Showing posts with label SPLOST IV. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SPLOST IV. Show all posts

Sunday, April 28, 2013

BEWARE: Local Scammers Using False Information as Excuse for Gaining Your Personal Data

This message was received by GTCO-ATL from one of our followers who lives near the Margaret Harris Comprehensive School in Atlanta.  Please read carefully and report any such attempted scams to law enforcement or call 9-1-1.  Remember that 9-1-1 works faster and better from a LAND LINE, not a cell phone!

Fiber Optics at the schools are not in place so you can get
residential Uverse, according to what ATT told a recent
resident who had been approached by someone saying
they needed personal data.

Hey everyone, BEWARE: FALSE AT&T UVERSE REPS without credentials blanket our neighborhood collection personal information.

I just wanted to let you know that there are people going door to door in our neighborhood saying they are with AT&T Uverse starting out by saying "I don't know if you've noticed the installation of fiber optic cables in your neighborhood but...." then go on to try and collect personal information from you. The last step of this guise is to make a call to set up installation which the person calls on their cell phone to their 'manager' or 'installation office' to check to see if you have any outstanding utility bills...then they ask for social security number and credit card information. 
(... cont.)   The girl who came to my door is very nice, early 20's with auburn hair. 
After the incident, I called AT&T and spoke with several managers and they confirmed that they do not do door to door for anything. Their computers showed that they don't even service this area. So, unless all of the people I spoke with were dead wrong, then the people running around are scammers. 
I think someone is hitting the areas around these (proposed) cell towers.  Please circulate to others...I was under the impression that the fiber optic cables that were popping up around the schools was due to SPLOST money and their new technology. 

And this article ran recently in the Tucker Patch:


Elderly Women Tricked by Scammers(Two similar incidents occurred within days in the same area.)




A woman of 83 had jewelry stolen from her Tucker home by thieves who were pretending to help her.
Construction in the area is not a reason to give out
personal data to anyone going door to door.  Get the
name of their company and call them directly if you have
any doubts about their legitimacy.
 The victim's daughter, Linda Trotter, recounted the events in an email. "Thursday afternoon about 2:30 a lady came to the door and told mother she needed to show her the property line as they would be cutting some trees and limbs on the property behind (her house)," Trotter wrote.
"She... went with the lady through the gate and the woman proceeded to tell her about trimming her bushes and (that) they would pick up the debris and mess. After several minutes the woman walked with her back to house, thanked her and got in the passenger side of a black truck parked halfway up the drive and left saying they would be back about 3:30 to do the work." They never returned. 
Trotter says her mother did not know anything was wrong until later that evening when she realized jewelry had been taken from her bedroom. "Her Rolex watch, her oval diamond ring, a heavy gold necklace, all from my daddy, and her retirement diamond faced watch," she said.
The woman who tricked her is described by Trotter as being white and in her late 30s. Her mother is devastated and "feeling very vulnerable... and violated," Trotter said.
 Fox 5 is reporting a similar incident happened to another elderly woman in Tucker a few days earlier.

Friday, April 26, 2013

Can a Cell Tower and a School Just Be Picked Up and Moved?




Here is a recent 2013 WSB-TV map of cell tower schools.
Note the location of Narvie Harris.

DeKalb residents voted yes on SPLOST IV.  Are we facing the same issue that has been reported in Fulton County? (see Patch article below)  Does this mean our Atlanta-area school systems be working together on a "master plan" that has not been revealed to homeowners and taxpayers?


Or is it a coincidence that schools approved in the Fulton SPLOST are now being torn down and rebuilt elsewhere and a recent WSB-TV maps shows a school (Narvie J. Harris Elementary) suddenly appearing in a new location?



Here is a map from a 2011 WSB-TV report  on cell towers.
Note the location of Narvie Harris.
DeKalb approved money in SPLOST for "demolition" without any clear indication of what exactly will be demolished.  Are they planning to tear down schools, homes, businesses, or more?  Will Fernbank, Smoke Rise and other schools we thought were going to be rebuilt in their current locations actually going to be moved elsewhere?  The same name but a totally new school in a new location?

Has this plan already started with Narvie J. Harris Elementary School?

Homeowners Fight Fulton BOE in Eminent Domain Claim
From the Sandy Springs Patch:

Twenty-one members of Riley Place Homeowners Association sent a letter to the Fulton Board of Education to protest possible relocation of Heards Ferry Elementary to their neighborhood on the southern end of Riverside Drive. The site is across from St. Andrews Presbyterian Church.

“We’ve already been threatened with eminent domain.” said Herb Carter, one of the homeowners refusing to sell his property.

Fulton County BOE makes threats to take
over homes that residents don't want to sell.
The homeowners' letter said in part: “The site on the southern end of Riverside [Drive] would require condemnation of at least two homes which homeowners do not want to sell…This is very valuable property made up of minimum 2 acre tracts, and the cost of land per acre, even after condemnation, would be about as high as any residential land Fulton County could consider acquiring.”

On Wednesday, more than 100 residents attended a public meeting at Riverwood International Charter High School on the relocation of Heards Ferry Elementary. Most at the meeting said they are opposed to moving the school to any new location.

Patrick Burke, Deputy Superintendent of Operations, said that by voting for the SPLOST referendum in November 2011, Sandy Springs residents approved moving Heards Ferry. He later added, “We’re studying what it would take to build on this site and keep things on this site.”


More on the SPLOST vote below.
During the meeting Burke said eminent domain is rarely used. “That’s not to say that we won’t use it,” he said.

The Riley Place homeowners represented in the letter do not have confidence in the Fulton County Board of Education. They complained in the letter that two previous meetings this year, on moving Heards Ferry, were not adequately announced to nearby residents and the general public.

Chris Clark, head of Riley Place HOA, said residents learned the Fulton County Board of Education was interested in their neighborhood about two months ago. “Out of six pieces of property that they need, [owners of] four have been approached by a mystery realtor,” he said. “We have not heard anything from [those property owners]. We assume they made a deal.”


Did you know the 2011 SPLOST referendum approved moving Heards Ferry?
Several residents say they now realize that they didn't understand the SPLOST referendum approved in November 2011.

Linda Gold's children attended Heards Ferry and Riverwood. “[Burke] kept saying that the voters voted for us to replace the school. I didn’t vote to replace the school,” she said.

Gold added, “I wouldn’t have voted for the SPLOST had I known they were going to rip Heards Ferry down. I thought that the money was going to build a new place on the site or repair it. I had no idea and neither did any of my friends.”


Did you misunderstand the 2011 SPLOST referendum? How do you feel about homeowners possibly being moved out by eminent domain?

See also: Residents Strongly Oppose Moving Heards Ferry Elementary

Wednesday, February 20, 2013

DeKalb Schools: 'There Is No Plan'


From the Patch

Marshall Orson, newly elected board member in the
troubled Dekalb County School District, spoke to
a gathering of about 100 residents from around
the county after filing a lawsuit against the state
that asked for an injunction to stop the Feb. 21 hearing.
But that motion was denied and tomorrow at 8 a.m.
the hearing will take place.  Live blogging contributions
planned by The Patch to include Get the Cell Out! 
School Board member Marshall Orson spoke in front of a tough crowd Tuesday night.
By Cheryl Miller

DeKalb School Board Member Marshall Orson (District 2) held a nearly three-hour Town Hall Meeting in the Emory community off North Decatur Road Tuesday night, updating a packed room of parents and neighbors on the events that have taken place almost daily since the state BOE gave DeKalb a 30-day window to prove their commitment to an improvement plan.

The state BOE is scheduled to reconvene Thursday at 8 a.m. to finish the hearing started in January that was required by a law intended to help school systems protect their valuable accreditation.

But, the law has had its own share of controversy when, in 2010, then-Governor Sonny Perdue removed Warren County's school board, but the state Supreme Court overturned that decision. The law was tweaked in 2011 and yet another lawsuit was spawned when the Governor tried to remove Sumter County's school board upon recommendation of the state BOE. Orson told the room that DeKalb had just filed a lawsuit in Fulton County which asks for an emergency injunction to stop three things: the state hearing from moving ahead tomorrow, the state BOE from recommending removal of DeKalb's board and the Governor from acting upon any recommendation by the state BOE.

Residents across the county are expressing outrage and many are sure this latest stunt by the board, already in hot water with the accrediting agency known as SACS, will surely lead to a total loss of accreditation. Orson stated his rejection of this idea. He told the group that his recommendation of former Labor Commissioner Michael Thurmond was a brilliant idea and that the district is already on its way to recovery. He expected that the measures outlined by SACS in its scathing report issued in December will all be met by the time SACS returns in May for its mid-point review on their progress.

"You have some areas where the district has obviously been deficient," he said. "Legal fees, for one, but also H.R., P.R., don't get me started, and finance. And that's because there has been a belief on the board in the past that it doesn't really matter if there are long-term repercussions as long as you can enjoy the short-term gain. This is a mindset, not a policy. And it is one we are changing."

One audience member asked what kind of assurances could Orson make that this board can work together and accomplish all those items in such a short time frame when they are already creating a lot of doubt based on the number of lawyers they have hired.

SACS admonished the board's exorbitant spending on attorney fees as one of the major line items they have direct control over. It is one of the major drains upon the general operations fund that is necessary for the vital parts of an education system: teacher salaries, textbooks, and other educational support materials. It is also the account that must pay for general maintenance and upkeep of the existing school buildings, an area that parents and residents have been complaining about for years.
BriarVista Elementary attendance zone from schooldigger.com

"You have been a part of a culture that is all about me, me, me and mine, back off, it's mine," accused a man seated in the front row. He stated he lived near Briar Vista Elementary School, one that has been targeted for closure and has struggled to maintain enrollment mandates for its Montessori program. "How are we supposed to trust that you are not still about those things now that you are on the board? How do we know we can trust you when, in the past, you have authored or co-authored some very inflammatory statements that many think have cost us the viability of our school?"

Fernbank Elementary attendance zone from schooldigger.com
Orson stated his actions as a parent at Fernbank were, at the time, what was necessary to support his interest at Fernbank, but he is now committed to working with every community in his district to help them accomplish what they want with their schools. But, he said it was important for everyone to get away from the wanting of "things" or "inputs" because they see what other schools may have and start focusing on what kind of learning they want to be taking place inside the classrooms. He said he remembers a parent who once told him that he would rather have his child in a building with a leaking roof and great learning going on than no learning and a brand new building.

An audience member spoke up and said, "Well, we have two of those things: leaky roofs and no learning." Nervous laughter in the room ensued.

This author spoke up to ask about the "proper channels" that were referenced in the SACS report. The question was, generally, "if we are not able to go to our board members for their help and board members are not supposed to micro manage, then can someone please tell us where exactly these proper channels exist?"

Orson replied with an extended discussion about the flawed nature of the SACS report and the difficulty the board has in responding to its accusations because of the need for anonymity contained in the report itself. He stated that, in his opinion, part of the problem is that decisions are made in the school system that are disjointed from other decisions that are simultaneously being made.

"If there is any kind of strategic plan," he said, "then it isn't one that is clearly communicated by anyone and may only exist in the mind of, like, one employee somewhere who just dreamed it up one day and didn't even write it down. And that certainally isn't how you go about creating a strategic plan. A strategic plan needs to take into account a lot of things, primarily the input from the community that must have some type of say about what kind of learning they want to see taking place and what form they want to see that learning take. That has not happened as far as I know. I mean, has anyone hear ever participated in something like that? No? I didn't think so."

But, one woman in the back of the room brought up the Briar Vista issue again, stating that it did not appear her community's input was really wanted or considered. The decisions were already made. A woman up front added that they have leaking roofs and windows that won't seal properly. She said that it was clear that Fernbank is getting everything they ever dreamed of while her school is being targeted for closure. We know that will harm our neighborhood and our property values. I care about this school and I don't even have children, only the four-legged kind. But, I care about my neighbors and we don't want to see this happen. What can we do? This board cannot come together for anything. These issues are not even on their radar, are they?"

Orson discussed the difference between the SPLOST plan for buildings and an educational plan that should go together. "We have the SPLOST plan," he said. "But the other is one we are all going to have to think about once these immediate issues are resolved."

Patch will have a live blog of Thursday's hearing starting at 7:45 a.m.

Wednesday, June 6, 2012

Congress Asked to Investigate Marketing of Mobile Phones to Children

Children's Advocates Ask Congress to

Investigate the Marketing of

Mobile Phones to Kids

In 2005, privacy, consumer and childrens advocates sent letters today to key Members of Congress, asking them to investigate the marketing and sale of mobile phones to children, and their effects on children’s privacy, education, safety and health.

The letters were written and organized by Commercial Alert, and sent to all members of the commerce committees of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives. The letter follows.

It is important to note that after this letter and other forms of protest were heard across the country, Sprint and Walt Disney backed away from its children's line of phones.  But, today the industry may begin pushing the envelope again as the proliferation of cell phone towers at schools makes the children who are inside those schools tempting targets for marketing efforts as they already have a technology-ready facility and simply need someone to place the products in their tiny hands. 

We, as parents, teachers, guardians and responsible adults need to stand firm in our efforts to protect the children and not allow ourselves to fall victim to the persuasive messages that are everywhere in our own environment.  We need to remain alert to the messages the children are seeing and help them understand the difference between perception and reality.

July 16, 2005

Dear Members of Congress:

On July 6th, the Walt Disney Internet Group and Sprint announced their intention to offer wireless telephone service to children 8-12 years of age.

This was just the latest in what is emerging as an industry trend. Earlier this year, Firefly Mobile enlisted 100,000 children for their mobile phone service. Enfora has announced plans to offer mobile phone service targeting children as young as six years of age. This fall, Wherify is planning to offer a “Wherifone” for children with built-in Global Positioning System (GPS) location tracking. In August, Mattel is expected to market Barbie-branded mobile phones. Hasbro is preparing its own mobile phone for children, too, called “Chat Now.”

The targeting of young children as the next growth market for the telecom industry is one of the worst ideas to appear in the American economy in a long time. Does anyone really believe that kids today lack sufficient distractions from their school work, that there are insufficient disruptions in the home, and that child predators and advertisers lack sufficient means of access to kids?

If the Disney Corporation and the others just wanted to give children a way to contact parents in emergencies, that would be one thing. The telecommunications companies—to parents at least—are playing up this angle. Telecommunications lobbyists in Washington will harp on it as well.
But despite the industrys rhetoric, Disney and the telecommunications companies really want to use children as conduits to their parents’ wallets. And marketers want another way to bypass parents and speak directly to the nations children.

Already, marketers are leaping to send advertisements via mobile phones. For example, Advertising Age reported on July 11th that many corporations, including McDonalds, Coca-Cola and Timex, are moving “from small [mobile phone advertising] tests to all-out campaign[s].” Children already are bombarded with too much advertising. They don’t need more advertising through their mobile phones, whether it is telemarketing, text message marketing, adver-games, or any other type of commercial messages.

Before the telecommunications industry declares “open season” upon the children of this country, we urge you to investigate and make absolutely certain that the industry has answers to the following questions.

Child Predators. Will adults other than parents be able to contact children through these phones, without the permission of parents? What about sexual predators, convicted criminals, etc.?

Disclosure of Children’s Whereabouts. For mobile phones to work, telecommunications companies must know where their customersÒ’ phones are. Will anyone other than the childs parents, law enforcement officials and telecommunications companies be able to track the physical location of the child’s mobile phone?

Interruptions in School and Church. Will the mobile phones cause disruptions and distractions in church and school, or will they be designed not to function in such locations? The potential for disruption here affects not just the individual child, but every child in the group in question.

Runaway Billing. Will parents have absolute control over billing and charges, so that no charges can be incurred without the parents specific prior consent? This includes charges for regular and special services, 888 numbers, and the rest.

Children’s Health. Children are vulnerable in ways that adults are not, physically as well as emotionally. In January, the British National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB) issued a report, titled “Mobile Phones and Health,” which warned about the possibility that mobile phones could cause benign tumors of the ear and brain. The NRPB recommended that parents not give mobile phones to children under eight years of age, that older children should limit their use of mobile phones, and that “the mobile phone industry should refrain from promoting the use of mobile phones by children.”

Upon release of the report, NRPB Chairman Sir William Stewart said,I don’t think we can put our hands on our hearts and say mobile phones are safe.

He also said that If there are risks, and we think there may be risks, then the people who are going to be most affected are children, and the younger the child, the greater the danger.

How has the U.S. mobile phone industry factored this warning into its service plans? Can it guarantee that children will suffer no adverse health effects from the use of mobile phones? If not, then why is it offering mobile phones to children? Is the industry willing to take full responsibility for the effects of its phones upon childrens' health?

The move to put mobile phones into the hands of children as young as six years old is not a decision to take lightly. It opens up a plethora of problems, not just for the children with the phones but for schools, churches, families and classmates as well.

Now is the time to pause, investigate and consider. Once the phones are in classrooms, playrooms, and in children’s bedrooms, it will be too late. Already we read with grim regularity of children molested by predators who contacted them over the Internet. We read of children who cannot focus their own attention even for short times. We hope we will not now read about children abducted by adults who seduced them through mobile phones, and of school rooms that cannot function because of mobile phones that ring constantly, just because Congress did not stand up and act.

Sincerely,

Joan Almon, Coordinator, Alliance for Childhood
Michael Brody, MD, Chair, Television and Media Committee, American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
Brita Butler-Wall, PhD. Executive Director, Citizens’ Campaign for Commercial-Free Schools
Angela Campbell, Professor, Georgetown University Law Center
Raffi Cavoukian, D.Mus., D.Litt., founder of Child Honoring, singer, author, ecology advocate
Nathan Dungan, author, Prodigal Sons and Material Girls: How Not to Be Your Child’s ATM
Leon Eisenberg, MD, Professor of Social Medicine Emeritus, Harvard Medical School
Henry A. Giroux, PhD, Waterbury Chair Professor in Secondary Education, College of Education, Pennsylvania State University; author, Stealing Innocence: Corporate Culture’s War on Children
Susan Grant, Vice President, Public Policy, National Consumers League
Nicholas Johnson, Former Commissioner, Federal Communications Commission
Carden Johnston, MD, FAAP, FRCP, Emeritus Professor of Pediatrics, University of Alabama School of Medicine
Tim Kasser, PhD, Associate Professor of Psychology. Knox College; author, The High Price of Materialism
Jean Kilbourne, author, Can’t Buy My Love: How Advertising Changes the Way We Think and Feel
Diane Levin, PhD, Professor of Education, Wheelock College; author, Remote Control Childhood?: Combating the Hazards of Media Culture
Susan Linn, EdD, Instructor in Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School; Co-founder, Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood; author, Consuming Kids: The Hostile Takeover of Childhood
Robert W. McChesney, PhD, Research Professor, Institute of Communications Research, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; Founder and President, Free Press; author, The Problem of the Media
Bob McCannon, Founder and Executive Director, New Mexico Media Literacy Project; Vice President & Co-founder, Action Coalition for Media Education
Ken McEldowney, Executive Director, Consumer Action
Jim Metrock, President, Obligation, Inc.
Ed Mierzwinski, Consumer Program Director, U.S. Public Interest Research Group (USPIRG)
Mark Crispin Miller, PhD, Professor of Media Ecology, New York University
Diane M. Morrison, PhD, Professor & Associate Dean for Research, University of Washington School of Social Work
Peggy O’Mara, Editor and Publisher, Mothering Magazine
Alvin F. Poussaint, MD, Professor of Psychiatry and Faculty Associate Dean for Student Affairs, Harvard Medical School
Privacy Rights Clearinghouse
Hugh Rank, University Professor Emeritus, Governors State University; author, Persuasion Analysis and The Pitch
Gary Ruskin, Executive Director, Commercial Alert
Phyllis Schlafly, President, Eagle Forum
Juliet Schor, PhD, Professor of Sociology, Boston College; author, Born to Buy: The Commercialized Child and the New Consumer Culture
Remar Sutton, Founder, The Privacy Rights Now Coalition
Victor Strasburger, MD, Professor of Pediatrics, Chief, Division of Adolescent Medicine, University of New Mexico School of Medicine; co-author, Children, Adolescents, & the Media

< ------------letter ends here----------------->


For more information about the marketing of mobile phones, see our web page on mobile phones.
Commercial Alert is a nonprofit organization based in Portland, Oregon. Our mission is to keep the commercial culture within its proper sphere, and to prevent it from exploiting children and subverting the higher values of family, community, environmental integrity and democracy. For more information, see our website at: http://www.commercialalert.org.

SPLOST "Oversight" Committee Accepting Volunteer Applications (no pun intended)

DeKalb Schools to Appoint Citizens SPLOST Oversight Committee


June 1, 2012

The DeKalb County School District invites members of the public to volunteer

their services for a 12-member Citizen’s SPLOST Oversight Committee. The advisory

committee, expected to begin meeting in August 2012, provides for citizen review of the

voter-approved SPLOST project list.


Interested DeKalb County residents who want to be considered for the committee should

provide their information online at:

no later than Sunday, June 17, 2012 at 11:59 p.m.

Only online applications will be accepted.


Qualified candidates must be citizens who reside within the boundaries of the DeKalb County

School District, may not be members of the Board of Education or employees of the School

District, and may not have any economic interest in any of the District’s projects.


Experience in accounting, architecture, auditing, construction, engineering, finance, K-12

education, legal, planning, project management and/or real estate is desired.


Members must be volunteers who can dedicate at least two hours each quarter to meeting,

generally in the evenings. Members must pass a background check and sign a non-disclosure

agreement.


For a review of the SPLOST IV program and projects: 




Questions about the Citizen’s SPLOST Oversight Committee may be emailed to:


For more information about the DeKalb County School District, visit: www.dekalb.k12.ga.us

Tuesday, June 5, 2012

DeKalb County's Budget Woes: What Gives?

(click headline to read what board member Paul Womack, District #4, said last August about the state of the school system's budget.)

DeKalb County Schools say they have a $74 million shortfall in their budget this year and have been hearing public comments about what things might be cut or kept. 

Here's the AJC article:  http://www.ajc.com/news/dekalb/dekalb-schools-facing-70-1442996.html

And here is a link to a play-by-play of the citizens' comments:  http://tucker.patch.com/articles/fernbank-supporters-dekalb-parents-address-school-board#video-10186173

But, the elephant in the room is the question of "how did we get here?"

Since the school board does not have an online check register or any other way for the public to see how they are spending our money, we can only take their word for it.

That would be fine if we had folks on the board that we felt we could trust.  But, in District #4, less than a year ago, Paul Womack, the incumbant for this area told a room full of parents that everything was fine.  He even said we might be one of the best in the state in terms of fiancial stability right now.  Here's his direct quote from August 31, 2011:


Please don't
vote for H.
Paul Womack,
District #4,
DeKalb
County
Womack:    "Well, let me, let me respond to the taxes. The school board does not raise taxes… since 2000. Ah, I was chairmen of the Budget Committee we cut 104 million dollars out of the budget. A lot of it was in the area that most people were concerned about. And that was in staff. And we got rid of a lot of things that we shouldn’t have. That we know of.  This year the administration was pushing through another budget and I was able to stop it. I’m vice chair. And we cut another 15 million. We are not going into the classroom. We have increased the number of students. But we have, I think, as good of a fiscal record as any school system, probably better than most. We did not do what the county did - raise property taxes, what? 28 percent? We didn’t do that. But you know, I don’t really buy that the community did not know because Medlock and a couple of areas around the county found out. They had to have knowledge because they came to the board and said, “No.” And the board said, 'Ok.' We listen you. But nobody came to, from this community and said 'no.' "


http://dekalbschoolwatch.blogspot.com/2011/09/transcript-from-briarcliff-es-pta.html

Thursday, May 31, 2012

Womack defends pay raise for Lewis

Paul Womack, District #4 (Tucker, Northlake, Briarlake, Lakeside, Smoke Rise, Jolly, Clarkston, etc.) - the person who brought us the cell towers is seen in this older interview defending the rasie the board voted on for Crawford Lewis, former Superintendent of DeKalb County Schools. Lewis is now facing corruption charges and Womack is running for re-election.

We haven't received statements from two Tucker canidates running against him, but will bring you more when we do. Jim Hensen and Tom Gilbert have both stepped up to hopefully take the reigns from the one-sided power trip that Womack has been on for far too many years now.

Like the man says, "You've got to do what's in the best interest of this county and for the children." (paraphrased, but please watch this clip for yourself!)

From the AJC: Lower Income Kids Waste Most Time on Gadgets

Monkey see, Monkey do! 

Guess what?  Kids can waste time using electronic devices, too! 

This is a video of an adorable baby who thinks that a magazine is actually an I-pad that doesn't work: 



While this video is cute, it also gives us a glimpse of the future.  Children who have never known a world without computers, electronic gadgets and games, but how healthy is all of this "virtual reality" and why are we so set on thinking of technology as a measure of education and achievement? 

Do we think that knowing how to use a calculator makes someone a math wizard? 

Do we think knowing how to use spell check makes us better communicators?

We can't even say for sure that the metorologists on television are any better at predicting the weather based on what type of radar system their station tell us they own, can we?

Did our kids get smarter when the "white-board" replaced the blackboard in our classrooms?  Then why would an expensive "smartboard" be any different?

Warning:  an Economic Divide

A post in the Atlanta Journal today even warns us that technology may even create a bigger problem for school districts, like ours here in DeKalb County, where there is a gap in the economic levels of students. 

If the cell towers that we might soon see going up at 8 of our lower income schools are truly educational in purpose, then is that a sign that our school board is leading us down a path of e-books, mobile homework submission and virtual classrooms? 

Will they be using our tax dollars to fund an "I-Pad in every child's hands?"  And, if so, how will our already poor performing, lower income "Title I" students do when they have the added distraction of a new computer to play with? 

How will the rest of their household react to having an I-Pad to "play" with when it is really intended for the child to use for school work? 

Has our board investigated other similar districts who have tried this solution to their educational problems?  Or, are we, once again, expecting our children to be the guinea pigs?  The RF radiation from a cell tower overhead can be expected to cause insomnia, memory problems, confusion and other issues for as much as 35 - 50% of the kids at a cell tower school. 

What about Lakeside?

Meanwhile, Lakeside High School, the school that was reported by board members to have been the original requestor for the cell towers to help them with their coverage problems, is yet to receive a signed contract OR an FCC license for a tower. 

We've suspected all along that they needed Brairlake Elementary School to receive a tower because they knew they would really not be getting one of their own.  And, since cell towers decrease property values, we aren't surprised that the other schools around Lakeside will be getting towers as a means to continue to help this overpriced community justify their sky-high mortgage rates. 

Here's an excerpt from the article from the AJC's Maureen Downey.  As you read it, think about whether or not this is the right direction for DeKalb County.  And, please remember the children when you plan to vote July 31.  Help us keep cell towers off school grounds by voting no on the ballot question and voting against the incumbants who brought cell towers to our schools in the first place, like Paul Womack, District #6.

Get Schooled - Gadgets Waste Time for Some Kids More than Others

3:01 am May 31, 2012, by Maureen Downey

Full text here:
http://blogs.ajc.com/get-schooled-blog/2012/05/31/new-digital-divide-lower-income-kids-waste-more-time-with-their-gadgets/
(Click link above for full article as well as a link to the NY Times piece.)

Excerpt below:

When technology first began to infiltrate American childhoods, there were fears of a digital divide; children from lower-income families would not have access to the emerging new technologies because of the cost and thus fall behind their more affluent peers whose families could afford cell phones, computers and video game systems.

However, now that access to cell phones and other electronics is widespread, there are fears of a new divide: Poorer kids are wasting more time on their assorted electronic and computer gadgets than more affluent peers.

“Despite the educational potential of computers, the reality is that their use for education or meaningful content creation is minuscule compared to their use for pure entertainment,” said Vicky Rideout, author of a decade-long Kaiser study on online patterns, in a New York Times story on the issue. “Instead of closing the achievement gap, they’re widening the time-wasting gap.”

Closing the digital divide is not improving the educational outcomes of low-income kids, in part because their families have the least ability to monitor their usage of electronics or limit their time.
These issues are important to understand as we are increasingly urged to expand online education options for students, even elementary-age children.

But all children, regardless of income, have come to largely see computer and electronics as entertainment. The challenge is recasting technology as an educational tool.

Nancy, What's Up With That?

 
Board Member Nancy Jester has started a new blog site called, "Nancy, what's up with that?"  You can find some of the common questions she receives and her responses here:  http://whatsupwiththat.nancyjester.com/
 
 
May 31, 2012
 
 
Hi Nancy,


Keep up the great work you are doing on behalf of the entire county.


I was reading some of the SPLOST IV information you provided to the DeKalb School Watch Two Blog and noticed a link in one of the Power Point presentations.




However, when I clicked on it today, May 31, it led to a page that says, “The online application process for the DCSD SPLOST Oversight Committee is coming shortly. Please check back to this website.” But, the Power Point also stated that the cutoff date to apply is June 10, 2012. So, we have 10 days and no way to apply.


Do you know if this online application will be working soon? Or will there be another way to apply? Perhaps the website that was provided could also give the alternative information?


I would like to apply, but that doesn’t appear to be possible. What’s up with that?


Cheryl Miller
(Get the Cell Out - ATL)

District #6

Wednesday, November 16, 2011

UPDATED: YOU TUBE VIDEO: CEO Burrell Ellis Answers GTCO-ATL Question During Town Hall Meeting

UPDATED VIDEO SHOULD START AT CORRECT POINT NOW:

At this November Town Hall Meeting, our co-founder waited patiently until almost the end of the Town Hall meeting until he finally had a chance to speak.  Asking two great questions, we thought for sure we would make some headway on both the SPLOST and the cell tower issues.  Instead, the answers were a little vauge and then directed to Senator Steve Hensen and others on down the line.  But, hey, at least we got them talking about the issue and the others in the room learned more, too. 

Thanks for thaking the question, Mr. Ellis.  But, what we could really use now is an answer that makes sense.  WHY and HOW can our locally elected school board be the ones to determine whether a huge industrial cell tower with HAZMAT materials and RF radiation is safe and properly kept up to code in light of all the controversy surrounding placing these structures near homes and schools? 

Are we really supposed to believe that DeKalb is the ONLY county where we do not care about exerting our power?  We let the school board walk all over us and our children?  And we don't care?  C'mon, that's not the way things work around here!  And, if it is, then we say that it is about time for a change!  Who's coming with us??

Click Photo for YOU TUBE VIDEO:

GTCO-ATL Asks the Hard Questions! GTCO-ATL Asks the Hard Questions!

Tuesday, November 8, 2011

Wi-Fi in the Classroom: A Non-Consent Form for Parents

Just added to our documents file is a handy tool for parents and administrators who have questions or concerns about wi-fi in the classroom.  The DeKalb County School District has listed Wi-Fi for all classrooms as an initiative requiring funding under the SPLOST IV referendum, being voted on by taxpayers in our county today, November 8, 2011.

Vote Today, Nov. 8
Find Your Polling Location:
http://web.co.dekalb.ga.us/voter/locator.asp

If you are a parent with a child in a DeKalb public school, we urge you to watch the video in our previous blog post concerning the dangers of enabling wi-fi to be used by or near your child.

If you would like to express your concern and request that your child's school provide a safe and healthy alternative to this form of instruction, please download and use the NON-CONSENT FORM made available today by Get the Cell Out - Atlanta. 

For a copy of this form in PDF format, use this link:  http://www.scribd.com/doc/72047357/GTCO-ATL-Non-Consent-Form-for-Wi-Fi-in-the-Classroom

Thursday, November 3, 2011

Voters weigh education sales tax with SPLOST

PTA President Admits Prior Knowledge of Cell Tower Proposal



As reported on DeKalb County School Watch blog:

Words were exchanged in anger, tempers flared and PTA President Evelyn Cunningham, wife of school board representative Jesse “Jay” Cunningham, admitted she had been aware of talks with the DeKalb County School System (DCSS) regarding the cell tower proposal for more than a year. She offered no explanation about why the subject was not announced to the parents or community until May, just a month before the school board was scheduled to vote.
Cunningham approached the group of approximately 12 - 14 people who had gathered outside the entrance to Martin Luther King, Jr. High School around 11 am. Monday, Oct 24, to inspect the location where they recently learned a T-mobile cell tower will reside for the next 30 years, thanks to the school board’s approval to lease its property, along with eight other school properties, in exchange for about $400 a month which will be deposited into the county’s general fund. The deal also includes a one-time payment of $25,000 that will also be deposited into the general fund, but those funds will be “directed” by the PTA or a School Booster Club that the school wishes to support.

While the group was assembled outside the school, a spokesperson for the local non-profit group “Get the Cell Out - Atlanta” was also being interviewed by a reporter from WXIA-TV for a story related to SPLOST IV. That story has not yet aired. As the group was disassembling and preparing to return to their vehicles or walk back to their nearby homes, Ms. Cunningham approached them and demanded to know their names and what had been reported to the news media. After several minutes, the group convinced the PTA officer to calm down and discuss her concerns rationally, which is when she admitted to having known about the cell towers for more than a year. When asked if she received the information from her husband, she replied that it was her understanding that lots of people in the PTA were aware of the proposal and it was not specific to anything her husband told her directly.

The DeKalb County Board of Education Administrative Rule O.C.G.A. 20-2-1160 requires: "… public forums from time to time, especially when dealing with controversial issues or matters of deep community concern, to receive input from citizens on policy issues, the educational program, and school administration."

The DCSS official position on the subject of public notification has been that public meetings were held at each of the schools once carrier T-mobile had been selected. Critics claim the flyer sent home with children was vague and did not convey the message that the meeting was to discuss the intent to place cell towers on the school property.

DeKalb County zoning laws specific to the permitting of cell towers has language that prohibit cell phone or cell tower companies from constructing towers, which emit low levels of RF radiation 24 hours a day, within close proximity of residential neighborhoods unless there are no other suitable alternatives. T-mobile representatives stated during the school meetings in May that the schools were selected because they were the “easiest” choice for them to pursue, not the last alternative as required by the county.

T-mobile also reported in the community meetings, according to one parent who attended the meeting at Brockett Elementary in Tucker, that they did not want to build their towers in neighborhoods where they are not wanted. The community members and neighborhood associations near Martin Luther King, Jr. High School have stated that they have been shut out of the process completely, only learning recently that a 150’ tower with a base size of 60’ x 60’ has been approved by the school board.”

At the July 11 board meeting, Jay Cunningham spoke out on the cell tower issue, stating that the community was in favor. In an interview with a reporter from the Crossroads newspaper in July, Cunningham said “Everybody has their view,” adding that he only had one call opposing the proposal. “Everybody had no problem with it. I didn’t hear anything negative from the community.” Read more: CrossRoadsNews - Cell Towers Going to Schools

“It is very disappointing and makes you wonder if you can trust anyone in this school system,” stated one of the people who witnessed the altercation between the PTA President and the community members who say they would like some answers.

“We have fought things like this before,” said one man from a neighborhood right next door to the school. “This is the first time something like this has happened where they plan to allow zoning for something and we do not hear about it until it is too late.”

For similar meeting held by School Board Member Paul Womack at Briarlake Elementary, click here: Womack T-mobile Cell Tower Meeting.

Friday, October 28, 2011

TUCKER PATCH ARTICLE: Wake Up and Smell the SPLOST

Reprint from the Tucker Patch
10.27.2011
Author:  Cheryl Miller
(click headline for the full story)
Much to the dismay and dislike of our DeKalb County School Board, we were still talking about cell towers when it came time for a vote on the SPLOST, special local one-cent sales tax.  But, as far as we were concerned, the two things are very much connected.  Without the financial troubles and lawsuits that resulted from previous SPLOSTs, we likely would not be in a position where something like cell towers would even need to be considered for budget enhancements.  And, if you can't trust your school board representative to listen to your opinion (or even call you back) when it comes to an urgent concern like the cell tower slated for your school, why would you trust that person to oversee a big huge chunk of your money, combined with the money from all your neighbors?  We didn't think it was right for our voices to be ignored and our rights to be trampled on, so we advocated for a "no" vote as a way to "send a message" that the people of our county were paying attention and demanding change before we would just hand over more money. 

Unfortantely, the board held the election at an odd time, making it the only thing on the ballot.  And, with enough friends and family, it was nearly impossible to stop the runaway SPLOST train.  People without kids just assume that if something is "for the children" then it must be good.  But, how much of the previous money even got to the "children" and why did it end up causinig major withdrawls from the general fund - the one to pay for the actual education?  We may never know the answers... but at least we are starting to ask the right questions!

Other communities, cell tower or no cell tower, are sadly still caught in the game of playing tag, hoping to each get a turn at asking for special favors while no one wants to be left  out in the cold.  We'll continue our quest to unite them all and show these communities that their strength is NOT in their barganing for top dog position.  Strength is in the numbers!  If we can stick together, share information and help each other, we can root out the bad and let all the good rise to the top!  Or, at least that is the theroy. 

But, for now, it is time to...

Wake Up and Smell the SPLOST

I was recently contacted by the Atlanta Journal Constitution to give my opinion about SPLOST IV (see article here) and before I knew it, I was in the middle of controversy. I guess voicing your own opinion and then backing it up with what you know to be true can sometimes be unpopular, especially when there is money involved. But, I still stand by my position and there are a lot of people out there who agree with me.

I don't expect everyone to speak out, but I do hope that more people will get out and vote on Tuesday, November 8, so your opinion will actually count. Like all elections, the biggest contributing factor in the upcoming SPLOST IV vote will likely come low voter turnout. Since SPLOST IV is viewed as relevant only to parents of public school children, chances are fairly good that a large portion of voters who could make a difference either do not know about this issue or do not care. And that means they do not intend to vote.
"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. "
                                                                        - Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
But, if you are concerned about high taxes and mismanagement of your money, it might be time to start paying attention because a good school system can make or break our county. And right now, we need all the help we can get. So, thanks to the Internet, it does not take much time to get caught up on the issues concerning our school system. And, if you really enjoy controversy, I recommend you check out The DeKalb School Watch blog or the website I moderate on behalf of our schools that were selected to receive cell towers courtesy of T-mobile and the DeKalb County School System (DCSS): Get the Cell Out - Atlanta Chapter.

Think "Yes" (to education), but Vote "No" (on SPLOST IV)
The reason I am comfortable with the "No" on SPLOST is precisely because we know that they have other ways to get the money, such as repealing the homestead exemption for property owners. This option has been positioned very cleverly as being a negative effect of a "No" vote. But, if you consider your options, you might find that it really would not be so bad. For every homeowner, the cost of losing the exemption would be about $57 flat.
(If SPLOST is not approved then we would lose the $2500 extra homestead exemption that goes against the school levy that we get in DeKalb. The school millage rate is 22.98 mils. 22.98 times $2500 is $57 and change. That's the same no matter the value of your house because the exemption of $2500 is the same for every homeowner. This amount would change only if the millege were to increase.)
So, if you want to look at it on a strictly personal level, do the math. Can you afford a penny on every dollar you spend for a year on everything except food? Or is a one-time, flat cost of $57 per household a better bargain for you?

This could be the wake-up call we need!
And, if you wonder what will happen if you decide to vote "No." The biggest difference is not whether they will get the money. It is only about how they will do it. A "No" to SPLOST IV results in a repeal of the property tax exemption. And that will do one very important thing - it will notify a lot more residents in our county about how bad the problems are in the school system these days. And since property owners are probably more likely to vote as well, these are important people for us to reach so that they might help us elect responsible school board members when it is time to cast our ballots next November.
A continuation of a tax that is already in place without even a short gap of interruption will not only send a message of approval to the current board, but it will also be passed without the majority of our county even realizing that anything has taken place. The current SPLOST funds extend through August 2012 and the tax can be revisited again if we do not pass it on November 8.
I think it is better to give the new superintendent a clean break from the past while she completes her plans. We should enable her to provide more input into the list of items where the money should be allocated so the money will go to back her plans, not require her to work within the confines of a plan that hasn't worked for us in the past.

Think Ahead if You Want Real Change
Without bringing attention to the education downslide we are on, we (the parents and teachers) will not be able to influence the other voters when it is time to try to vote out the incumbents who have failed to listen to us and have pursued their own agendas. It is a fact that voters who are unsure of how to vote will typically vote to preserve what is going on now because, even in difficult times, people are inherently afraid of change. We have to motivate them to WANT to change.

Yes, it might take a short adjustment period where some pain is felt, but it is temporary. If you are concerned about the conditions of the schools, then perhaps you could consider volunteering your time to help. Maybe the PTA or the community at large could help raise funds and organize clean-up or repair days with local volunteers for the most pressing immediate needs that have been neglected by our school board. Our money can be used to directly help the schools, rather than collected and then wasted by administrators who pay their own salaries first before paying teachers and beautify and improve their own surroundings before considering the needs of our children.

We are giving away so much money that it is literally bleeding us all dry, and for what? Our schools are a mess, our board is corrupt and our children are failing. Money is not the only way to show support for the children. In this case, the good intentions of the public to help our schools has resulted in litigation that must be paid by the fund that would normally pay our teachers. So, by giving more money to SPLOST, we actually took money away from those who are directly responsible for teaching our children.

Congress will not pass a new law if there is one single line in it that they cannot agree upon. Instead, they will deny it and wait for a better version to come across their desks. If the money is really needed, we do not have to worry about them finding other ways to ask... that is exactly what they will do.

Don't accept something that is not clearly defined or does not meet your expectations. Do not settle for less than what we deserve. Do not take the abuse of those in power without at least attempting to put your foot down. Because a leopard doesn't change its spots, but a great city and a great county can certainly decline into poverty if we do not speak out now while we still have something left that is worth protecting.

Early Voting for DeKalb County

From the Voter Registrations Office 404-298-4020
(click headline for the full story)
Early voting for all DeKalb County voters has begun for the municipal and
countywide special elections that will be conducted on November 8, 2011.
The voting will continue weekdays through Friday, November 4 from 8:30 AM
until 4:00 PM. The location is the Voter Registration office at 4380
Memorial Drive. There will be no voting on Monday, November 5.

For a review about the E-SPLOST and why we advocate DeKalb County to vote "no," please refer to the following links:
"Wake Up and Smell the SPLOST" on the Tucker Patch.
"School SPLOST has Opposition," on the AJC.com.




The educational special purpose local option sales tax (E-SPLOST) is to
continue a 1% sales tax for educational purposes for the DeKalb,
Atlanta and Decatur school systems. This 1% tax has been collected since 1997 and must be voted on every five years to continue.

For more details on the E-SPLOST, go to the following websites:

DeKalb School System website at http://www.dekalb.k12.ga.us/splost-iv

Atlanta Public Schools website at http://www.atlanta.k12.ga.us/site/default.aspx?PageID=1

Decatur City Schools website at http://www.csdecatur.net/SPLOST/more

In addition to the E-SPLOST, each municipality in DeKalb is conducting
elections for city officials, to approve Sunday liquor sales and to
approve special referendums.

Refer to the DeKalb Votes website at http://www.dekalbvotes.com to see sample ballots and to locate your polling place for Election day.

Questions may be addressed to the Voter Office, 404-298-4020.

Wednesday, October 19, 2011

Wi-Fi and Your Child’s Health:

F O R I M M E D I A T E R E L E A S E

Get the Cell Out - Atlanta Chapter
www.getthecelloutatl.org

Wi-Fi and Your Child’s Health:
What DeKalb Parents Should Know

DEKALB COUNTY, GA: Tuesday, October 18, 2011: As the vote for E-SPLOST IV

approaches, there is one item on the wish list submitted by the DeKalb County School

Board that has parents taking a closer look at how their children’s health might be

affected. The issue is Wi-Fi in the classroom and there is significant evidence from its

implementation in other school districts that this technology may bring more harm than

good to our classrooms.

“Wi-Fi systems emit the same form of radiation as cell towers,” says Cheryl

Miller, co-founder and President of a countywide non-profit group Get the Cell Out -

Atlanta Chapter. She says that school boards can no longer assume wi-fi is safe after

the World Health Organization has called the low level radiation exposure a possible

human carcinogen listed in the same category as DEET insecticide and lead-based paint.

Microwave exposure is linked to infertility, erratic heart rates, learning impairment,

behavioral changes, leukemia and cancer, especially in children.

Across the globe, schools are starting to plug back in after students started

reporting various symptoms that could only be explained by the introduction of wireless

technology into their classrooms.

According to the Center for Safer Wireless, children in schools with wi-fi

technology have reported the following symptoms:

* Headaches (3-5X per week, that require medicine)
* Dizziness - Nausea - Vertigo (gone after student leaves the school)
* Visual and Auditory Distortion
* Racing Heart Rate (Tachycardia)
* Memory Loss (difficulty remembering school information)
* Attention Deficit (difficulty concentrating while in class)
* Skin Rash (mostly lower leg, goes away on weekends or longer breaks)
* Hyperactivity (appears mostly among children not previously hyperactive)
* Night Sweats (unexplainable, unrelated to fever, and lasting several nights)
* Insomnia (restless sleep)

In France and the U.K., wi-fi systems are being dismantled and banned from

primary schools. Germany has issued a country-wide warning to all of its citizens about

the dangers of wi-fi.

Miller states that the cell tower issue is not a fight about technology. “The

response the school board is getting from the schools affected by the cell tower vote is

that it is not okay to ignore the concerns of the districts they serve,” she said. “By not

following their own rules that call for public forums to gain community input before

making a decision, they are sending a message to the parents and taxpayers that they do

not care. That is not acceptable.”

Miller states her group advocates using the power of the vote to let school board

leaders know they will be held accountable by the people they were elected to serve.

“This is not the way to run an efficient school system,” she says. “We have been

left with no other option than to open our eyes to what is going on countywide and stop

being the enabler in this dysfunctional relationship.

Vote No and make them roll up their sleeves and really do their jobs. If they find

money is the only problem that has not been fixed, they will come back to us in a few

months with a cleaned up proposal that is fully justified and contains needs, not fluff.”

For more information about the cell tower issue as well as concerns about wi-fi in

schools, visit the official website for Get the Cell Out - Atlanta Chapter,

www.getthecelloutatl.org or send an email to sayno2celltowers@yahoo.com.


###


Contact: sayno2celltowers@yahoo.com

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

Vote NO on SPLOST IV

We will encourage everyone at a school or neighborhood slated for a cell tower to vote NO ON SPLOST IV on November 8. Why? For starters, because your BOE decided to lock you into a 30 year deal for a dangerous cell tower on public school property without even asking you if it was okay. Then, they pulled a card out of their bag of tricks to again deny you the chance to be heard at the county zoning level by claiming they are exempt from the normal zoning process. Yet school board officials and county commissioners have not been able to tell us what specific law they are referring to when they are making this claim.

So, not only do they not wish to consider your input on a major decision that could affect your health, your property value and your safety from strangers in your neighborhood and at your school, they also wish to completely silence you from being heard at all, even as a courtesy, in a public comments portion of a zoning meeting.

They negotiated the cell tower contract to bring in merely $400 a month, when the average price T-mobile pays elsewhere, like in Gwinett County, is between $2,000 and $3,000 a month for county property leases. While early rumors had some schools expecting they might see substantial benefit from a tower, they have more recently learned that all the tower income will be deposited directy into the DCSS general fund.

One board member, Paul Womack, reported to parents and community members in the Briarlake neighborhood in Decatur that DeKalb is in such "good shape" financially that the cell tower proposal was not even about the money. He claims that the main purpose was to improve the cell service at Lakeside High School. As a side note, the topic was originally introduced to DCSS by a board member who served the Lakeside community and is now a member of the school's booster club, The Valhalla Project. See: http://www.wix.com/dbbaker/thevalhallaproject. Unlike the other schools receiving towers, Lakeside will allow the booster to direct any tower money that may be allocated for renovation projects, rather than the PTA.

What we cannot understand is why it takes 12 schools spread out across the county to improve the dropped call ratios at Lakeside. And, why is the school board suddenly feeling so commpelled to solve this issue when students are not even supposed to use their cell phones on campus? Verizon coverage seems to be fine in the area, so perhaps there are other business connections between Lakeside and T-mobile or AT&T.

If you would like to read the transcribed conversation that took place between Mr. Womack and the people in his district who turned out for a meeting after the vote was already rendered and the contracts were signed. Many of these people had not been informed about the cell tower proposal until it was too late to even voice their opinions. (See partial transcript below.)

We are republishing the transcipt as a reminder of how much our board believes they can operate without even caring about public opinion. If you are as mad as we are when you read Womack state, “I really don’t care.” Or, “If I said yes, it would be a lie, if I said no, it would be a lie,” then please join us in sending them a clear message:

“If you want more money from us, we are not going to just hand it over for you to do whatever you want to with it. You will have to take it from us by way of property taxes or whatever means you feel justify your actions, but we will not hand over our money until you start listening to the people you were elected to serve. You will have to take the money from us, just like criminals. You are cut off until you start following your own rules and doing the job you were elected to do – educate our children. Stop foolish spending. Stop selling out our children. Stop helping your corporate buddies. Start doing what is right or step down."

Here is the transcript as promised:
Thursday, September 1, 2011

Meeting with Paul Womack at Briarlake Elementary School

Transcript of Meeting Between School Board Vice Chair Paul Womack and Concerned Parents and Residents discussing the cell towers.

Transcription of 8/31/11 (Reprinted with permission from DeKalb School Watch Blog.) Womack = Paul Womack, elected again in 2008, having served for twelve years in the 1970s, currently District 4 Rep - School Board Vice Chair / Acting Chair During July 11 board meeting in which a contract was agreed to that will put cell towers at 9 public schools in DeKalb County. Womack is the district representative for 5 schools on the original list of 12: Lakeside, Briarlake, Brockett, Jolly and Princeton.

Interesting to note that this meeting was assembled on short notice within about two days time and 22 people attended, many of whom were not actually invited and the meeting hosts were unsure how they even found out about it. The meeting that was held in May regarding T-mobile’s proposal that Mr. Womack mentions in the transcript below, was supposedly highly publicized and every attempt was made to let the community know about it. That meeting had only 3 attendees from Briarlake. (The Lakeside meeting was held at the same time one mile away.) The Brockett meeting had 5.

===
Womack: You can use [the money from T-Mobile] for improvements, things for the school, room parties, things like that. It’s up the community how you’re going to spend that $25,000. There has been no location so far. They have looked at a couple of sites, but I have been assured by T-Mobile that the community will be able to say yeah or nay as to the actual placement. Questions?

F1: The literature from the World Health Organization from December, 2010, mentioning the RF that comes from cell phones as inconclusive regarding damage as well as the RF from cell phone towers. Five months later they came out with a major study that’s conclusive that long-term usage of cell phones can be (damaging). There’s also a study due out in 2013 about cell phone towers and exposure to those. Shouldn’t we consider waiting until…

Womack: (Steps on speaker)The contract has already been signed. That’s a given. Uh, you get more radiation from your microwave than you do...

F1: But that’s not constant exposure.

Womack: I understand, but when you use this, that’s your choice. That will not be your choice. (chatter) Excuse me, one at a time, please. One at a time. Uh, I can’t say that that study is right or wrong, but I know that the federal government says that it cannot be taken into consideration. But there is no concrete, proven fact. I haven’t seen that study, but I will ask the administration to look at it. I will get an answer.

F2: Will you take a look at this study of dairy cows in Germany? It shows a verifiable link between the RF emissions and the cow’s behavior. They were aborting their calves, not producing enough milk, and when they were removed from that range, everything went to normal.

Womack: Ok. Now you had a comment back there.

F2: Well, my point is, if this is such a controversial issue, why are we taking the risk with our children? Aren’t we supposed to protect children?

Womack: Your name is…

F2: (Answers) I’m just concerned that we are thinking “oh we’re going to get all this money, so that makes it ok”.

Womack: No. It doesn’t. We held a seminar here. We advertised it for a month. Put it on the website. The community was told, but everybody said, “oh it was the end of school, we didn’t have time”. We had about ten people that showed up for that presentation from T-Mobile. And I only heard one question during that presentation that was anywhere in voicing a concern. And the community over at Medlock voiced major concern and we took it off of the contract. But their voice was not from the safety, they were mad because Medlock had been closed. They didn’t want any encroachment. We’ve tried to follow what communities wanted and very frankly, I’ve only had 4 or 5 questions out of this community as to whether it was safe, why did you do it. If the community does not speak up, I can only support or not support what I’m hearing.

F3: I have a comment. Many people didn’t come, because they didn’t know. Now that people know, I understand that this took place in the summer.

Womack: There was a presentation on May 3.

F3: There was a presentation but it didn’t discuss cell towers on this property.

F4: You’re right here in my neighborhood, in my backyard. I didn’t know anything about this. I’ve spoken with several of my neighbors and nobody knew anything about it. Nobody let our neighborhood know anything about any possibility of there being any cell phone towers right in our backyard. It’s the first time we’ve known about it right after your vote.

Womack: I’m sorry.

M1: Well it looks like now, it’s a done deal

Womack: It is a done deal.

F4: Unless there’s a protect order.

Womack: That won’t happen cause the county has come to us to ask how we did it cause they want to do it too. (arguing ensues)

F4: If you did it before we had a chance to know about it that was

Womack: It was on television before the vote, on all of the stations.

F4: What stations?

Womack: The television stations ma’am. It was out in the public. I can only do what I hear, not what I’m hearing after the fact.

F4: Well, if we didn’t know before the fact, then what could we say before the fact?

F5: I could find nothing online.

Womack: Well, it was on our site. It was publicized through… We had sent notices to uh, I don’t know what to tell you on that.

F5: During the vote on July 11, during the meeting it was brought to your attention that the community was not aware of this. I am very involved in the schools and I was not aware of this.

Womack: I don't know what to tell you.

F5: I do know that you pushed the vote through.

Womack: Yes


F5: You opted. Your name in the meeting minutes opted to push the vote through.

Womack: Yes

F5: And you say that the contract is now signed, but we’re saying that we didn’t know. You’re telling us we did, but I’m telling you that no, I did not.

Womack: Well, I don’t know how to get it out anymore than we tried. I don’t have the resources personally to do this. We asked the administration to post it on the site. I do know that we got it out the best we could. And I don’t care what issue it comes to a community, part is going to have it and part is not.

M2: I realize that, but at the same time, the procedures that have been used at least since the Roosevelt administration, whenever we have an issue of public necessity, vs the rights of private citizens affected by that alleged necessity, is that we have a period of adequate notice – sufficient to get the message to the members of the community that are affected. I’m just saying that if all you did was notify the PTA and you’re planning on putting a 150’ cell phone tower that’s 50 feet from my property line? And it’s my property value that’s going to be affected, then you need to notify me and other members of the community that are affected. I back up to the playground of this establishment.

Womack: One of your neighbors, I discussed it with him because he, uh, came. And I asked him, “what’s your interest?” And I said, “are you concerned?” and he said, “Oh, no. no.” He said, “I’ve put cell towers up all over the country. Now you may know who I’m talking about, somebody right around here. I live, not quite as close as you are. I don’t know what to tell you. I didn’t know why you didn’t know it because we tried to get the message out.

F6: Well, I’m right next door. We have a neighborhood alert. We have a newsletter. We have an email alert for the neighborhood. Nobody in our neighborhood knows about it and we are immediately next door. My property line is exactly next to the property line of this school. Nobody in my neighborhood knew anything about it. Not a thing.

Womack: Well, I don’t know what to say to you. We tried to get it out.


M2: Did you put signs up? I mean, did you put any signs?

Womack: No, no we did not. We did not. No.

F6: So, one meeting and that’s it? You had like one meeting and pushed it through? Is that what happened? I mean that’s what it sounds…

Womack: Well, actually, yes, I would say that is the fact of the matter, yes.

F6:That doesn’t seem right.

M3: I’d like to try to suggest a rationale for why what happened did happen. We are at a time when our county is looking for sources of revenue to keep the schools open, not have to cut services while politically it’s the wrong time to be raising taxes and here was a chance to get a hold of a cool, free half a million bucks and if we went and got this thing done without making a lot of noise, it was gonna happen and the county and the school board was willing to take the risk that there wouldn’t be a couple of lawyers living next door that might somehow find their way there might be a rite of notice and run down to the courthouse. And that’s what happened.

Womack: Well, let me, let me respond to the taxes. The school board does not raise taxes… since 2000. Ah, I was chairmen of the Budget Committee we cut 104 million dollars out of the budget. A lot of it was in the area that most people were concerned about. And that was in staff. And we got rid of a lot of things that we shouldn’t have. That we know of. This year the administration was pushing through another budget and I was able to stop it. I’m vice chair. And we cut another 15 million. We are not going into the classroom. We have increased the number of students. But we have, I think, as good of a fiscal record as any school system, probably better than most. We did not do what the county did - raise property taxes, what? 28 percent? We didn’t do that. But you know, I don’t really buy that the community did not know because Medlock and a couple of areas around the county found out. They had to have knowledge because they came to the board and said, “No.” And the board said, “Ok.” We listen you. But nobody came to, from this community and said “no.”

F7: I am new to Decatur, and I met a parent from Medlock. And, I knew nothing about the cell towers at the school before I met her and she described to me a wooing relationship with T-mobile. That they came several times and tried to tell them how good it would be, and this was before the school closed, how good it would be for the community, how, ah, they could make it look like a water tower and not like a cell tower, that it could have their mascot painted on it, and so they, in the process of wooing the community alienated the community. And that’s what I understood from this parent.

Womack: Well, that could very well be true. Yes sir?

M4: Just curious, I’m sorry. I was a little late. You may have discussed it earlier. If it is not a good decision for the three schools that you pulled off the list, and I saw this in a report I recently read and the person in that article quoted a board member as saying if they heard anything at all, then how does the logic follow through that it is a good idea for the other schools?

Womack: The, the, uh, answer to that, maybe, maybe. It was that the community came forth and said we just don’t want it. That was, that was before the vote, sir.

F5: But, you can change the vote, right? You can bring it back up?

Womack: No, no. The contracts have been signed. I’m sorry.

F5: Well, don’t you think if other schools were had a quite a lengthier notice because of T-mobile and.. and we didn’t have any interaction with the school so we didn’t have any notice.

Womack: I can’t answer that. I can’t give you an honest answer about that. If I said “yes” it would be a lie, if I said “no” it would be a lie.

F5: Well, just personally, I’m just amazed that those other schools were that together and were there at that meeting. And were, you know, in the…

Womack: They voiced it to their, their, their local boards

F5: And so, in this report of that meeting, you know, there’s all this stuff about how this school and that school went to the community and this school doesn‘t want it … and it says that cell phone towers especially near developing children could be a danger. Is there a provision in this 15-year contract if there is something in there that is damaging to children? Is there some sort of break off?

Womack: I don’t know about that. If you would make just a little note for me and I will try to get you an answer.

F5: Okay

Womack: But, I can assure you, just as one board member, if this thing proves to be detrimental, and not, uh, an eyesore, if this were detrimental to kids the board would move to break the contract.
(mumbled talking in background)

So, everything we’ve seen so far and I’ve told you the FC - the Federal Communications Act says health cannot be … it is updated… look, I can’t give you the answer. Look either you are in FAVOR of this, or you are not. Yes sir?


M5: Then I have a question. If this is a private company and it’s not a question of public perception. And if a private company can go buy private property somewhere.

Womack: Yes sir.

M5: And it wasn’t a matter of money as you said so there in your speech a while ago, then what was so seductive about this particular proposal that you had to go for it and after there are three major objections and sneak it through as you did.

Womack: We did NOT sneak it through, sir. That’s your definition. We did not sneak it through at all. The seductive part is we have poor cell service in here. Over at Lakeside. Over at Lakeside. There is no police. There’s no fire. There is no cell service across from Briarcliff almost all the way down to Clairemont and back down a great degree down… (unintelligible name of a road). And in the school last year they had a young lady that had a seizure. And that community wants a cell phone.

F7: They don’t have a land line?

Womack: They did, uh, it happened outside. And it took them something like 10 minutes to get from where they were inside because they were trying to take care of her and the seizure she had.

(His cell phone started beeping. - which was a little amusing since he was just making the point about no cell service in the area)

Excuse me. (He reaches into pocket, takes out phone and turns it off.)
Yes sir?

M6: Can, can you generally explain the electromagnetic spectrum and tell us why 120 towers isn’t sufficient for coverage?

Womack: No sir, I can’t.

M6: Because it doesn’t make any sense to have more.

Womack: You have a cell tower right down here at, uh, at uh, Oak Grove and Lavista.

M6: Here you can have the addresses. I’ll give this to, you can have the addresses of where all the towers are at.

Womack: I’ve seen that. And, I know we’ve got a lot of cells in here. But the cells - break out.

M6: How?

Womack: Sir, that’s a technical question and I’m not prepared and I will not discuss it and I am not talking about it.

M6: But, you made the decision to put the tower in. Without knowing? That doesn’t make any sense to me.

Womack: That doesn’t have anything to do with…

M6: (Angry) It has everything to do with our children!

Womack: We have very limited cell service in this area.

M6: Do you want me to tell you why it is that way?

Womack: Why?


M6: Because they’ve jumbled the airwaves with all the towers in. You’ve got asymmetrical lines and you’ve got symmetrical lines. Asymmetrical are for residential areas, meaning we take in…

Womack: You’re the expert, sir. I’m not …

M6: Well then I should have made the decision! And I would have said No! Because, to me, 120 is pretty sufficient!

Womack: Okay, sir, you’ve made your point.

M6: Thank you. Appreciate it.

F8: … (unintelligible - lots of talking going on in background)… and when did the school system start making decisions about cell phone coverage?

Womack: This started, I guess, last, um, about mid-last year, well, I guess.. And we, uh, discussed it in a couple of board meetings best I can remember… lightly, not heavy, but lightly. And we said, “We have to go to the community.” And, we did that as best we could. I’m sorry we did not contact your association.

F8: Well, I would like to know where did you go?

Womack: Well, Maam’ I can’t… I can’t answer that. I’m not gonna go knock on your door and say, “Hey, we gonna put..

F8: I’m not asking you for that, but what I am asking is that you go to the neighborhood that is immediately next door and give us some kind of notice.

M7: Mr. Womack, you could have done what’s standard for zoning issues, which is that..

Womack: Post a notice out here?


F8: Exactly!

M7: You could have put up a large sign that everybody notices …

Womack: Look, we relied on our website. I’m sorry we didn’t do our job as well as we should. But, let me tell you something, whether you like what I’m going to tell you or not, I really don’t care…


M7: Obviously!

(more mumbling from audience)

F9: That’s the problem!

Womack: That is not the problem.

F9: That IS the problem!

Womack: Ma’am, when you set in my seat and you’re pulled as many ways as I’ve been pulled since I came back on this board, you would run from this job.

F9: (Angry) That was your choice! That’s not my problem. I did not force you to do that!

Womack: I understand, Ma’am. And I’m not debate that with you. You’ve got your life… I’m not, because I paid to get this job and the community asked me to do it. Now…

F9: Then don’t complain!

Womack: It is the most important job there is in the state. The school board. Because it’s charged with educating the future leaders of this country. If we fall down, the community falls down. I’m sorry that you did not get the notice that you wanted.

F9: No notice.

Womack: I said I am sorry you didn’t get it! I’m not going to play on the words. Yes, ma’am?

F10: Um, I’m not going to say if it is right or wrong because it sounds like it’s already a done deal and really there is no sense arguing over it at this point unless you’re going to bring it to court. From that vantage point, my question really comes to you is that if this was about money for the cell towers, is there any sort of written information as far as how much Briarlake is going to get for it?

Womack: $25,000

F10: And that’s it? Out of that $250…

F11: $450 (others also chime in with $450,000)

Womack: $450. Now if they put another cell phone, uh, carrier up there, you get an additional $25.

M8: But, by law, don’t they have to fill the other 120? Don’t they have to co-locate? Or do you not know the laws on that either?

Womack: Sir, I don’t know the answer. You’re an expert in the math and things..

M8: Yeah, I am, and I will be more than happy to tell ya… you’re skirting the law!

F11: That’s right!

Womack: You need to talk to our people. I’ll be glad to open that door for you.

M8:Oh yeah, I’d appreciate that. Thanks.