Parents and residents are still fighting the construction of a cell phone tower on Benjamin Tasker Middle School land, expressing concerns about adverse health effects and a lack of policy transparency.
The Board of Education approved the construction of cell phone towers on public school grounds on Nov. 11, 2010, during a public meeting. The leasing master agreement between Prince George’s County Public Schools and Milestone Communications, the cell phone tower provider, was signed on Feb. 7, 2011.
Milestone selected 73 potential school sites, according to the leasing agreement. For each tower, Milestone would have to pay the Board a one-time fee of $25,000 and 40 percent of gross revenues generated from each tower built. ( Note: In DeKalb County, our school board did not even negotiate a good deal on the revenue side, agreeing to place towers for only a small lease amount that they are not allowed by contract to even attempt with options to renew ONLY for T-mobile every 5 years. Taxpayers were left on the hook for 30 year deals for what will be outdated technology at, most likely, closed schools that do not even need it for anything education-related now. )
No towers have been built yet, but the application process for individual school sites is already underway. Green Valley Academy of Temple Hills, Benjamin Tasker Middle School in Bowie, and Charles Carroll Middle School in Carrolton are among the first schools to be approved as sites for cell phone towers.
According to the county planning department, Milestone has not applied for a special exception because the county’s zoning ordinance does not require a special exception for monopoles built on public property standing less than 199 feet high. The tower proposed for Tasker Middle School will be 151 feet.
Deborah Lumpkins, director of Mothers Raising Sons and Daughters, said the Board of Education did not do enough to inform the community about the towers.
Lumpkins has three grandchildren at Benjamin Tasker Middle School. Lumpkins said she feels the Board of Education doesn’t have the public’s best interests in mind anymore.
“It’s all about their pockets,” Lumpkins said. “This is a sellout for them to make money for the school.”
According to the lease agreement the Board unanimously approved on Nov. 11, 2010, the Board gets paid $25,000 and 40 percent of the revenue generated from the tower. The school system declined to comment on how much the school itself will get. The leasing master agreement between the Board and Milestone was signed on Feb. 7, 2011, by former Superintendent William Hite.
Janis Sartucci, a member of the Parent’s Coalition of Montgomery County who has been assisting parents in Prince George’s County, said the Board of Education is still the land owner and must have the final approval on land use decisions.
“The Board of Education is trying to stay out of these decisions,” she said. “They want to hide. They are public officials and they don't want their names on these decisions.”
According to the 2010 Board policy, the Board had final authorization and approval for cell phone towers on public school grounds. But in 2013, the Board of Education amended the policy and deferred authorization to the school system chief executive officer. According to the 2013 policy, “the Board directs the CEO to implement and administer an administrative procedure governing the process for selection and authorization of sites for the location of wireless telecommunications facilities.”
Milestone gave a presentation about the proposed cell phone towers on public schools in Bowie in front of the Bowie City Council in early February. The council did not object to the project.
Bowie Mayor Frederick Robinson said the health threat “was not significant enough” to affect the decision. The installation of more cell phone towers is determined by consumer demand, he said.
(Exactly what criteria is he using to determine what is "significant enough" of a health risk in this case?)
“It comes down to do you want a product or service?” Robinson said. “Then capacity has to be increased.”
Councilmember Diane Polangin said the construction of more cell phone towers is practical.
“Everybody wants to be connected,” she said. “People don’t want their calls dropped. Dear Lord, even elementary school kids have cell phones.”
Polangin said the location of the towers does not really matter.
“You don’t really notice them,” she said.
 |
| The invisible cell tower at Daly Elementary School in Germantown, MD |
Ultimately, building cell phone towers on public school grounds is a school board issue, Robinson said.
“We reviewed the matter and deferred it to the school board – it’s their property, their issue,” Robinson said.
Eric Martin, a board member of Mothers Raising Sons and Daughters, said he strongly opposes cell phone towers on school grounds because of health concerns. Martin has a 12-year-old son who attends Samuel Ogle Middle School in Bowie, one of 73 potential schools in the county for building a cell phone tower.
“If they put a cell phone tower there, I may have to enroll my son in private school,” Martin said.
Lumpkins and Martin said they plan to raise awareness about the issue and petition against it this summer.
“If people don’t start talking, don’t start saying something, they’ll just make decisions without us,” Martin said.
Greenbelt resident Thea Scarato said she has similar health concerns.
“Schools should be a safe place, a safe learning environment,” said Scarato, a mother of a 9-year-old and a 12-year-old.
“I think every parent needs to be informed about this issue in order to make an educated decision or have an opinion on it,” Scarato said.
Scott Peterson, spokesman for County Executive Baker said Baker supports the school system’s decision.
“(Baker) is confident that the decisions the system is making are being made with the utmost concern for the safety and health of the students, faculty, staff as well as the surrounding community," Peterson said.
Get the Cell Out - ATL followers know very well about the nightmare being experienced by the parents and communities in this story from Maryland. We have been going through the exact same thing in DeKalb County and we do not have much in the way of answers, either.
Is the Mayor in the article above, who stated that there were no "significant risks" to the health of the children, now an authority in the medical field? Has he relied upon independent research on the effects of RF on children? (hint: there are none.) What studies did he read before he concluded that the risk was not significant because the World Health Organization's task force on this same issue reached a different conclusion. The American Academy of Pediatrics is urging schools to use precautionary approaches to their decisions before switching to wi-fi networks. Did the Mayor review anything from these authorities or did he do exactly what the school board did in DeKalb County and simply rely upon industry-funded studies that will tell you whatever you want to believe?
Is his statement going to be an acceptable answer to the child who develops leukemia as a result of his/her exposure to constant radiation, detected years from now after the Mayor and the School Board are no longer in their same seats, making claims that the risk is worth the benefits? When we trade off a child's health as an acceptable risk in exchange for fewer dropped calls and a nice tax break for a commercial business, we can clearly see how education has gone downhill in this country.
When you cannot trust your school board to keep Possible and Probable Carcinogens from going up at a school, how can anyone expect you to trust them to make sound decisions on education? Children must get an education in order to insure our society continues to grow and prosper. Parents must make the best decisions for their children's needs at all times, based on what resources they have personally available and what public resources are available to them.
What other options do parents have in cases like these when their own elected school board members have determined that they will value money over health, and are willing to throw a landmine into the path of the children who live in particular area or attend a particular school?
As a parent, this trend of taking a risk for the "greater good" of the financial stability or, worse, for the restocking of the local slush fund account, is a disturbing one.
No comments:
Post a Comment
We want to know what you think. Leave your respectful comments here!