The Devil is in The Detail (How the Cell Tower Votes Shine a Light on DeKalb's "Corridor of Corruption")

Wonder exactly how the cell tower vote shook out and whether or not your own community said they were for or against the idea of cell towers at schools? 

Read more by clicking the headline for the full story. 

On July 31, 2012 Georgia voters took to the polls in the election primaries. In Dekalb County, a question popped up on the ballot with little explanation:

"Should the local, charter or independent school system of Dekalb County place or operate a telecommunications tower on any elementary, middle or high school property?"

The phrase, "The Devil is in the Detail," refers to a catch or mysterious element hidden in the details.^[1]

While opponents  of cell towers on school grounds were happy when the outcome was a strong 62% of voters saying "NO," GTCO-ATL was wondering if there was more we could learn from the data.  So, we dug a little deeper. 

From the start, we were critical of the validity of any data that might come from this question. First, it was asking too many things at once which is a common error people make when they are not properly trained in survey data analysis or proper question techniques.  We tried to alert those who were responsible for the question, Rep. Karla Drenner and Rep. Chuck Sims, but they did not respond. We then asked Gov. Deal to not sign the referendum as it was vague, not necessary and did not come from the people. He signed it anyway.

So, we determined that even though it might not go our way, at least it would tell us a few things that could be beneficial.

1. First, any area that answered yes, or even close, could be an area that is uninformed of the dangers and problems a cell tower could bring. We could focus more effort with our PR there.
2. Second, if we felt there were areas well informed that still said yes, we might be able to see specifically where corruption was influencing the voters.  Why wouldn't we think a yes could be a sincere, honest vote? Because we have been at this for more than a year and have never met anyone who has thought it was a good idea. Even those who like to debate us on the blogs will not take a pro-cell tower stance.
3. The third thing we thought we would learn would be where these "rural" Dekalb areas actually are located where Mr. Cunningham said they "welcomed the towers." Going by the way things appeared in the media, the South regions wanted the towers and money, while the North was leading the protests against them.  What we expected was to see strong opposition regardless of the location.

But, oddly enough, here is how the vote shook out:

(click chart to enlarge)

Here are some questions we had:

• Are these areas (highlighted in yellow) actually ignorant of the dangers of cell towers?
• Is the difference of just a few percentage points even enough statistically to be concerned about or is it safe to say that overall the entire county was against the idea of placing cell towers on the public school grounds?
• Should the school board inform T-mobile about the few areas that skewed slightly in favor of cell towers so they can be the ones to receive them?
• Is there a chance that the very few areas that skewed in favor of the towers had some sort of "inside information" to reassure them that they would not actually be the ones to receive the towers? 
• Are the areas of the county that were not selected for tower placements not going to receive the cooresponding technology either? 
• What is the purpose of a "non-binding advisory referendum" anyway?  Why did state legislators create this alternative to the total ban on towers that the citizens wanted?
• What did they expect to do with the results of this referendum?
• But, who are we advising?  Who will listen? 
• Who will actually do something with these results?
• If no one is going to act upon this ballot question and it will not influence (or "advise") anyone in a decision-making capacity, then why did taxpayers have to pay for it? 
• Why did we even have to take our time and resources to educate people about the question, and its poor wording, if the outcome was for no viable purpose? 
• Or, as we suggested originally, was this question created for someone else?  Someone OTHER than the citizens?  Perhaps if the results would have gone in the favor of the towers, they would have used the results.  If that is the case, then shouldn't THOSE PEOPLE (or businesses) be the ones who should have paid for it?  Not the voters of DeKalb County. 
• Were we really successful in stopping the towers? 
• Is the school board aware that the contracts have expired?
• Why won't our School Board or our county CEO tell us anything?

We may never know for sure, but we plotted the districts marked in yellow, above, on a map of the voting precincts.  After studying the areas and their relationship to each other, here's what we saw. 

 

(We are working to get a scanned version of this map

uploaded here for you.  Check back soon.)

WHERE WERE THE YES VOTES?

1. A small number of Dunwoody communities, and a

2. A small portion of the Lakeside or Emory-Lavista "Corridor" of schools.  

Note:  Almost all areas in favor were ITP, or "Inside the Perimeter."

WHO COULD THEY BE?

Of course this is all speculation on our part, but there could actually be four types of "yes" votes in these areas:

1. Voters who are completely unaware of the issue (just like we once were before this started)
2. Voters who think tower radiation is harmless for children and therefore our public land should be leased to T-mobile without concern (we have not actually met anyone like this, have you?)
3. Voters who have been told to vote yes (by an employer or friend) and do so because they do not have a personal, vested interest in the outcome.
4. Voters who have spoken to their board member, believe they will not be receiving a cell tower and therefore they do not care if a tower goes up somewhere else.

Note:  It is important to note that none of the areas (in the chart in yellow) actually had a cell tower going up near them. 

Of course we have no way of knowing why people voted the way they did.  We cannot go back and review the votes to ask follow-up questions.  And, people who were unaware of the issue had no way of selecting "I don't know" or "unaware" as their response.  These are just a few of the reasons we asked the Governor to veto this bill, but he went ahead and signed it.

Dunwoody

Those who voted in the Dunwoody area may have done so because they were not faced with this issue at their local schools.  Dunwoody did not have any of their schools on the original or reduced list for cell towers.  Does this mean they do not get the technology, either? 

If cell towers are actually a means for distributing the material of a virtual charter school, did certain folks in Dunwoody already know about this concept?  They have been advocating on the School Watch Blog for separate school districts.  So, have they been promised a way that they can make this happen in return for supporting the cell tower idea? 

Do we have a case of ignorant, but financially well-off, neighborhoods where they do not follow school news?  Or is this a case of yet another area of DeKalb selling someone else's neighborhood out when offered something they want for themselves? 

Lakeside / Fernbank and the Emory-Lavista Corridor

That leaves only a few districts that were either divided in their responses or barely tipped the scales in favor of towers on school grounds. But, with the exception of Lakeside High School, these areas were not facing the possibility of a tower at their own neighborhood school, at least not according to our Open Records Requests to see their contracts. 

So, Lakeside High area again emerges as one sticking out like a sore thumb. The school that reportedly initiated the request to their district representative, Paul Womack, who in turn brought the item to the Budget, Finance and Audit Committee while he was the chairman. Lakeside High School wants a tower, and the money of 12 towers so the Vallhalla Group can "finish the dream."   And the rest of us must endure all the baggage that it means to get roped into this issue while they sit back and smile.

In the Oct. 1 meeting agenda, a donation was accepted to finish the Lakeside construction for an outdoor eating area.  Yes, you read that correctly....

Did people really just vote "yes" to radiating other people's children for 30 years in exchange for an outdoor pavilion so their kids can get a little sun while they eat their non-free, non-reduced priced lunches?  Tell us that is not what is happening here? 

Then again, Lakeside has so many towers in a four mile radius, one more could not have possible been what made the difference, could it?

It appears that everything is proceeding according to plan.   But, who's plan is this??

Protests Come From the "North" (But the Public Votes Yes?)

"South" Board Members Vote Yes, but the Public Votes NO? 

Don't you find it interesting that we saw bigger than life protests coming from the areas where many people voted to be in favor?  AND, at the other end of the county, in the areas where we were told they "welcomed the towers," we saw the largest portion of people who voted against it? 

Have you figured out that things are not always as they seem here in DeKalb? 

And, many board members publically stated that they would have voted differently if they knew then what they know now.  See our story on this subject, here.

The cell towerss are a great lesson in not judging a book by its cover.  Rather, we should be judging our school books by the fact that they will soon not have any covers, just screens.  Hell, we don't even have librarians any longer! 
 
Most important:  Most People in Most Places Across the County Said NO CELL TOWERS AT OUR SCHOOLS.  And, for those of us who agree, if it is not a good idea for my school, then it is not a good idea for any school!

But, these are just a few of the ideas we came up with.  We would love to hear what you think.  Email us at sayno2celltowers@yahoo.com and let us know!

We did it once, now let's do it again! 

Vote NO on the charter school ammendment this November!  This is NOT about charter schools!  It is about creating virtual schools under a sneaky initiative put forth by corporations seeking new ways to profit, NOT about our children or parental choice.

VOTE NO to changing the state's constitution! 

NO MORE CHARTER SCHOOL AUTHORITIES!

Don't GIVE AWAY our power!  Let's Take it BACK! 

What can we do instead?  Start looking for well-qualified people to run for the School Board in the next election!  WE can do this if we keep working together!  Stick up for your beliefs!  Inform your neighbors!  Talk about what is happening so that others will not have to suffer the same thing happening to them! 

See you at the upcoming meetings!  (see our meetings page) Ask Questions!  Remain Alert!  Do not Trust those in power who have something to gain from you.  Seek advice only from those uninterested third parties or people whom you trust before acting upon anything you see or hear in this school system.   

 

 

For more info, watch "The United States of ALEC" here:  http://billmoyers.com/



 VOTE NO TO CHARTER SCHOOLS! 

It is time to STOP FEEDING THE BEAST!

1. ^ ^{a b c d} Titelman, Gregory, Random House Dictionary of Popular Proverbs and Sayings, Random House Reference, March 5, 1996p