage/pcc.aspx. In addition, a pending merger with AT&T would significantly change the needs of T-mobile and could render all agreements to be null & void. I don't know any fair-minded individual who would enter into a contract of this proportion with a company that has publically stated it is in the process of being bought out by another entity and will therefore cease to exist. That's simply bad business.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. We will follow this issue closely and urge our friends and neighbors to do the same. We proudly join the growing community of citizens across the country who are standing up to these assaults and helping deciding bodies such as yours to do the right thing for the students and community that lives near and supports the school.

We expect you will take the community and parent protests seriously and consider our messages carefully before rendering the best decision for the future of DeKalb and our children. Brockett Elementary has been a part of our community for 50 years. We hope it will continue to be a source of pride for us, not a reason for us to be forced to abandon our school and possibly even our homes. Please vote 'NO' against any proposal to locate a cell tower at our school, or others in our county. Please make us proud that Paul Womack truly is willing to stand up to any opposition and represent fairly the opinions of the members in his district, with an ethical code that is in tact even where others may fall short.

1 Microwave and Radio Frequency Radiation Exposure, San Francisco Medicine , Vol. 74, No 3, March 2001
2 Mobiles Risk to children, Daily Mail (U.K.), May 11, 2000