Yes, a Cell Tower Will Lower Property Values. And, Yes, Lower Property Values Result in Less Money for the Operating Fund of Our Public Schools

We have been talking about the many, many reasons why there might be some upset people when they wake up in DeKalb County, after an overwhelming majority of voters sent a clear message that we do not want T-mobile towers on our school grounds... only to see a giant cell tower going up right outside their window. 

One good reason they might be concerned is that their property values, already taking a beating, might get even worse.  And, they would probably be justified in thinking that way.

 

Who would want to live right next to one of these things, seriously?

 

The DeKalb County School Board Chairman Dr. Eugene Walker said he would take one in his front yard, but that was before a cell tower in Lilburn caught fire and fell over.  He probably had second thoughts after he saw that happen.

 

And imagine what it’s like for people who purchase or build their dream home or neighborhood, only to later have an unwanted cell tower installed just outside their window? 

This negative effect can also contribute to urban blight, a deterioration of neighborhoods and school districts that can happen when residents move away or pull their children out of school because they do not want to spend so much time near urban health hazards, like cell towers.

People don’t want to live next to one not just because of health concerns, but also due to aesthetics and public safety reasons.  Cell towers become eyesores, obstructing or tarnishing cherished views, and also can attract crime, are potential noise nuisances, and fire and fall hazards.  There is also concern for injuries to people and property on the ground below a cell tower in winter as ice and debris often accumulate up top, then fall to the ground as the weather gets warmer throughout the day. 

 

These points underscore why wireless facilities are commercial / industrial facilities that don't belong in residential areas, parks and schools.  In addition, your county officials have the power to regulate the placement and appearance of cell towers, as long as such discrimination is not unreasonable, and especially if you show them that you already have coverage in your area.


A recent map of the U.S. was released by the FCC to show the areas deficient in 3G wirelss coverage and guess what... DeKalb County, GA, was not on it!  So even the FCC has your back on this one, DeKalb... we are NOT considered to be deficient in our current coverage.  These towers are simply not needed.  They are just an attempt to gain closer proximity to our homes and to push their 4G coverage products on us without consumer demand for them.  This mindset is the opposite of safe cell siting procedures.  The FCC clearly defines the "need" for a tower as something that must come before the approval to build.  That's why T-mobile wants to go around the standard process and use our schools as their accomplice.  They don't care about the fact that children will lose playground space or that their health might be at risk.  They care about profit and nothing else.


Putting cell towers near residential properties is just bad business.
*  For residential owners, it means decreased property values.
*  For local businesses (realtors and brokers) representing and listing these properties, it will create decreased income.
*  For county governments, it results in decreased revenue (property taxes).
*  For state and local school boards, it results in abandonment of schools and distrust of elected officials.

 

Read this New York Times news story, "A Pushback Against Cell Towers," published in the paper's Real Estate section, on August 27, 2010:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/29/realestate/29Lizo.html?_r=1&ref=realestate. 

 

A number of organizations and studies have documented the detrimental effects of cell towers on property values.  

 

1.  The Appraisal Institute, the largest global professional membership organization for appraisers with 91 chapters throughout the world, spotlighted the issue of cell towers and the fair market value of a home and educated its members that a cell tower should, in fact, cause a decrease in home value. 

The definitive work on this subject was done by Dr. Sandy Bond, who concluded that "media attention to the potential health hazards of [cellular phone towers and antennas] has spread concerns among the public, resulting in increased resistance" to sites near those towers.

 

Percentage decreases mentioned in the study range from 2 to 20% with the percentage moving toward the higher range the closer the property.

 

These are a few of her studies:

 

• a. "The effect of distance to cell phone towers on house prices" by Sandy Bond, Appraisal Journal, Fall 2007, see attached. Source, Appraisal Journal, found on the Entrepreneur website,  http://www.prres.net/papers/Bond_Squires_Using_GIS_to_Measure.pdf
• Sandy Bond, Ph.D., Ko-Kang Wang, “The Impact of Cell Phone Towers on House Prices in Residential Neighborhoods,” The Appraisal Journal, Summer 2005; see attached. Source: Goliath business content website, http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-5011857/The-impact-of-cell-phone.html
• Sandy Bond also co-authored, "Cellular Phone Towers: Perceived impact on residents and property values" University of Auckland, paper presented at the Ninth Pacific-Rim Real Estate Society Conference, Brisbane, Australia, January 19-22, 2003; see attached. Source: Pacific Rim Real Estate Society website, http://www.prres.net/Papers/Bond_The_Impact_Of_Cellular_Phone_Base_Station_Towers_On_Property_Values.pdf

2. Industry Canada (Canadian government department promoting Canadian economy), “Report On the National Antenna Tower Policy Review, Section D — The Six Policy Questions, Question 6. What evidence exists that property values are impacted by the placement of antenna towers?”; see attached. Source: Industry Canada http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf08353.html website,

 

3. New Zealand Ministry for the Environment, “Appendix 5: The Impact of Cellphone Towers on Property Values”; see attached. Source: New Zealand Ministry for the Environment website, http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/rma/nes-telecommunications-section32-aug08/html/page12.html

 

 

On a local level, taxpayers have informed local school board, county government and administrative offices and state legislative officials.

 

1.  Santa Cruz, CA: Also attached is a story about how a preschool closed up because of a cell tower installed on its grounds; “Santa Cruz Preschool Closes Citing Cell Tower Radiation,” Santa Cruz Sentinel, May 17, 2006; Source, EMFacts website: http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/?p=466.

 

2.  Merrick, NY:  For a graphic illustration of what we don't want happening here in DeKalb County, just look at Merrick, NY, where NextG wireless facilities are being installed, resulting in declining home real estate values.  Look at this Best Buyers Brokers Realty website ad from this area,  “Residents of Merrick, Seaford and Wantaugh Complain Over Perceived Declining Property Values: http://www.bestbuyerbroker.com/blog/?p=86.

 

3.  Burbank, CA: As for Burbank,  at a City Council public hearing on December 8, 2009, hillside resident and a California licensed real estate professional Alex Safarian informed city officials that local real estate professionals he spoke with agree about the adverse effects the proposed cell tower would have on property values:

 

"I’ve done research on the subject and as well as spoken to many real estate professionals in the area, and they all agree that there’s no doubt that cell towers negatively affect real estate values.  Steve Hovakimian, a resident near Brace park, and a California real estate broker, and the publisher of “Home by Design” monthly real estate magazine, stated that he has seen properties near cell towers lose up to 10% of their value due to proximity of the cell tower...So even if they try to disguise them as tacky fake metal pine trees, as a real estate professional you’re required by the California Association of Realtors: that sellers and licensees must disclose material facts that affect the value or desirability of a property including conditions that are known outside and surrounding areas."

 

(See City of Burbank Website, Video, Alex Safarian comments @ 6:24:28, http://burbank.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=6&clip_id=848)

 

Indeed, 27 Burbank real estate professionals in December 2009, signed a petition/statement offering their professional opinion that the proposed T-Mobile cell tower at Brace Canyon Park would negatively impact the surrounding homes, stating:

 

"It is our professional opinion that cell towers decrease the value of homes in the area tremendously.  Peer reviewed research also concurs that cell sites do indeed cause a decrease in home value.  We encourage you to respect the wishes of the residents and deny the proposed T-Mobile lease at this location.  We also request that you strengthen your zoning ordinance regarding wireless facilities like the neighboring city of Glendale has done, to create preferred and non preferred zones that will protect the welfare of our residents and their properties as well as Burbank's real estate business professionals and the City of Burbank.  Higher property values mean more tax revenue for the city, which helps improve our city."

 

(Submitted to City Council,  Planning Board, City Manager, City Clerk and other city officials via e-mail on June 18, 2010.  To see a copy of this, scroll down to bottom of page and click "Subpages" or go here: http://sites.google.com/site/nocelltowerinourneighborhood/home/decreased-real-estate-value/burbank-real-estate-professionals-statement )

4.  And, of course, you can look at our website, www.GETtheCELLoutATL.org for  the long history we have had of fighting for the rights of our schools, children and neighborhoods here in DeKalb County, GA, a suburb area near Atlanta.

 

Here is a list of additional articles on how cell towers negatively affect the property values of homes near them:

 

 •The Observer (U.K.), "Phone masts blight house sales: Health fears are alarming buyers as masts spread across Britain to meet rising demand for mobiles," Sunday May 25, 2003 or go here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2003/may/25/houseprices.uknews

 

• “Cell Towers Are Sprouting in Unlikely Places,” The New York Times, January 9, 2000 (fears that property values could drop between 5 and 40 percent because of neighboring cell towers)

 

•“Quarrel over Phone Tower Now Court’s Call,” Chicago Tribune, January 18, 2000 (fear of lowered property values due to cell tower)

 

•“The Future is Here, and It’s Ugly: a Spreading of Techno-blight of Wires, Cables and Towers Sparks a Revolt,” New York Times, September 7, 2000

 

•“Tower Opponents Ring Up a Victory," by Phil Brozynski, in the Barrington [Illinois] Courier-Review, February 15, 1999, 5,  reporting how the Cuba Township assessor reduced the value of twelve homes following the construction of a cell tower in Lake County, IL.  See attached story: http://spot.colorado.edu/~maziara/appeal&attachments/Newton-43-LoweredPropertyValuation/

 

•In another case, a Houston jury awarded 1.2 million to a couple because a 100-foot-tall cell tower was determined to have lessened the value of their property and caused them mental anguish: Nissimov, R., "GTE Wireless Loses Lawsuit over Cell-Phone Tower," Houston Chronicle, February 23, 1999, Section A, page 11.  (Property values depreciate by about 10 percent because of the tower.)

 

 

Read about other "Tools" that may help you and your fellow residents oppose a cell tower in your neighborhood:

 

•Reasonable Discrimination Allowed
 •We Already Have Good Coverage: Significant Gap and 911
•Alternative Locations and Supplemental Application forms
•Aesthetics and Safety
•Noise and Nuisance and notes about Clearwire
•Health Effects: Science & Research

 

Also print out this helpful article on court decisions from the communications law firm of Miller & Van Eaton (with offices in D.C. and San Francisco) that you can pull and read to realize what rights you may or may not have in opposing a wireless facility in your neighborhood: http://www.millervaneaton.com/content.agent?page_name=HT%3A++IMLA+Article+Tower+Siting+Nov+2008 (click the link once you get to this page). 

  

TALK TO LOCAL REALTORS
 When opposing the zoning or construction of a cell tower, it's important to alk to your local real estate professionals as early in the process as possible.  Inform and educate them about the negative effects on local property values that cell towers have. 

 

After all, they are required by law to disclose any known environmental hazards in the area of a home they are selling, either current or future, so they are well aware that the disclosures they make directly affect the price a homebuyer is willing to pay. 

 

Ask for letters of support to be sent from the Realtor directly to the county Planning and Development officials and cc'ed to you and your local media so that you are educating and informing as many people as possible on this issue as early in the process as possible.  

 

It's very important to have your local real estate professionals back up what the experts report in their studies to make your arguments relative to your specific community. 

And, don't forget the importance of your neighborhood school on influencing your property value.  Here's one local Realtor's take on it:  http://tucker.patch.com/blog_posts/whats-a-huge-factor-in-calculating-your-property-value


HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATIONS
 You can also educate your local homeowners' associations and neighborhood councils about the negative property value effects and have them submit letters. 

 

They may also become great advocates for your cause, helping to spread word of mouth about the pitfalls of cell towers among the community and showing up in force whenever your group is called upon to present its side of the issue at a zoning hearing or in front of a committee that must decide about an application for special use of the land in an ordinarily residential-only zone.


DON'T GIVE UP THE FIGHT

This area of the law is still very new and it is expected that many of the cell tower battles will be over unchartered territory.  You are expected to have to go to the judiciary system in some cases as there is no precedent to lead in either direction.  So, do what you can to stand up for your rights!  If you are fighting within the FCC "shot clock" window, you will likely have attorneys' fees refunded as well.  You are not just fighting for yourself, but for all those who will travel the same path after you.

Don't give up.  Be respectful, but take nothing at face value.  Use the media to tell your story if you can get them on your side.  But, focus on your issue, your case and get your neighbors to unite as it will affect everyone in some way.  The more you can help educate others, the better off we will all be in the long run.

If you have any questions, feel free to email us at sayno2celltowers@yahoo.com.  We are not attorneys nor do we offer advice that should substitute for the advice from a qualified attorney in this area, but we have been working on this subject for more than a year and can offer practical input about our own experience that we are willing to share.  Sometimes it helps just to know you are not alone and you have people in your corner.

And, here in DeKalb County, we started with no one in our corner and, as of July 31, 2012, 75,000 voters, a whopping 62%, voted "NO" to cell towers at our schools!  Way to go DeKalb County!

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

Grand Jury Calls For Investigation of DeKalb School Board

Updated: Thursday, 03 May 2012, 10:22 PM EDTPublished : Thursday, 03 May 2012, 10:13 PM EDT
(reprinted with permission)
by: Kaitlyn Prat

Grand Jury Calls For Investigation of DeKalb School Board: MyFoxATLANTA.com

DeKalb DA Robert James announced he would not convene a special grand jury LAST TIME it was recommended.  

School Board Chairman Dr. Eugene Walker looked over his shoulder ominously.   Skeptics say that THIS time the

DA is going along with the investigation, but not truly leading it.  What is it that these board members do to

seemingly nice, intelligent, otherwise perfectly normal people who work alongside them? 

Maybe we should fear the school board and elect the cell towers? 

DEKALB COUNTY, Ga. - A DeKalb County grand jury is calling for a special investigation of the county school board. It's the second time the recommendation had been made in recent months and this time the district attorney is pursuing it.

The grand jury report focuses on how the school board managed money. It questioned why tax payers are paying more than $100,000 in legal fees for former DeKalb Schools Superintendent Crawford Lewis, who was indicted on racketeering charges.

The report also points to an expensive civil suit against a former construction company, Heery/Mitchell.

“The ongoing fiscal irresponsibility of the DeKalb County School Board has caused tens of millions of dollars to be wasted,” the grand jury indictment states.

DeKalb County Schools spokesman Walter Woods said the board would welcome the investigation.

“Everything we’ve done is legal. We observe the law. If we’ve violated the law then let them bring that to our attention,” said DeKalb Schools Chairman Dr. Gene Walker, who said he had not seen the grand jury report.

Ten Superior Court judges will decide on the investigation.

Dear Mr. Burrell Ellis, CEO, We are contacting you again ...

April 25, 2012

Dear Mr. Burrell Ellis, CEO
DeKalb County Government
330 West Ponce DeLeon Ave.
Decautur, GA  30030

Dear Mr. Ellis,

We are contacting you again with questions regarding the county's policy and plans regarding the construction and operation of cell phone towers on public school grounds.  As you are aware, the Board of Education has agreed to lease its property to T-mobile, but the county still has zoning authority over the exact placement of all telecommunications towers.  Local zoning ordinances are already in place to protect our residents. 

As concerned taxpayers, residents and homeowners of this county, we want to urge you and your office to be aware of the intentions of T-mobile to go around our local government and exploit loopholes in our laws and policies.  Much of the process has been kept secret from the residents and homeowners who will be most directly impacted, which is standard operating procedure for T-mobile who has been on a mission for the past couple years to place their cell towers in the Greater Atlanta area at an alarming rate. 

Please note our concerns and the concerns of many other taxpayers in this county who have taken the time to provide their feedback in the attached petition.  It is particularly alarming that T-mobile, a German-based company, would agree to lease public property for a period of 30-years when it has stated publically that it no longer wishes to remain a player in the U.S. wireless market. 

We are sure that you received the original letter from all seven of our elected county commissioners, but we have included as an attachment (1) for your reference.  Mr. Ellis, this letter makes it very clear that DeKalb County has a proper procedure that T-mobile and any other cellular company is expected to follow when submitting applications for their transmission towers.  The ordinance states that residential communities are not safe places for cellular towers.  And, our commissioners believe that any permit applications either from the BOE or T-mobile for public school property to be used in this manner should be denied.

The BOE may believe that they are exempt from zoning laws, but they are incorrect.  As we have pointed out, and as the county commissioners have agreed, any structure that has a primary purpose that is proprietary in nature is not considered to be a justifable use of an exemption from zoning.  The exemption was allowed for publically-funded school grounds when used for the education of children.

Privately-held, privately-profiting cellular companies and their holding companies are not interested in our public school grounds to help better our education system.  They are motivated by profit and tax relief.  The primary function of the T-mobile towers will be to add to the bottom line of T-mobile through the sale of its wireless products and services and through the sub-leasing of its tower to other cell providers.  Any other purpose the towers may be used for would be secondary to its proprietary function.  The school board initiated the request for the towers as a means for additional revenue.  Please see the attachment (2) from Steve Donahue, Director of Plant Services, in his initial summary of the task.  This summary was part of the agenda during the June 2011 board meeting agenda.

Therefore, the county cannot in good faith offer to transfer an exemption over to T-mobile when it would normally be only a priviledge of our school system for the purpose of building educational facilities.

In proving this point, we have attached a copy (3) of the case entitled, "MACON-BIBB COUNTY PLANNING and; ZONING COMMISSION et al. v. BIBB COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT."  It shows that the property of a state governmental unit is exempt from local zoning when a governmental function is being performed but not when a proprietary function is being performed.

Furthermore, the county commissioners, in their letter, have stated that it is their belief that the county should not ignore its own zoning ordinances, unless it is proven that they must do so in a court of law.  We have information to submit to them that addresses this issue.

We would like to present you, your staff from the Public Works Division and from the Office of Planning and Sustainability, and our commissioners with one additional piece of information.  Thanks to the recent comments made by the former School Board Chairman, Mr. Tom Bowen, to the various media outlets, he called our attention to the neigboring Cobb County as we were curious about exactly what happened there as they were faced with similar circumstances. 

In fact, the admission of Mr. Bowen and Mr. Paul Womack, the former Vice Chairman of the School Board, that they were familiar with the situation in Cobb County makes their motivations in passing this item even more suspect.  Anyone familiar with what took place in Cobb County is aware of the protests from the neighborhood that almost led to a recall of one board member.

Even more recently, current Chairman Dr. Eugene Walker, has made similar references to the fact that neigbhoring counties have chosen this route.  To us, that knowledge means that DeKalb has a great opportunity to rise above the others, not sink to their level.

Sir, the conduct of these school board officials flys in the face of the open and transparent government that the citizens of DeKalb County have been asking for and that you, yourself, have stated as an important element of your administration.  We hope you will not let their poor judgment in this situation drag your reputation down as well.  They have tried to both avoid your input as well as claim to have your support.  We just want to know the truth.

Upon looking at cell tower cases in Cobb County, we have located a federal decision that will provide the commissioners with the legal backing to solidify their recommendation that no permit be issued for these T-mobile cell towers on our public school grounds that would circumvent the standard "Special Land Use" process.  

The case is also attached for your review (4).  Please distribute to whomever on your staff you feel would be necessary in case they play a part in this decision.  We are also sending a copy of this entire packet to everyone listed in the CC: section, but realize that we may have missed someone, esp. since the Public Works and the Office of Planning and Sustainability seem to be going through a lot of personnel changes lately.

The federal case we would like you to reference is titled, "T-MOBILE LLC vs. COBB COUNTY, GEORGIA."   In this case, the County’s Planning and Zoning Staff reviewed the Application for compliance with the County’s local zoning ordinance.   The Ordinance provides several design, location, and safety requirements for the construction of towers over 35 feet. Official Code of Cobb
County, Georgia § 134-273.  Based on the Ordinance, the county denied the application for a tower permit and T-Mobile sued.

The court found in favor of the county and proved that the county has every right to uphold its own zoning ordinances and was justified in denying the application based on the fact that the tower proposed would be an intrusion into a residential area.

We hope you and your staff will review the documents and take these court proceedings into consideration when making the final determination.  We have received an outpouring of support for this mission to keep our school yards safe and free from the intrusion of cell phone towers on their grounds.  We have united our county on this issue, and groups that might normally be divided on other matters when it comes to schools and education, were able to come together, work together and seek help from their elected officials from the north to the south.

Now, we turn this final decision over to you, Mr. Ellis, and pray that you will do the right thing for the children of our county.

And, the final attachment (5) is a partial listing of the more than 1,300 names we  have collected of people from all over the county who want you to know that they also oppose these towers.  Please read more into these petitions than just a headcount, as we could easily deliver thousands more if that were all it took in order to make a point. 

We ask that you read some of the comments that are made by those who signed.  We think you will see, as we did, that this issue is not something that will simply fade away.  It is clear that many, many taxpayers and voters in DeKalb County, not only oppose cell towers on school grounds, but they are very angry about it, too. 

Please deny T-mobile and stand up for the citizens. 

Thank you sincerely,

Get the Cell Out - ATL

cc: Director of the Federal Communication Commission,

DeKalb County School Board,
Spokesperson Walter Woods,
Gov. Nathan Deal,
DeKalb County Director of Public Works,
DeKalb County Chief of Staff for Community Relations,
DeKalb County Commissioners,
Georgia State Board of Education,
the Georgia State Delegation,
The Center for Safer Wireless,
Unhappy Taxpayer and Voter,
Concerned Citizens of South DeKalb,
Mayor Ramsey of Clarkston,
Citizens for a Safe and Healthy Environment,
The Georgia Green Party,
MACE,
Briarcliff Heights Community Action Group,
Parents Coalition of Montgomery County,
National PTA,
DeKalb School Watch,
Cobb County School Board Member Rick Welkis,
Mount Shasta Research Center,
Center for Disease Control,
SACs,
DeKalb County District Attorney's office,
Georgia Office of Administrators of Special Education,
Georgia Association of Zoning Administrators,
Get the Cell Out and
Get the Cell Out - Atlanta Chapter.


Attachments (5)
Board of Commissioners Letter
Steve Donahue summary of task document
Bibb County Supreme Court Decision
Cobb County  Federal Court Decision
GTCO-ATL Petition

DeKalb County School District Launches New Alert System

Dear GTCO-ATL friends,

You may have already received word about this, but I wanted to make sure....

DeKalb County Schools are offering a message service for free alerts and important messages.  If anything good has come from our cell tower battle, perhaps it shall be that the school system realizes the importance of having a way to communicate with the community (not just parents) rather that relying on the PTA (and placing them in the middle when word doesn't get out). 

If you pay property tax in DeKalb County, then you are a "stakeholder" in education.  You don't want to be kept in the dark when it comes to important announcements that might have an impact on your local school.  Like it or not, the success of the neighborhood school has been proven to be one of the primary influencers in assessing your property value. 

So, please sign up, stay informed and please plan to make INFORMED CHOICES at the ballot box this year when and if we are able to elect a new school board.  This is a year that the safe choice will NOT be the incumbant, so please research the alternatives and make the choice that's right for DeKalb County's children and communities!

I just signed up for the alerts, and it literally took me less than 30 seconds to do so.

Thanks!
Cheryl

Mar. 21, 2012 – In an effort to communicate timely, school-related information to parents,
teachers and citizens through the tools they use every day, the DeKalb County School District is
launching a new automated notification service that sends school news via email, text message
and voicemail.  The new service, called K12 Alerts, is free and available to everyone who wants
to know more about DeKalb Schools.

K12 Alerts will keep parents, DeKalb Schools staff members and local residents informed of
everything from weather-related school closings and early dismissals to other important news
impacting the School District.

Anyone interested in receiving messages from DeKalb Schools can register through K12 Alert’s secure online portal at www.k12alerts.com/portal/dekalbcountysd.

For more information about K12 Alerts visit www.k12alerts.com.

Supreme Court of Georgia Decision: Public Property is NOT Immune From Zoning Laws and Regulations When a Proprietary Function is being Performed

MACON-BIBB COUNTY PLANNING and ZONING COMMISSION et al. v. BIBB COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT.

(click headline for full text.)
DECIDED JUNE 25, 1996 -- RECONSIDERATION DENIED JULY 9, 1996 AND RECONSIDERATION DISMISSED JULY 12, 1996 -- CERT. APPLIED FOR.

In Macon Assn., supra at 488 (3), the Court recognized that in this country, the general rule granting immunity from local zoning ordinances to governmental entities is supported by essentially four traditional tests: the Superior Sovereign Test, the Governmental Propriety Test, the Power of Eminent Domain Test, and the Statutory Guidance Test.

1. The Superior Sovereign Test holds that since the state and its units and agencies occupy a superior position to municipalities in the governmental hierarchy, their exemption from municipal zoning regulation is a matter of preemption.
2. The Governmental-Propriety Test holds that property of a state governmental unit is exempt from local zoning when a governmental function is being performed but not when a proprietary* function is being performed.
3.  Cases applying the Power of Eminent Domain Test take the position that when a political unit is authorized to condemn, it is automatically immune from local zoning regulation when it acts in furtherance of its designated public function.
4. Under the Statutory Guidance Test, the courts simply look to the legislative statutes in order to glean some expression of legislative intent on the immunity question.

*  pluralpro·pri·e·tar·ies




Definition of PROPRIETARY

1  : one that possesses, owns, or holds exclusive right to something; specifically: proprietor 1

2  : something that is used, produced, or marketed under exclusive legal right of the inventor or maker; specifically: a drug (as a patent medicine) that is protected by secrecy, patent, or copyright against free competition as to name, product, composition, or process of manufacture

3  : a business secretly owned by and run as a cover for an intelligence organization

Maybe This is Why They Can Put Up the Towers SO Fast!

Exerpt taken from Wireless Estimator

Georgia
Cross Florida's border where there are more state and local requirements than oranges and you'll find that most contractors don't need a license in America's Peach State. The exception is asbestos abatement and the mechanical trades, and, of course, the always popular electrical profession. Check for local jurisdiction licensing requirements.

Out-of-State Corporations Out-of-state corporations must register with the Georgia Secretary of State to do business in the state. For information click on Secretary of State .
      

Add this Complaint to Your List: I Don't Want My Child Traumatized When a Tower Climber Falls to His Death!

(click headline for full story)

Cell Tower Cimber --  Most Dangerous Job in America

Reprinted from Wireless Estimator

 January 30, 2006 - Based upon the latest national census of fatal occupational injuries from the Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics, workers who are required to climb cell towers and other communications structures throughout the country have been identified as having the most dangerous job in America.

 

In previous years, inaccurate Occupational Health and Safety Administration coding and an unknown total of tower climbers prevented the tower erection and maintenance industry from revealing the most fatalities per 100,000 workers.

Although tower climbers are one of the smallest specialized construction groups with approximately 8,700 employees, they had ten fatalities from workers falling from a tower in 2004, representing 115 deaths per 100,000 workers.

Logging workers captured the second most dangerous occupation with 85 fatalities in 2004, representing 92 deaths per 100,000 loggers.

The occupation most aligned to tower erectors, structural iron and steel workers, an industry group of approximately 67,000 workers, had 31 fatalities representing 47 deaths per 100,000 workers.

Response from County Commissioner Kathie Gannon's Office

(Click headline for full text of this letter of response)

Thank you to one of our GTCO-ATL followers for emailing us the response below with permission to publish.  It is so helpful for all of us to try to work together, compare notes and sort out the inconsistencies in order to figure out what is really going on with these cell towers and how they are being approved.  GTCO-ATL will be formulating a follow-up to the response below and will post any other comments received as well.

If you have an email response or your email/letter of inquiry to share, please email it to us at sayno2celltowers@yahoo.com.  Your name and contact details will not be posted or shared unless you instruct us to do so.

We would also like to thank Commissioner Kathie Gannon, Super District 6, and her Policy and Project Manager Davis Fox for the most complete response we have seen to date.  It is evident that those who have nothing to hide do not mind sharing what they know with the constituents they have taken an oath to represent. 
 -----------------------------------------------

March 5, 2012

Thank you for writing Commissioner Gannon regarding the cell towers on school property. There are many simultaneous issues going on with the cell tower issue that complicate this matter. Commissioner Gannon does not favor the construction of the cell towers on school property. However neither she, nor the Board of Commissioners have the authority to stop their construction. Please allow me to explain some of the factors involved.

• In the DeKalb form of government the Chief Executive Officer, Burrell Ellis, is responsible for the administration of government and the Board of Commissioners is responsible for setting policy, approving the budget and passing laws. The CEO and his staff give work direction to the departments. If the County had the authority to deny a permit, it must come from the executive branch. The Board of Commissioners cannot give work direction to County employees.
• Schools are usually located in residential zoning districts. Normally to build a cell tower in property zoned for residential uses, the owner of the property must seek a zoning variance before the Board of Zoning Appeals.
• Boards of education in the State of Georgia cannot be regulated by local governments. This means they are exempt from zoning codes, and do not have to go through the normal process of applying for a variance to the Board of Zoning Appeals. It also means they do not have to have building permits. They may build without them. Georgia Supreme Court cases have established this legal precedent. To change this ruling, the General Assembly must pass a law. It is my understanding the Representative Drenner has introduced such a piece of legislation.
• T Mobile is the tenant, and the Board of Education is the property owner. Even if T Mobile does apply for a permit, it is done so on behalf of the Board of Education. The owner is the responsible party, and the owner must comply with the zoning regulations. The Supreme Court has also ruled that tax-exempt owners can be engaged in for-profit business if the proceeds of the for-profit business provide financial support to the tax-exempt purposes of the owner.
• I know you would like for the County to simply not grant the permit. I don’t know if T Mobile will seek a permit. In any case, such a decision to deny a building permit would have to come from the executive branch. On a practical basis, the County will not deny a permit without a valid legal reason, ie.: it doesn’t comply with zoning, or it is designed incorrectly, etc. If the County denied an applicant without a valid, legal reason, the County is exposing itself to a lawsuit and to legal costs.

Essentially, the Board of Education and T Mobile are exploiting a loop hole in the rules.  I know you may find the information above as disheartening, wrong, or counter to what you believe is fair. Commissioner Gannon believes the cell towers should be more closely regulated, and the Board of Education should be subject to the same rules as every other property owner.  However her authority and the Board of Commissioners' authority is determined by the DeKalb County Organizational Act, the United States and Georgia constitutions and the laws of the State as affected by Court opinions.

I hope this information provides some clarity. Thank you for writing Commissioner Gannon, and let us know if you have further questions.
 

Davis Fox

Policy and Projects Manager for
DeKalb County Commissioner Kathie Gannon for District 6

Contact InfoDeKalb County Board of Commissioner
Manuel J. Maloof Center
1300 Commerce Drive
Decatur, GA 30030
404-371-4909 phone; 404-371-7004 fax

 kgannon@dekalbcountyga.gov

Rise in Children with ADHD May Be Attributed to Cellphone Exposure in the Womb

(click headline for details)

Cell phone use in pregnancy may cause behavioral disorders in offspring

By Karen N. Peart
March 15, 2012


Exposure to radiation from cell phones during pregnancy affects the brain development of offspring, potentially leading to hyperactivity, Yale School of Medicine researchers have determined.

The results, based on studies in mice, are published in the March 15 issue of Scientific Reports, a Nature publication.

“This is the first experimental evidence that fetal exposure to radiofrequency radiation from cellular telephones does in fact affect adult behavior,” said senior author Dr. Hugh S. Taylor, professor and chief of the Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility in the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology & Reproductive Sciences.

Taylor and co-authors exposed pregnant mice to radiation from a muted and silenced cell phone positioned above the cage and placed on an active phone call for the duration of the trial. A control group of mice was kept under the same conditions but with the phone deactivated.

The team measured the brain electrical activity of adult mice that were exposed to radiation as fetuses, and conducted a battery of psychological and behavioral tests. They found that the mice that were exposed to radiation tended to be more hyperactive and had reduced memory capacity. Taylor attributed the behavioral changes to an effect during pregnancy on the development of neurons in the prefrontal cortex region of the brain.

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), is a developmental disorder associated with neuropathology localized primarily to the same brain region, and is characterized by inattention and hyperactivity.

“We have shown that behavioral problems in mice that resemble ADHD are caused by cell phone exposure in the womb,” said Taylor. “The rise in behavioral disorders in human children may be in part due to fetal cellular telephone irradiation exposure.”

Taylor said that further research is needed in humans to better understand the mechanisms behind these findings and to establish safe exposure limits during pregnancy. Nevertheless, he said, limiting exposure of the fetus seems warranted.

First author Tamir Aldad added that rodent pregnancies last only 19 days and offspring are born with a less-developed brain than human babies, so further research is needed to determine if the potential risks of exposure to radiation during human pregnancy are similar.

“Cell phones were used in this study to mimic potential human exposure but future research will instead use standard electromagnetic field generators to more precisely define the level of exposure,” said Aldad.

Other Yale authors on the study include Geliang Gan and Xiao-Bing Gao.
The study was funded by grants from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development, and Environment and Human Health, Inc.

Citation: Scientific Reports 2 : 312 | DOI: 10.1038/srep00312

Response from County Commissioner Jeff Rader's Office

(click headline for full text)

Commissioner Jeff Raider,
District 2, DeKalb County

February 23, 2012:  Thank you for your email.  Unfortunately, the school system is exempt from county zoning requirements according to state law, therefore, DeKalb County cannot deny the system a building permit.  However, once the school system applies for a permit, citizens have 15 days within to file an appeal to the Zoning Board of Appeals.  This appears to be the only avenue available right now.  I am also aware of efforts by state legislators to introduce a moratorium on permits for cell towers.  I believe that the Briarlake community is very active in these matters.  Please contact Stephanie Byrne, President of No Briarlake Tower, LLC for more information on what they are doing to organize against this.
 
Stephanie Byrne, President, No Briarlake Tower, LLC
404-728-0584, http://www.nobriarlaketower.org

I hope this helps.  Let me know what more I can do for you.

Sincerely,

Caroline Enloe

Commission Office Coordinator

Jeff Rader, Commissioner

District 2, DeKalb County

www.commissionerrader.com

404-371-2863     

Dear Representative Sims,

(click headline for full text of email sent to Rep. Chuck Sims)

To: "chuck.sims@house.ga.gov"

Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 7:37 PM
Subject: HB 1197 Cell Phone Towers in DeKalb County
 

Dear Representative Sims,

I am writing to you today on behalf of the parents, children and property owners that remain on a list of communities that will be adversely affected if Rep. Karla Drenner's bill 1197 is not permitted to exit your committee and be placed in line for a vote by the House of Representatives in full. 

I am not a lobbyist, nor do I have the financial resources of a major industry behind me.  But, I am an American citizen and I believe I have the right to be represented fairly by my government officials, especially in matters where I feel personally threatened and my child is being denied her right to a free, primary education. 

In May 2011, my husband and I had to make a difficult decision to take our child out of the public school system so we could speak out publically to try to protect our community from a cellphone tower that was proposed for school grounds.  We were successful in having our school removed from the list before the school board voted.  But, we didn't want others to go through the same ordeal, so we decided to stay involved in the process in order to warn others and help them speak out in opposition to the towers approved for their schools. 


Rep. Karla Drenner (D - Avondale Estates) addresses concerns of

residents countywide about cell phone and cell tower radiation and

the effects on children.  Her bill seek to ban the

placement of towers on school grounds, not ban them completely. 

It has still met opposition in committee and has not progressed

toward the necessary next step of a vote by the House as a whole. 

Rep. Chuck Sims in the Chairman of the Committe holding it up. 

Please email him if you would like to see him help Rep. Drenner

resolve the outstanding issues so it can move forward quickly.

That is what brings me to where we are today.  We are trying to get our state representatives to help us locally and statewide by imposing restrictions that would protect the land we, as taxpayers, have intended for education, not for commercial profit.  There are many dangers associated with cell towers, esp. on grounds where young children play.  These kids do not carry or use cell phones, they cannot read the warning signs on the fences, they are vulnerale to the increases in their background radiation levels and they do not need a bevy of strangers coming on school property.  These towers contain HAZMAT materials and have been known to catch fire and fall over.  Schools and homes would be in the fall zone of these towers as they do not have to comply with local building codes.

Rep. Sims, I hope you understand, that as a responsible parent, I am in a  very difficult situation here in DeKalb County and I know I am not alone.  Our school board does not conduct business in the open and they often do not seem to care about the miserable job they are doing at their primary job of education children. 

As long as there remains the chance that the school board will place a cell tower on the grounds at any school at any time and get away with it, I cannot feel safe sending my child to public school, a right she should be entitled to.  And if I cannot trust a school board to place a priority on keeping her physically safe and away from harm then I cannot trust them to properly care for her mind, either. 

As a parent, I cannot take chances with her childhood that might have lifelong consequences.  It's my role to protect her and guide her to become a responsible adult and a postive contributor to society.  I just never thought it would be our own school system that I would have to protect her from. 

Who will step up to protect the children?  My husband and I have done our best to spread the word about how they tried to put a tower at our child's school and the dangers that we learned are associated with cell towers.  We remained involved in the proceess, even after we had our school removed from the list.

But, we had to take our child out of the school in order to speak out.  Now, what measures are in place to stop them from trying this again?  Who will warn the neighbors next time now that we are no longer involved in the school?  Who will warn us?

Rep. Karla Drenner has stepped up to try to give us the peace of mind that this assult on our community will not happen again.  She has a lot of people just like me who are behind her 100%.  In fact, 17 of 19 representatives signed off on her local bill to stop the placement of cellphone towers in Dekalb County.

But that bill was stalled in your committee and does not look like it will get a vote.  Why?  I understand there are lobbyists who have used the FCC Telecommunications Act of 1996 as a reason to claim her bill is illegal, but we do not think that is the case.  What's more, we are surprised that rather than just stopping our bill, your committee did not work with Rep. Drenner to suggest a rewrite that would allow it to move forward.

I've looked at similar legislation in California, New York and proposed legislation in Maryland.  Those bills include a stipulation that I think might allow Rep. Drenner's bill to move forward.  It states that a ban on cell towers would exist, "... unless the cellular carrier can show that there is an absolute need for the tower and that the location sought on school grounds is the only location that can adequately provide service to satisfy that need." 

Would the addition of a similar clause to Bill 1197 help us get it out of committee and onto the House floor for a vote?

I'm writing to ask for your help.  Can you advise me or Rep. Drenner about why her bill did not make it past your committtee and work with us to provide a revision that will satisfy the lobbyists or whomever you  have spoken to that may have convinced you to hold our local legislation back? 

We do believe this issue should be something taken very seriously on a statewide basis, but we first want to protect our county since this cell tower mission appears to be profitable for our school board (but not our schools - they are promised nothing out of the tower revenue) and we need to impose some limits on what they are allowed to do with our school properties before more good parents leave the schools and leave the county as a result. 

Let DeKalb be an example for the state.  Let us enforce some limits to protect our neighbhorhoods and children.  Please work with us to do what is right for the children who should not be caught in the middle of a battleground between political parties or become the victims of telcomm companies looking to improve their bottom line.

Please help me understand why Bill 1197 did not move ahead and what I can do to see that it does.  I have more than 1,110 petition signatures to back me up on this one.  This issue will not go away, so please help us find a way that we can protect ourselves now rather than later.

Thank you,

Get the Cell Out - Atlanta

School Board Member Jay Cunningham said Lithonia has Wireless Dead Zones? Tell That to the FCC!

(click headline for full story)  In November 2011, the FCC released the "Connect America" fund, a program to encourage and accelerate the deployment of 3G wireless technology to those areas of the U.S. where it was not currently available.  In other words, the FCC wanted to know where the "dead zones" for coverage were located and how they could be eliminated.

The first phase of this mission was for the FCC to identify the areas of the U.S. that would qualify for the "Mobility Fund," or access to federal dollars to encourage building out of networks to rural and highway destinations not currently serviced.  So, they identified where there is an actual "need" for more cell towers in the U.S. in order to provide adequate coverage.

The map below is a screen shot of the FCC's interactive map.  This view shows the Atlanta, GA market in a close-up perspective.  Note, nearly every county in the Greater Atlanta area, including DeKalb County, GA, is NOT shaded in light grey.  This indicates that DeKalb County, according to the FCC, which sets the standards, is not in need of further build-out to support 3G and does not have any areas that would qualify for the federal program. 

In other words, in DeKalb County, GA, the FCC does not recognize any "dead zones." So, we ask ourselves, what is the reason for MORE towers?  If the FCC says we do not need them and the citizens of this county are saying that we do not want them,

why are our county officials continuing to approve further permits for them?

Below is the FCC interactive map that allows you to zoom in or out of certain areas to determine where the needs still exist to bring the nation up to 3G capabilities.  For more information about this program or how the FCC determines where the "dead zones" still exist (though clearly NOT in DeKalb County, GA), please visit the official FCC website and the latest article titled: 

Data, the Way You Want It.

Jolly Elementary School has FCC Tower Approval

One of the most helpful tools in keeping track with cell tower activity in your area is the website called AntennaSearch.com.  Although it does not provide information about your local zoning and permitting applications, it does let you know when a cell carrier applies for a license from the FCC, the step that typically takes place PRIOR to their applications locally.  The only step that comes before the FCC permit is the securing of a lease or purchase for the property in question.

Unfortunately, when an industry is growing as fast as the wireless business and they are left to "police themselves," they don't always do a great job of filling out the information required and somehow they continue to get away with it.  There is no way to really know if the tower locations reported to the FCC are completely accurate or if the are even actually built on the spot where they originally said they were going to build, but this database appears to be the closest thing to accurate as the public has available.

Accoring to Antenna Search, the following information can be learned about the Jolly Elementary School location:

1.)  It has an unregistered tower approved by the FCC for .11 miles from the school building address.  This tower belongs to T-mobile and is likely the one recently approved by the school board.  It will be counted among the total of 81 towers in a 4-mile radius of the school.  There are also two new tower applications found, one of which is for the DeKalb County Police Department.

Below are the currently registered towers near Jolly Elementary in Clarkston, GA:

Below are the un-registered towers currently near Jolly Elementary School:

Below is an aerial photo of the Jolly T-mobile tower location, right between the school and the playground, it will likely take up the majority of the ball field these kids currently use during recess and after-school to play soccer and other sports and activities.  You can also see the close proximity the tower will have to neighboring homes:

Here is a close-up of the Jolly Elementary School location for the T-mobile tower.  Remember, it will have a 60' x 60' base.  That is larger than any cell tower location we have been able to find anywhere.  What exactly is coming?  We are not sure!

German Study Indicates Living Near a Cell Tower Tripled the Cancer Rate of Its Citizens

(click headline for full summary and a copy of the report)

The result of the study from Germany (headquarters of T-mobile) shows that the proportion of newly developing cancer cases was significantly higher among those patients who had lived during the past ten years at a distance of up to 400 metres (approximately a quarter of a mile) from the cellular transmitter site, which had been in operation since 1993, compared to those patients living further away. In addition, patients who did have cancer and lived near the cell tower, fell ill on average 8 years earlier than anyone with cancer outside the quarter mile radius.

In the years 1999-2004, ie after five years’ operation of the transmitting installation, the relative risk of getting cancer had tripled for the residents of the area in the proximity of the tower.

The study was conducted with no outside financial support (no telecommunications money to influence the results).

The results presented were considered to be concrete epidemiological sign of a temporal and spatial connection between exposure to cellphone base station radiation and the disease of cancer, with leukemia being the most common. The reserachers concluded that the results From both an ethical and legal standpoint it is necessary to immediately start to monitor the health of the residents living in areas near mobile telephone base stations with epidemiological studies. This is necessary because this study has shown that it is no longer safely possible to assume that there is no causal link between radio frequency transmissions and increased cancer rates.

Since that time, Germany enacted laws that keep cell towers away from their citizens, both adults and children. They also do not allow cell towers near their food supply or food sources, such as cattle fields. T-mobile has since expanded in the U.S. where these practices are still permitted.

Germany still has excellent mobile coverage.

84400819-Germanreport-celltower

WFTX-TV: Bill Would Ban Cell Phone Towers On School Property

Great job Dara!  Excellent quote on FOX5 News!

Bill Would Ban Cell Phone Towers On School Property

Updated: Monday, 05 Mar 2012, 6:52 PM EST

Published : Monday, 05 Mar 2012, 6:47 PM ES

By PAUL YATES/myfoxatlanta

 

ATLANTA - Opponents of cell phone towers on school property say their legislation aimed at stopping campus towers has stalled at the state capitol.

State Rep. Karla Drenner (D-Avondale Estates) has pushed for a measure that would ban cell phone towers on school property statewide because of potential health threats to students from radiation.
She has also introduced legislation that would target future school yard cell phone towers in DeKalb County, where the school system recently made an agreement allowing towers at nine schools.

“I’ve offered this piece of legislature under the premise of what’s called prudent avoidance: if we don’t know the long-term health effects associated with placing towers on school property, we should avoid this as much as we can,” Drenner said.

Drenner said that neither measure has made any progress at the State Capitol.  Crossover Day, when most bills must have passed the House or Senate to remain alive for the remainder of this year's legislative session, is Wednesday.  Parents and others said they lobby key state lawmakers for the legislation.

“The problem is that it’s not yet determined. That being said, why should our children be guinea pigs?” said parent Dara Schlacter. 

The issue has become controversial as financially-struggling school districts make deals for cell phone towers. 

The DeKalb system has said studies indicate the towers don't bring a health risk.
Other metro school districts, including the city of Atlanta as well as Cobb and Fulton counties, have allowed cell phone towers on school property.

Drenner announced that a House committee would conduct a hearing on her bill on Tuesday.

Bill Would Ban Cell Phone Towers On School Property: MyFoxATLANTA.com