IMPORTANT MEETING: Cell towers focus of DeKalb meeting Monday

GTCO-ATL URGENT NOTICE:  If you do not want a cell phone tower to be placed at your child's school or in a residentially zoned part of DeKalb County, you are urged to attend this important meeting on MONDAY at 6:30 p.m.  

A show of support is very much needed so that we may keep ALL of our children, ALL of our schools and ALL of our communities safe from the unwanted and unnecessary intrusion of these dangerous structures.  

If you would like to be reminded about the many, many reasons that we believe cell towers should not be permitted in residential areas or on public properties such as schools, please refer to the bottom of this article.

Meeting notice, From the AJC

By April Hunt

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

DeKalb County, which is in the process of rewriting its county code, will hold an informational meeting Monday about possible new regulations on cell towers.

The placement of towers on county schools has been a hot button issue among residents for years. Residents can offer input on code changes at the meeting, which begins at 6:30 p.m. in Maloof Auditorium, 1300 Commerce St., Decatur.

Cell Towers Should Not Be Allowed in 

My Neighborhood or at My Child's School Because ...

1.)  A Non-Binding Advisory Referendum was conducted by the state legislature in July 2012 which showed overwhelming support for keeping cell towers OFF our school grounds.  62% of voters (more than 75,000 residents upon the final tally) voted NO when asked if telecommunications structures should be allowed on any public elementary, middle, high school or charter school in DeKalb County.  16 of 18 members of the DeKalb Delegation in the House also agreed by signing on to Rep. Karla Drenner's bill that would have banned this practice completely in DeKalb.  The bill was killed in committee by someone who does not even live here and who has been found guilty of DUI three times (Rep. Chuck Sims - R).  Obviously, his judgment is questionable and if it had not been for his decision to stop the bill, we would not even be discussing this issue right now.  

2.)  100% of the communities that were actually facing the possibility of a cell tower at their local school voted NO on the referendum, stating they do NOT want cell towers on school grounds.  Their voices have never been officially heard as the school board approved the decision without giving proper notification to the homeowners at any of the schools and giving a misleading flyer to parents which resulted in a failed attempt to hold public meetings on the subject.  Even then, the majority of the board members themselves did not even attend these meetings.  There was no Superintendent at the time the issue was voted on and nearly every board member (except Dr. Walker) later stated in a public meeting hosted by Crossroads News that they would have voted differently if they had to make the decision again.  And, in fact, the county commissioners themselves have already made a joint statement aganst the towers.

3.)  Cell Towers lower property values.  Fact.  Most of our county is already suffering from a decline in property values as a result of the housing crisis.  

4.)  RF radiation from a cell tower is constant, background radiation that you cannot escape from.  We know that high power radiation causes cancer.  What researchers are still debating is the long-term effects of low power exposure.  However, there has been enough evidence to cause the world's leading authority on cancer, the World Health Organization, to upgrade it to a "possible human carcinogen."  This announcement was made PRIOR to the school board's decision and should have been considered RELEVANT new information that would have given them cause to vote differently than other school boards in our area.  Their justification that it has taken place elsewhere is not enough for us to say that it is okay for us here.  In fact, this one area could be a way to help DeKalb appeal to new homebuyers and help restore our schools to a higher standard where we place the lives and education of children FIRST.  

5.)  Cell towers are aesthetically unpleasant.  Zoning laws should take into consideration what the residents in an area want or do not want to see when looking out their windows or driving through their neighborhood.  I do not know anyone who would want to be within sight of a cell tower.

5.)  Crime is invited to our communities when we place cell towers near our homes.  Constant 24 hour access is provided to our school grounds and, for many, to the back doors and back yards of our homes that are next to the schools.  The copper theft in the metro area has been widely reported and there is no security provided to keep unwanted intruders from using these parking areas to scope out our homes, or watch our children on their playgrounds or as they walk in their own neighborhoods.  This is a danger we do not need to add to the list for our police force, which is already spread thin.

6.)  The fall zone of a tower is necessary to be one and a half times the total height of a tower.  If this is not followed in a residential area, then you are placing a tower near structures that are occupied by people most of the time.  If a tower were to fall over for any reason, human life and private and public property is at risk.  Will the county's insurance cover the damage that would occur in these cases?  If not, they need to keep the cell towers in commercial and industrial areas as they are now.

7.)  Dangers of falling ice and debris.  Many injuries can happen in winter if ice collects at the top of a tower overnight and then large portions fall to the ground as the sun warms it later in the day.

8.)  Cell tower climbers could fall traumatizing children or residents who witness it.  It is currently known as the most dangerous job in America.  In fact, people on the ground could be killed by something as simple as a screwdriver falling out of a tower climber's pocket because of the rate of speed and resulting force by which it would hit anything in its way at ground level.  We've seen what a falling limb can do when it strikes a child.  We do not need to place more of these dangers above our children's heads.

9.)  It is NOT necessary to place cell towers closer to our homes or at our schools.  We have plenty of towers in our area as they each can transmit from 5 - 15 miles and federal law mandates that they exhaust all possibilities for co-location prior to building new structures.  If they want to build new towers, it is purely a competitive game of owning a tower closer so that the competition has to sublease from them instead of the other way around.  There are NO dead zones in all of DeKalb County, as confirmed by the FCC's latest map on 3G nationwide expansion.  Unless a cell company can prove it actually NEEDS for our zoning laws to change, why would we offer to make things easier for them (and more expensive for ourselves)?  They have all the access they need right now.  They may just have to pay a little more to provide the service by utilizing the existing towers and subleasing options available to them.  This is not an industry that needs our help in order to profit.  They are one of the richest industries in the world right now, just behind oil and war.  

10.)  Distrust of government is a big issue here right now. The Snowden case with the federal government already has citizens on edge about whether or not the U.S. government is spying on ordinary citizens, intercepting their wireless calls without search warrants or without any justifiable cause.  Citizens in DeKalb are already very aware of the allegations of corruption in various levels of our government.  We do not need more reasons to distrust you or be suspicious of those who are supposed to represent us.  What we DO need are reasons to trust.

CELL TOWERS SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED 

IN ANY PART OF OUR COUNTY 

THAT IS NOT CURRENTLY ZONED FOR THEM.   

Please, represent us in the way that we have asked you to.  Do not allow the tainted money of the telecommunications industry to sway you.

Don't "Cell" Out Our Children! Vote NO to cell towers on July 31!

Many people have asked me about the short speech I gave at the DeKalb Board of Education meeting in November of 2011 during the public comments portion of the meeting.  So, I'm reprinting it here as a reminder to everyone that the school board elections are right around the corner.

If  you do not know whether or not a candidate or incumbant would vote in favor or against a cell tower at your child's school or next to your home, I suggest you find out before deciding whether or not that person should be able to represent you.

My wife and I have been speaking out against cell towers on school grounds since one was proposed for our child's school last year.  After it was removed from consideration, we remained involved because we felt it was not right for these towers to be placed at any school in any part of our county.

Unfortunately, efforts made to ban the towers completely left us with a "non-binding advisory referendum" on the upcoming ballot.  While they call it an "advisory" referendum, you know that means it will likely be used to determine which areas of DeKalb will be the best places for them to try putting up the next round of towers once the first 8 go up. (Smoke Rise, Briarlake, ML King High, Princeton, Narvie J. Harris, Margaret Harris, Jolly, Flat Rock.)

There will be a question on the July 31 ballot about this issue.  It will ask you if the DeKalb School system should "place or operate telecommunications towers" at any public or charter school.  WE hope you will agree that putting children at risk from a health and safety standpoint should never be an option, no atter how deserate the county is for money.  You are urged to vote NO!

Please vote NO to "telecommunications towers" at any public school and warn others aabout the importance of showing up to vote July 31, or your school or neighborhood might be next!


Norcross 2011 cell tower fire (courtesy CBS Atlanta).

*****************************

COMMENT MADE DURING NOVEMBER 2011 BOE PUBLIC MEETING:

I would be cordial and greet you here tonight, but I know you guys don’t want to hear from me, but here it goes again.  It makes me sick that I even have to come up here and talk about cell towers.  As a father, it makes me sick to tell my daughter that her life would be at risk, whether you guys believe it or not.

You guys seem to think that it doesn’t show any risk factors.  But, I’m also a physical therapist and I work in a bone marrow unit and I work with leukemia patients every day.  Come in to my work if you don’t  think something like this exists.  Picture one of your loved ones sitting in that bed.  They can’t do anything, frail and weak.  They didn’t ask for it.  But, for some reason you guys think it is okay to expose children to this? I don’t get it.

I was also a boxer.  I have been in hundreds of fights.  And every time I think of what you guys have done, it feels like someone sucker punched me from behind.  And. I feel that way every day I have to think about this.

I got in my truck the day we found out.  I got in my truck and went to my neighbors with pen and paper and got signatures.  I said, “Did anybody tell you that this was going on?”  Not a single person knew.  Not a single one.  And we came and we told you guys that and you said, “Oh we haven’t seen any factors that we would think it would be dangerous.

B.S.   There is a dirty little secret and we are going to uncover it.  You are not going to get away with it.  I promise you that.   Again, it makes me sick that I even have to bring this up.  The fact that we’ve been lied to by our principal.  Let’s just talk about notification.  Our principal said, “We didn’t know anything.  We were just told to put the information in the children’s backpacks…. in my three year old’s backpack, isn’t that pleasant?  That’s a sweet thing in pre-K.

SO…. We go to the principal and she says, “We didn’t know.”  So we go to the PTA and they say “We didn’t know.”  And at first they are all up and arms about it and then they say, “We can’t take a stand on issues like this.”  So we are left in the dark.  So, we have to continue to seek the answers.

Not a single person has told me, not a single person, a positive that is coming out of this.  Except, “Oh, the schools are going get money.”  $25,000 hush money for the PTA?  That’s not acceptable.   The cost of somebody’s bone marrow transplant doesn’t cover the cost of a single payment that we will ever get.  I don’t get it.  

And, God forbid…  (pause)…  I don’t ever want to wish any illness on anybody, but again, come in to my work, step one foot in the bone marrow transplant unit and I guarantee you will rip those cell towers out of there.

(to the board) Bad people...  It’s not nice.

******************************************  end public comment

To watch the video of this and other protesters from the School Board Meeting last Novemer, go to:    http://view.liveindexer.com/ViewIndexSessionSLMQ.aspx?indexSessionSKU=MekWaHPZMrYBy4Wd4iUaZQ==

For more details, go to: www.GETtheCELLoutATL.org.  And, to learn about school board candidates who oppose cell towers on school grounds, you can also "like" us on Facebook.

Read more: CrossRoadsNews - entry Don t 34 Cell 34 Out Our Children Vote NO to Cell Towers on July 31

Erin Brockovich move over!

(click headline for full text)
The DeKalb School Watch Blog featured us back on August 4, 2011, in an article titled Get.the.Cell.Out and we just realized that we never linked to that write-up, which actually contained an excellent summary of what went down the evening of the DCSS vote.

Since the meeting summary and other details might be helpful to the people out there who might be just trying to catch up with everything, we thought it would be a good time to post a copy of that article here.  And, here is a link to their new site:  DeKalb School Watch Two.

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 and 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: MyFoxATLANTA.com

Annoymous Tips - More Towers to Come SOON!

(click headline to read full text of article.)  Unconfirmed right now, but the communites near Brockett Elementary School in Tucker and Sagamore Hills Elementary School in Atlanta should be alerted that they may be next on the cell tower hit list!

It has been reported annoymously that there are more cell tower sites being prepared right now with the majority of the schools and their communities completely unaware.  Rumors in the Brockett Elementary neighborhood in Tucker have turned up reports of ATT vehicles on every street at various times of the day.

Is the board retailiating against the community for speaking up instead of shutting up after their school was removed from the list? 

Some residents believe a cell tower build may be attempted and therefore anyone who hears such a rumor should contact their county officials to inquire about building permits on file.  If this is the case, we hope the neighborhoods can stick together and speak up for themselves.  But, is there anyone who will listen and take action to protect them?  The dead ends of this process have proven to be more frustrating than having to wait on hold for 30 minutes before ATT answers its helpline for DSL! 

It has also been rumored that M.L. King High School may soon receive a second tower, this one from Verizon Wireless.  Will this maddness ever stop?  Our schools, our homes, our property, our reputations, our hope for the future - it still isn't enough?  They want to take our last dollar and our lives, too, and they probably do not even need to have an Open Meeting to make that call either.

To review the Georgia Open Meetings Act, go here: 

http://sunshinereview.org/index.php/Georgia_Open_Meetings_Act

Minority Groups Really, Really, Love Telecom Consolidation! (NOT!)

(click headline for the full story)
(ATT Rolls Out Astroturf to Push for T-Mobile Deal)
by Karl Bode Tuesday 12-Apr-2011
Reprinted with permission
One of the most effective ways the phone companies have gotten what they want politically over the years is to fake the fact that they have consumer support for often anti-consumer policies. This is done via PR, farmed think tank science, hired bloggers (who don't allow comments), fake consumer groups and astroturf (fake grass roots) campaigns. Such efforts can make it appear that anti-consumer positions -- such as the elimination of consumer protection laws -- have broad consumer support. Another tool at their disposal is the "co-opting" of existing groups. Groups receive significant sums of money from these providers, and regurgitate their positions on political matters as a favor.

Randall Stephenson, CEO and president of ATT,
and Rene Obermann, CEO of Deutsche Telekom AG

With their bottomless lobbying budget ATT is the largest player in this shady space, over the years using phony consumer groups to cheer for metered billing, or senior citizens groups (run by ex bell marketing execs) to fight against network neutrality (the process by which all information on the Internet is delivered at the same speed, regardless of which service provider you use to access the web). They can also take the form of a phony opposition group, or infiltrate a real one, with the intention to make a lot of noise in order to drown out the voices of true opposition groups, then leading the opposition down a dead end, and stopping members from taking action independent from the group as they believe they are being represented well.

With ATT's proposed acquisition of T-Mobile immensely unpopular, it's not surprising to see ATT firing up their disinformation engine to try and pretend the deal has broad support. That has involved ATT using groups like The Hispanic Institute whose website suggests they simply adore less competition in the wireless space:
“The proposed merger of ATT and T-Mobile will move us closer to universal mobile broadband deployment. When we consider how essential mobile technology is to empowering communities, we conclude that this proposal is good for Hispanic America...it creates an opportunity to harness and support America’s innovation economy. Moreover, it provides an opportunity to amplify the growth in mobile broadband adoption by both English and Spanish speaking Americans.”
You'll find very similar gushing for the deal by the Latino Coalition:
“The proposed merger of ATT and T-Mobile holds great promise for all Americans, and especially those of Hispanic heritage.”

The similarity in language is, of course, because these groups are being told what to say by ATT. One DC insider informs us that rumblings on K Street suggest ATT had called every civil rights group in the United States for support within fifteen minutes of the deal being announced. Fearful of losing ATT donations -- most of these groups quickly got to parroting prepared ATT statements, unconcerned about the actual impact of a T-Mobile deal. Getting funding for a new events center apparently dulls any ethical pangs felt using your organization as a hired stage prop.

As we've noted, ATT's acquisition of T-Mobile does virtually none of what ATT suggests it will accomplish, has little to no impact on national next-generation wireless deployment, and aside from satisfying ATT's desire for relentless acquisition and expansion -- offers few if any benefits to anyone -- especially consumers.

What the deal will do is reduce competition, raise prices and degrade the quality of service for T-Mobile users, something any real Latino or minority group worth its salt would find runs contrary to their constituents' best interests.


GLAAD Drops Support For ATT Deal With T-Mobile After Activists Speak Up

Sarah Lai StirlandJuly 13, 2011, 9:33 PM  reprinted in part

The Gay Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD,) reversed its support for ATT’s proposed merger with T-Mobile Wednesday after its initial endorsement of the deal caused an uproar within its own community.

“A rigorous review process considered GLAAD’s unique mission and concluded that while ATT has a strong record of support for the LGBT community, the explanation used to support this particular merger was not sufficiently consistent with GLAAD’s work to advocate for positive and culture-changing LGBT stories and images in the media,” said Mike Thompson, GLAAD’s Acting President in a Wednesday press statement.

Thompson sent a letter to the Federal Communications Commission Wednesday after an initial supportive May missive from his predecessor Jarrett Barrios.

That letter caused a firestorm of controversy within the activist community, members of whom believed that GLAAD had been bought off by AT&T’s charitable donations.

POLITICO reported early June that GLAAD had received $50,000 from ATT. It also noted that many other non-profit groups supporting the merger had received money from the telecommunications company.

Comments

when will you start supporting the merger, and how much did you cost?

I would have a high sell out price myself, but i don't run a website or anything, so i won't get any offers.

how does one get hired as a corporate shill, i wonder?

________________________________________________

have they ever approached this website with an offer? i'd be curious how much they have hinted at before being told to pack sand.

________________________________________________

Even someone in kindergarten could figure out that taking away competition brings nobody closer to so-called universal or near universal broadband. Verizon will get there all by itself whether the merger occurs or not. Besides what difference does it make if T-Mobile plus AT&T equals 100 percent coverage or AT&T (after gobbling up T-Mobile) on its own equals 100 percent. 100 is 100 no matter how many companies are involved. There is absolutely no logic to AT&T's position and it gives me a headache thinking about the shills who support it.

__________________________________________________

Jonesboro, AR Re: Dumb

But we are dealing with pre-K minds in CONgress.

__________________________________________________

@rr.com Re: Dumb

pro is the opposite of con, thus congress is the opposite of progress.

said by mtech:But we are dealing with pre-K minds in CONgress.

__________________________________________________

·Millenicom

What AT&T means is universal higher prices!

Once the merger takes place what an excellent opportunity for AT&T to conspire with Verizon to raise prices. By the way why hasn't any government regulator asked why the contractual prices both carriers charge are basically the same.

__________________________________________________

Re: What AT&T means is universal higher prices!

said by Mr Matt:contractual prices both carriers charge are basically the same.

Because it's not.

The base plans might appear to be the same but when you factor in the differences between them (rollover for AT&T, friends and family for Verizon, mobile to mobile for each carrier) the actual per-minute cost you wind up paying will vary depending on your needs and usage.

Nor do they charge the same for data since the last time I checked Verizon still has unlimited plans for smartphones and AT&T doesn't.

__________________________________________________

payoffs take away our rights to at&t

So att can payoff everyone in usa. Well bottom line is they sold off their rights to company that bite you later. HOPE ALL THE SELL OUT GROUPS ENJOY THE PRICE THEY HAVE TO PAY FOR SERVICE LATER. THANKS for how you treat your follow poor and middle class to not being able to pay att service later. Hope you calls drops like the do now forever guys.

__________________________________________________

Marietta, GA I really have been shocked at the dishonestly

that AT&T has used . The Latino support media blitz was a real eye opener . The headlines that went to multiple sources never really said anything about supporting the merger . It had catch phrases like it " recognizes " the positive this or that . This merger would hurt Latinos maybe more than any other group . A GSM standard seems like it would benefit them more than any other group . I wonder what the fringe latino groups got just for letting their name be used ? The other blitz I noticed was how it is able to roll out the " most advanced mobile broadband experience" to this city or that city due to this merger . Thus the merger is good for you . I never really noticed the lengths a company would go though to deceive from the CEO down. Just really evil stuff . Everyone will pay more if this merger goes through indeed . Just really shocked at how this merger has grabbed my attention . It almost has a good vs evil feel.

__________________________________________________

Hello! That's why AT&T is a.k.a. "The Death Star". Just look at their logo

__________________________________________________

AT&T is right! If they control all the pipes they can spoon feed us via walled gardens/portals.

It will be a more open internet, because it'll be their version of it

Welcome to the future!

__________________________________________________

Why do members of minority groups allow for other groups, which may or may not hold their individual interests at heart, to speak for them? Why do these organizations get to be allowed to "state" with what "everyone" in that particular minority group is "supposed" to be thinking?

--

"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service.

__________________________________________________

Re: You Know

said by pnh102:Why do members of minority groups allow for other groups, which may or may not hold their individual interests at heart, to speak for them?

There are many rea$on$ why any group, minority or not, allow corporation$ to $uggest talking point$ to them. Merger or no merger, The Hispanic Institute and The Latino Coalition aren't really directly affected. $o if they pro$titute them$elve$ as corporate mouthpiece$, they really don't hurt their member$hip on way or another.

__________________________________________________

Hazelwood, MO I guess it is the same reason in that a corporation gets to speak for its stock holders and make it's (current board) political opinions known.

Lets ignore the fact that not every stock owner of the company is even a US citizen having US voting rights (thus should not have any say) and every US owner already has a vote and is able to speak on their own with their own donations.

__________________________________________________

If you can't convince 'em, confuse 'em

__________________________________________________

said by pnh102:Why do members of minority groups allow for other groups, which may or may not hold their individual interests at heart, to speak for them? Why do these organizations get to be allowed to "state" with what "everyone" in that particular minority group is "supposed" to be thinking?

They get to do it, because in the US it has been legal forever to sell your support to anyone you want to. I am sure they all see it as getting a piece of the corporate pie any way they can. Can't get good jobs in these companies like AT&T & Verizon, so take a payoff instead. At least they get something.

__________________________________________________

At the end of the day, GREEN is the only color that counts

AT&T has the cash to buy comments from consumer groups, bloggers and so-called minority groups. When you think it is a black and white issue, simply follow the money trail and you will see it is really a GREEN issue. The question that AT&T asks is how much green can we get?

--

A citizen of The United States of Amnesia. How quickly we forget.

__________________________________________________

kudos:2 Wow, SOMEONE doesn't like AT&T

As a T-Mobile customer I'm not thrilled about the takeover, but could this writing be any more biased and

__________________________________________________

Re: Wow, SOMEONE doesn't like AT&T

said by quatrix:As a T-Mobile customer I'm not thrilled about the takeover, but could this writing be any more biased and inciting?

__________________________________________________

Oh hey you must be new here.

__________________________________________________



kudos:4 i HATE T not because its "cool to hate at&t" but because of years of crap service.

The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese

__________________________________________________

Mobile, AL makes me sick

It makes me sick to send AT&T my hard earned money every month. Their dishonesty is enough for me to switch carriers. When VZW deploys LTE in my market I'm gone.

__________________________________________________

I am just wondering if they are buying T-Mobile as a band-aid solution to their broken network and they will just let it fall into further disrepair once the two networks are merged.

__________________________________________________·Verizon FiOS

how abouts that astro turf:

at&t's new salespitch men: Mit Romney and (J.J.) Jimmie Walker...

__________________________________________________

After you become an AT&T customer, you will feel like Florida Evans:

»www.youtube.com/watch?v=ap5Sw3xsZhU

__________________________________________________

A citizen of The United States of Amnesia. How quickly we forget.

permalink · 2011-04-13 11:36:22

__________________________________________________

AT&T... really? Smart people can already figure out this is a good thing, as long as the FCC puts some conditions on it.... why the need for astroturf? It just makes you look bad, AT&T.

It doesn't really affect different groups particularly differently, if anything the affects are different urban vs. suburban/rural, but urban T-Mobile customers have the most to gain, although AT&T customers have a lot to gain too.

__________________________________________________



Marietta, GA Re: oooookay

I'm an urban T-Mo customer & the only thing I feel that will be gained is the size of my bill . I have what I want , a GSM phone with stellar rates & great service . A T-Mo customer will not come out ahead . The astroturf & AT&T's refusal to guarantee our rates while continually bring up that rates in theory should be dropping is just validation that in the end we will be getting hamered in this deal .

__________________________________________________

Re: oooookay

Why do you think you are entitled to cut-rate prices when you will gain the amazing coverage and superior building penetration of AT&T Mobility's nationwide network?

Rates per se won't drop, but rates relative to the speed, coverage, and quality of service have dropped significantly and will continue to drop in the future.

AT&T shouldn't rate guarantee Magenta SIMs just like they didn't for Blue SIMs. If you want a new phone, you should have to get an Orange SIM and an Orange plan. However, I would also say that AT&T should be required to unlock your Magenta devices so that they can work on Orange as a backup phone or whatever. Even 3G devices will work fine on EDGE post-AWS 3G.

__________________________________________________

Also, Orange plans have Rollover, A-List (which T-Mobile ironically invented and then killed with MyFaves), and AnyMobile, while Magenta plans don't.

__________________________________________________

I think they should clean out all the legacy as quickly as possible. And if that means losing our 850 minute legacy Orange plan too, that's fine. AnyMobile would probably even it out with the current 700 minute plan anyways.

_________________________________________________

Marietta, GA Re: oooookay

I think I'm entitled to keep my plan . I have fine coverage & speed right now . Why do YOU and AT&T feel entitled to buy the company I do business with ? Entitled ? If AT&T didn't feel so entitled they wouldn't have to buy out the only national GSM competition . They would work on their infrastructure & have real customer service not telemarketers . But they do feel entitled . Thats why they are sending another wave of lobbyists to Washington right now as I type . I guess we will see if anti trust still exists . What makes you sure this merger will benefit you ?

__________________________________________________

You're entitled to keep it for the remainder of your contract OR to be let out of your contract. I've had great customer service experiences at Corporate stores, better than the rest of the sleazeballs out there who sell cell phones.

I get more coverage. I get more efficiency. I get more spectrum. I get more capacity. I get more cell sites. I get more backhaul. I get a larger selection of phones. I get better competition since it throws the current duopoly off balance.

AT&T already has the best coverage and the fastest data of the two carriers, this is just going to make them even more awesome. Now Verizon will be in the position AT&T was in a few years back with a newer, faster technology, but more limited coverage, except that AT&T has built out blazing-fast 3G to virtually everywhere anyone goes (even though it is still less than probably 40% of the network land area wise).

__________________________________________________

Re: oooookay

Keep gorging on that corporate kool-aid. How does the elimination of competition bring better competition? AT&T may do some nice things to keep the FCC off their backs but once the deal is given the PASS stamp the real raping will begin.

More capacity, more spectrum? Faster data rates? So you can hit the draconian 2GB limit faster? Coverage is debatable, since you have done nothing to back up your claim that AT&T+T-mo will actually have any significant increase in coverage, since we don't know how much of it actually overlaps.

__________________________________________________



Marietta, GA It doesn't benefit AT&T or T-Mobile customers to have only one GSM provider . You seem to be suggesting that by having less competition you are getting more . I suspect unfortunately that this merger will go through . I more than suspect AT&T won't come out of this looking good . AT&T's unpopularity after this takeover might do more to " throw the current duopoly off balance " than anything else . 10's of millions of TMO customers are livid about this merger & there is growing sentiment that this falls under anti-trust .

__________________________________________________



Jackson, MI BiggA has a Verizon phone. He just wants the deal to go through so your service can go down in flames. Now that I think about it, so do I.

__________________________________________________

·Comcast

It brings better competition two ways:

1. Most people need a carrier with a true nationwide network, and low-band spectrum. There are two of those. This throws the duopoly, which is near deadlock now, and has been for years, completely off balance.

2. Sprint and T-Mobile are scraping at too small of a market to both be financially sustainable and build out a world-class 4G network. Now Sprint will be able to sweep up the lower-cost less coverage market while AT&T and Verizon duke it out at the top.

More spectrum and more tower both equal more capacity. This is fundamental and basic to wireless services.

The coverage boosts are all in urban areas, where they don't have the same tower sites. They will end up with a lot more tower sites.
It probably won't help on street, but in-building will increase a lot. Out in more suburban/rural areas, it won't help AT&T very much, although T-Mobile has been more aggressive in the last couple of years in building new towers, and does have a number of sites that AT&T hasn't gotten on yet.

What you people don't get is that NO ONE CARES about the whole GSM vs. CDMA thing. 95% of people don't KNOW THE DIFFERENCE, and even then, most people buy a phone from their carrier, AND there are VERY FEW phones that currently have both AWS and NAM. I know that all of my phones are NAM only, so they are effectively locked to AT&T in the US.

Correction: 10's of T-Mobile customers are livid. There's somehow still a lot of people who don't know this is going on, and after that, the majority either support it or don't really care.

This is NOT anti-trust. HOWEVER, I hope that the FCC puts some strict rules on ALL of T-Mobile's spectrum (which would basically carry over to AT&T's since the networks and spectrum will be combined and managed as one) about overage fees, bill monitoring, allowing SIM cards in any device and allowing tethering, open application access on platforms that support it (Android), and the like. This would be a win for everyone involved, and usher in even better mobile services.

__________________________________________________

If this merger is approved, I'll will be either dropping service completely or, dare I say it, switch to Sprint or __________________________________________________

@comcast.net What ignorance

There's an old name that keeps ringing in my head ..."Ma Bell" seems like we're taking several steps backwards. I'm all for competition. With competition, we the users can benefit from cheaper services. If we only had one company offering telecom do you really think rates would be so affordable? with T-mobile gone, the only other major carriers up for grabs will be Sprint and US cellular. We keep going on this path all we will have is VZ and ATT, their argument, we can't compete because they are bigger...common when does this stop. In the meantime most people forget that the way of the merger means less jobs. When did we start preaching comptetition isn't good?

__________________________________________________

New Jersey

kudos:1 maybe 100 % consoliation ?

Have ATT merge with Verizon and Sprint, and all the others. Of course data access prices would drop ? - sarc !

__________________________________________________

Shallow Astroturfing (The So-called Precusor Blog)

I just tried six times to post the following message on the Precursor Blog by Scott Cleland (www.precusorblog.com):

"I used to live in the UAE which had a single state run phone company (Etisilat). When the World Trade Organization required competition, they created a second primarily state owned phone company (Du) and nothing changed. ATT and Verizon may compete, but they generally march in lock step thereby denying customer choice. They are essentially our version of the UAE companies mentioned above. Canada has three large providers (Bell, Rogers, and Telus), but Canada found that there was inadequate competition and pried the doors open for new competitors Wind and Public who are shaking things up. A duopoly is very much the same as a monopoly. While your position is well argued, I just don't see it."

As the poster of the original article correctly noted, the precusor blog appears to be deliberately rigged to stop posting while maintaining the appearance that posting is permitted. Everytime I tried to post to the blog, Mr. Cleland's blog said I was not filling out the captcha correctly or that I wasn't hearing the audio captcha correctly.

I hope people who are searching for articles to get a sense of public opinion about the proposed ATT and TMobile merger do not regard Mr. Cleland's views is representatives or accepted because no one has "chosen" to put a post up on his "precusor blog."

Stu

__________________________________________________

Miami, FL Re: Shallow Astroturfing (The So-called Precusor Blog)

You mean the Google is the most evil company in America blog?

Scott doesn't care about the truth. Just that his checks from the telecomunication companies keeps rolling in.

_________________________________________________

kudos:29 Re: Shallow Astroturfing (The So-called Precusor Blog)

The frightening thing is he continues to be called before Congress as an objective and independent sector analyst.

__________________________________________________

Do they really think MORE cell towers will solve the problem?

(click headline for the full story)

Georgia AFTER ...
Note the entire area of Atlanta is solid in color from all the cell towers. 
The worst part?  This map is from 2005! 
Map reprinted with permission from Steelinttheair.com

Georgia BEFORE

Delivery of Petition: DEADLINE EXTENDED: SIGN BY MIDNIGHT on Jan. 11, 2012

If you have comments or specific conerns about the cell tower planned for your school or community, please sign the countywide petition as soon as possible.

The link is at the top left of this website.

Your comments will be included and your name is allowed to remain annoymous online (as well as all your contact details).

The comments of all communities will be compiled and delivered to all the parties at T-mobile, the school board and our local and state government who have input into this process.


NOTE: Even if your comments do not stop the tower, you may still have the right for your specific concerns to be addressed before the construction can begin.


If you or anyone you know needs convincing about the dangers of cell phone use, please watch this video, and spend some time researhing this topic on your own. There are many precautions you can take to reduce the radiation you and your family are exposed to on a daily basis. It is worth a little extra time to learn what you can so you can make informed choices about how to stand up for your own rights and the rights of others.

Industry research is a one-sided story. You need to hear the opposing side - those with loved ones who have suffered as a result of what can only be attributed to cell phones or cell towers. Remember, many cases are still tied up in litigation and the victims cannot discuss the topic until a decision has been reached. Many cases have been settled already and the litigants are bound to a gag-order as part of the judgment award. There is still a report from the World Health Organization scheduled for 2012 release.

Do not lose sight that Amerian citizens have more rights than businesses, unless we agree to give them up.


CLICK PHOTO TO PLAY VIDEO: OR GO TO:  http://youtu.be/zLt7wdipLUA

First "Due Diligence" Period Expected to End Thursday

(click headline for the full story)  If you have any objections to a cell tower slated to go up at your child's school, it is best that you get those objections into writing and into the hands of the DeKalb County Director of Planning or the Director of Public Works before this Thursday, January 12.

Jan. 7 protest of T-mobile by Dekalb residents and parents
highlights the unethical business practices of the company
that has been approved to build cell towers at 9 public schools
against the wishes of community and without proper
notification of the taxpayers.

GTCO-ATL speculates that the end of the first due diligence period for T-mobile could be THIS THURSDAY, January 12, 2012!!! This will be six months from the day the contract was expected to be signed (July 12, 2011). And, that means one of two things can occur next at these sites: a 6 month extention on the due diligence period OR construction of the eavesments or actual tower will begin.

Any affected community needs to be prepared to photograh any signs of construction if you ever wish to claim that the tower will have a visual impact on your view from your home. And, if you were not properly notified, you can file a temporary restraining order quickly to stop the work before it is too late.

This worked in Cobb County and can buy you anywhere from 30 - 90 days to consult with an attorney.  If you have specific questions, please email sayno2celltowers@yahoo.com and we will do our best to help you find the answers.

Special Administrative Permit in DeKalb County Means No Need to Notify the Public

(click headline for the full story)

NEW CALL TO ACTION FOR ALL GTCO-ATL FOLLOWERS:

Contact the Director of Public Works,

in writing and by phone to oppose  the use of

the Special Administrative Permit

for our school cell towers!

Demand Transparency!  Demand Accountabilitty! 

Demand ethical treatment by your elected officials!

Cell towers must be zoned using a Special Land Use permit

which has much more stringent rules that must be followed.

It includes and entire sction dedicated to cll towers!

DeKalb County Public Works Department
Director's and Administration Office
330 West Ponce de Leon Avenue, 4th Floor
Decatur, GA 30030

Director's Office - (404) 371-4778
FAX - (404) 371-4761
CODE
County of
DEKALB, GEORGIA

Codified through
Ordinance No. 11-08, enacted June 28, 2011.
(Supp. No. 42)           

  Go to Sec. 27-779. - Telecommunications towers and antennas.

Applications in all cases where the telecommunications tower or antenna is a use which may be authorized by special administrative permit shall be made to and decided by the director of public works pursuant to all standards and requirements contained within this section, in Article V of this chapter, and any other applicable section of this chapter.

…

No new tower shall be permitted unless the applicant demonstrates to the reasonable satisfaction of the director of public works in the case of application for a special administrative permit or the board of commissioners in the case of application for a special land use permit that no existing tower or structure can accommodate the applicant's proposed antenna. Evidence shall be submitted at the time of application for special administrative permit or special land use permit, as the case may be, which demonstrates that no existing tower or structure can accommodate the applicant's proposed antenna…

FOX5 VIDEO: "Get the Cell Out - Atlanta" Formed to Alert Other Schools About Cell Tower Decision

By KAITLYN PRATT/myfoxatlanta

(click headline for the full story)

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

Updated: Tuesday, 23 Aug 2011, 12:57 PM EDT
Published : Tuesday, 23 Aug 2011, 12:29 PM EDT
Reporter: Kaitlyn Pratt

DEKALB COUNTY, Ga. - T-Mobile is getting a "busy signal" from some residents in DeKalb County in answer to proposed cell towers planned near elementary schools.

"When did schools become a profit center for commercial business?" asked Cheryl Miller who is against cell phone towers.

There is outrage over the possibility of cell phone towers at schools in DeKalb County.
"One hundred fifty feet in the air - a 60 by 60 base. In the middle of their neighborhood," said Miller.

Cheryl Miller said Briarlake Elementary is one of nine campuses where the DeKalb County School Board approved T-Mobile to build during a July meeting vote.

"If it's nine this year, it could be nine more next year," said Miller.

Miller is concerned about radiation levels and property values. She is working to spread information about the proposed sites through a group, "Get the Cell Out."

"Just because the school board has agreed to lease their property at these nine schools - does not mean T Mobile will get the zoning permits necessary."

But T-Mobile isn't getting a "busy" signal from all residents. Those in favor of placing towers at the nine schools say the money paid by T-Mobile each month will bring much needed funds into DeKalb County's school district.

Supporters add each of the PTA's of those schools will receive a $25,000 donation; money they say could help DeKalb's students.

Both sides will have a chance to voice their opinions at a zoning hearing in the next few months. A date has not been set yet.

Twelve DeKalb schools were originally on the list for possible tower locations. Neighbors signed petitions to have three campuses removed.

Original title of article on FOX5 website: Opinions Divided Over Cell Towers at DeKalb Schools (We did not think "divided" was a fair way to represent this issue, so we re-wrote the title for our blog site purposes.)

WSB-TV NEWS VIDEO: Fight Brews Over Cell Towers On School Grounds

The Fight Continues Over Cell Towers On School Grounds

(click headline for the full story)

George Howell reporting, Channel 2

Updated: 10:22 a.m. Monday, July 11, 2011

Click photo above to play video.

WSB-TV, Channel 2 Action News,  has finally re-posted the original newscast that aired July 10, 2011, in the 11 p.m. news and then again several of the newscasts the following day leading right up until the DeKalb County school board's vote that evening at the public meeting. Thank you to Channel 2 and George Howell for taking an interest in our story and helping us get the word out to others.

Immediately following the vote, we were interviewed in the parking lot outside the "Palace" and the so-called "partial victory" was announced.  We were surprised that Brockett was taken off the list as we had assumed that the fate of all the schools had already been pre-determined.  At one point, the board members discussed removing some or even all of the other schools which we had been advocating for from the very beginning.  Because that did not happen, we decided to stay involved with this issue and follow it through to the end, whatever that may be.  

The transcript of the story is below:

DEKALB COUNTY, Ga. — Parents opposed to a proposal to put cell phone towers on DeKalb County school grounds worked to spread the word Sunday.The fight will be resolved in a school board vote Monday.

With a petition in hand, Paul and Cheryl Miller gathered as many signatures as possible against putting a cellphone tower behind Brockett Elementary School, where their daughter attended Pre-kindergarten.

"This is putting her health in danger, and absolutely, this is why I am speaking out and I hope others will do the same," Cheryl Miller told Channel 2's George Howell.

The other schools on the table include Brockett, Briarlake, Flat Rock, Jolly, Medlock, Meadowview, Narvie J. Harris, Princeton and Smoke Rise elementary schools, Margaret Harris Center and Martin Luther King Jr. and Lakeside high schools.

Cheryl Miller said she's concerned about radiation emitted from the tower and questions why T-Mobile, which is in the process of being acquired by ATT, needs a tower in a residential area.

"We don't see why our school would possibly be one of the ones that would help," she said. She said she’s concerned that not enough parents are informed of the issue.

"Most people aren't even aware that this is probably going to happen," she said. DeKalb School Board Chair Tom Bowen said there have been several meetings discussing health concerns.

"We've received a significant amount of feedback, but based upon the information that we've received, the safety, which is of paramount concern of the district, is within acceptable levels," Bowen told Howell.

Signs of Soil Testing at Margaret Harris Comprehensive School

(click headline for the full story)  Despite the community's recent objections to the DeKalb County School Board, it appears as though T-mobile has started the soil testing process which is one of the steps they need to complete in order to apply for the Special Administrative Permit that they expect will be "rubber stamped" in a closed meeting with the Interim Director of Planning & Sustainability, Andrew Baker, sometime this month or early first quarter. 

The community members have started their own Facebook page at: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Briarcliff-Heights-Community-Action-Group/278307285544800?ref=ts. We are rooting for them to catch up quickly so we can pass them the ball and let them run it in for a touchdown! If they can stop their tower, that means there is still hope for the other schools, too, so don't give up if you are still trying to find a way to oppose the tower near you! Seek legal advice outside of the county if you are having trouble finding council in DeKalb. Many land use and environmental attorneys here are already working on retainer with a cell company and cannot accept a job that would be a conflict of interest.

Signs of land distrubing activity in expectation of a T-mobile tower took place in the Briarcliff Heights neighborhood which is located in a part of Atlanta that is considered to be unincorporated DeKalb County. 

An important distinction to make is that between three similar sounding schools that have all been a part of the cell tower protest:  Brockett Elementary School is located in Tucker.  Community members there rallied early and were able to have their school removed from the school board's list in July.  By August, these parents started organizing an outreach campaign to inform the communities surronding the 9 schools still on the school board's list. 

The first school that Brockett Elementary, via Get the Cell Out - Atlanta Chapter, reached out to assist was Briarlake Elementary School in an unincorporated part of DeKalb that uses the name of Decatur.  And, just recently members of GTCO-ATL were successful in reaching the Margaret Harris School in Atlanta, a community known as Briarcliff Heights.  To make matters even more confusing, Lakeside High School, the school that reportedly started the initial inquires into placing cell towers at schools to assist with their dropped call issues, is located in Atlanta on Briarcliff Road.

If you can keep all those "B's" straight, we'll give you an "A" for effort!