IMPORTANT MEETING: Cell towers focus of DeKalb meeting Monday

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

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

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

Meeting notice, From the AJC

By April Hunt

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

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

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

Cell Towers Should Not Be Allowed in 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CELL TOWERS SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED 

IN ANY PART OF OUR COUNTY 

THAT IS NOT CURRENTLY ZONED FOR THEM.   

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

Zoning Code Update Comments from June 18

Here are some of the comments that were made during the June 18 Board of Commissioners Meeting. Cell tower comments dominated the overall agenda and the board determined it was best to defer 30 - 90 days before making a vote to adopt the new county zoning code.

DeKalb Zoning Code Comments June 18, 2013 by Get the Cell Out - Atlanta Chapter

The final vote on whether to adopt the new zoning code was scheduled to take place Tuesday Aug. 20. We have not heard the outcome of this meeting, yet.

VICTORY! NO to Cell Towers on School Grounds!

(click headline for full story)

YES!   YOU VOTED NO! 
THANK YOU DEKALB COUNTY VOTERS! 

71,690 VOTERS HAVE AGREED SO FAR! 
NO CELL TOWERS ON OUR SCHOOL GROUNDS!

VICTORY BY 60% OR MORE!

DeKalb Voters Say No to Cell Towers on School Property
Article below from The Patch
By Jonathan Cribbs
1:02 am

DeKalb County voters said they don't want cell phone towers on public school properties Tuesday.

In a nonbinding resolution – part of Tuesday's primary election – more than 60 percent of residents voted no to the question: "Should the local or independent school system of DeKalb County or a charter school in DeKalb County place or operate a telecommunications tower on any elementary, middle or high school property?"

Of 114,804 votes counted early Wednesday morning, "No" took 71,690 votes – all preliminary returns. More than 5,000 absentee ballots have yet to be counted.

The resolution will have no legal bearing on whether the DeKalb County School System continues to pursue construction of cell phone towers on school property. The school system upset a number of school communities in north and south DeKalb County last year when they agreed to let T-Mobile build nine cell phone towers on school properties across the county for up to 30 years.

************************
NEXT UP:  MAJOR CONCERN FOR LOCAL TOWER WORKERS IF T-MOBILE DOES NOT BACK OUT OF THE CURRENT DEKALB COUNTY SCHOOLS CONTRACT

The Resolution May Not Have Legal Bearing,
but it has a Moral Lesson That Should Not be Ignored

And, that leads us to the next order of business... the nine approved schools that have now been reduced to eight total signed lease agreements... when will T-mobile get the message that we do not want them to build cell towers on our school grounds?  When will they exercise the "out clause" that only they can do and escape any futher financial obligation to the school system as the inability to gain a permit is a just cause for the lease termination.  They wrote the lease, so they likely expected that it might be possible to get this far and have to back out.  So, what are they waiting for?

And, we need more than just a promise from our current board of educaiton that they will not entertain these cell tower offers again.  If Montgomery County, MD, can get a resolution passed by their board, then so should we!

If they plan to build eight or nine towers before school starts on Monday, Aug. 13, that sounds like an impossible timeline.  And, in fact, T-mobile and ATT are actually well-known for trying to pressure their workers to make unrealistic deadlines.  That pressure has led to many tower workers losing their lives trying to meet the demands of their $10 - $11 / hour job.  For more on this subject, see the in-depth article titled:  In Race For Better Cell Service, Men Who Climb Towers Pay With Their Lives.

Tower climber Jay Guilford poses atop a cell tower. He was one of 11 climbers to die while working on AT&T jobs during a wave of cell service expansion from 2006 to 2008. Photo courtesy of Bridget Pierce.

What can we do to make sure our local construction crews are safe?  We must continue writing and calling the office of the CEO, Planning & Sustainability, Public Works and our County Commissioners.  We have to tell them to put an immediate moratorium on all cell tower construction countywide so that it will not be possible for the towers to go up in an unrealistic time frame. 

And, if the permits are not in place, we need to ask our represenatives to tell us the truth - will these permit applications be accpeted?  Will there be a chance for public comment?  What is being done to disucss alternative methods of provding service to our county WITHOUT having to take up valuable school grounds and pay off our corrupt school board members?

If the ballot question was writen by the telcomm industry and its lobbyists, then we are very proud to see that their plan to find out where the opposition might be located has backfired.  Instead, it will show us where there may be corruption and that, when motivated to work together, our county CAN come together for the sake of our children!


"We're so proud of everyone who helped make this happen!  Good job DeKalb County!  We will continue to fight to see that your rights are protected and your voices are heard!"

-- Cheryl and Paul Miller, Founders, Get the Cell Out - Atlanta

CBS Investigative Reporter Wendy Saltzman Writes to DeKalb School Board and Superintendent

GTCO-ATL Note to Readers:  How does this relate to cell towers?  When we started paying attention to the schools that were supposed to be getting cell towers, we also started to notice the electricity waste taking place.  We are following this story as we have wondered if perhaps the cell tower schools were ramping up their electricity use intentionally (by command from higher up's) so that when the cell towers came online and started using our school's electricity as paid for by the taxpayers that the year-to-year numbers would not look extreme and therefore no one would notice that the towers added a huge amount to electric use.  That, of course, all remains to be seen because we still do not have any word from our county CEO Burrell Ellis on whether or not any permits for T-mobile will be approved against the wishes of the communities, the county commissioners and the state legislature. 

We were also in touch with the Georgia Smart Meters opposition group that the cell towers inside our neighborhoods could have a connection to the smart meters Georgia Power is installing on our homes.  The smart meters need cell towers to communicate our usage data back to their headquarters.  So, in case Georgia Power is involved in placing these dangerous towers on our school grounds, we thought it would only be fair for us to make sure they are not getting too much of our money in others ways since they seem to think they are entitled to a lot more than we think a private citizen should have to give up just for use of electricity - our privacy, our health, our public school grounds.  What's next?  Well, CBS Investigative Reporter Wendy Saltzman is on our side and holding the school board and its spokesman accountable!  We'll be watching her station to see what she learns in her ONGOING investigation about the waste of our money in our own schools. 

If not for this waste, maybe the school district would have never been so desparate to have to consider cell phone towers as an "alternate revenue stream" to begin with.  Read on for Wendy's letter, dated 7/20/12:

Dear School Board Members and Superintendent,

I know all of you are very busy with the budget right now, but I wanted to follow up on the report we aired on Tuesday.  I was very dismayed when I received an email from a parent saying the lights were still on (not just security lights, but lots of lights) day and night at the schools we identified in our reports and others.  I was told by Jeff Dickerson the issue was being looked at when we spoke on Tuesday.   I would like to find out what the school district is doing about this issue. We will continue reporting on it, as the school district is already $6 million over their budget for electricity.

Here is a link to my report:

http://www.cbsatlanta.com/story/19045960/school-lights-left-on-tough-questions-about-waste

I have received a large response from parents, and was made aware the story has also been posted on two other sites. 

https://dekalbschoolwatch.wordpress.com/2012/07/19/lights-left-on
http://tucker.patch.com/articles/tucker-schools-in-cbs-investigation-of-electricity-waste

Here is the email I received from a parent just today that I found concerning.  Please advise what the district is going to do moving ahead, as I plan to follow up on your progress next week.

Just a quick update to let you know the electricity issue / efficiencies of our schools made it to the list of questions for candidates at the school board forum at Arabia Mountain High last night.  And we don’t even know who submitted the question, but everyone there seemed to be very aware of it.  The board members (current) seemed a little embarrassed by it.  But, you know what... I drove by Brockett today and darn if those outdoor flood lights weren’t still on in the daytime!  Ugh!  Maybe they are on because of the weather, but we will keep checking when it clears up and see if there has been any change to the practices of these schools since your investigation.  Here are a few of my notes from the candidate forum regarding this issue:

The answers were all over the place:

Jim McMahan (Dist. 4):  We need to do what we can do; efficiencies for all departments are a must
Dr. Pam Speaks (Dist. 8):  Need to hold the superintendent accountable
Dr. Rivers-Cannon (Dist. 6):  Need less administration and paperwork so the little things will get done faster.
Latasha Walker (Dist. 6):  Need to identify where the waste is coming from.  You can’t fix what you don’t know.
Tom Gilbert (Dist. 4):  It’s not that big of a deal.  At Home Depot, we leave our lights on, too.
Jim McMahan (Dist. 4):  Well, we don’t  have the money of Home Depot; maybe your boss can donate some motion sensors to our schools since we cannot afford to keep our lights on like that.
H. Paul Womack (Dist. 4):  Listen, here is the deal with the lights. I called the Superintendent and asked her to check into it and that is all I can do.

Enjoy your day and thanks for all that you do!

Thank you,


Wendy Saltzman
Chief Investigative Reporter
CBS ATLANTA NEWS
Direct: 404-327-3031
Fax: 404-327-3074
Cell: 404-606-0460

Wendy.Saltzman@CBSAtlanta.com

  

YOUTUBE VIDEO: The Trashy Side to Lakeside

The housing market in Atlanta has taken a hit, like most areas of the country, but the pricey homes near Lakeside High School have managed to maintain their value and, in some cases, even increase. Ever wonder how?

Real estate agents might tell you that it is due to their well-known high school, Lakeside.
But, as this video suggests, perhaps the inflated home values are the result of "McMansions" being built on lots far too small for them.

It's a builders way of preserving a declining home market in a bad economy. The high priced homes infused into reasonable priced neighborhoods makes every home value in the area go up, whether the actual buildings next to the McMansions are actually worth it or not.

The home buyers are told the school is the reason. But when construction plans fell short due to abuse of taxpayer funds, the boosters devised a plan to "finish the dream." It involves claiming to want a cell tower while knowing they would never get one. Then sticking 8 other nearby schools with them, thus lowering the appeal of those neighborhoods while you rake in all the money through an agreement you've made with your school board member and the cell tower company.

It appears there is one thing that is available on a more "equal opportunity" basis in Atlanta than education - is the corruption.  Thankfully, the trials of Crawford Lewis, Pat Pope Reid and Tony Pope are expected to begin this September.  Perhaps the outcome could signal the end of an era, and the beginning of something better.




Before anyone provides feedback, please understand that this video is not intended to offend anyone who lives near Lakeside or attends school there.  We love the area.  We have friends who live nearby.  We think they should feel the same way we do. 

In fact, even the folks at the Yahoo news group must have similar questions.  Check out this story, titled "The American Dream is a Myth."

We don't want to harm anyone's neighborhood.  And, we don't think the ordinary citzens who live near Lakeside would want that, either. 

Instead of allowing corruption to ruin our schools, which harms everyone's property values, we need to vote the most responsible school board members into office and weed out the ones who are pitting us against each other.

Let's take matters into our own hands.  We can apply for the SPLOST oversight committee!  We can encourage responsible people to run for the school board (in two years) and we can vote for the best choices availabe on July 31.  We can vote NO on the cell tower question.

We can speak up at board meetings, but not just for our own schools.  Let's start speaking out for the sake of ALL our schools and ALL our neighborhoods. 

We can encourage others to vote.  Talk about the important issues.  Make a difference.  Do the right thing instead of trying to help those who are digging themselves in deeper, we should take a step back and look at our own behavior.  Let's be role models for our children and show them the way things SHOULD work. 

Let's leave a legacy that will make them proud of us!

[ ] YES             “Should the local or independent school system of DeKalb County or a charter   
                          school in DeKalb County place or operate a telecommunications tower on any
[ ] NO                elementary, middle, or high school property?"

VOTE NO!  VOTE NO!  VOTE NO!  VOTE NO!

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 customersҒ 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.

HB 1299 Signed by Gov. Nathan Deal; JULY 31 Call to Action - VOTE NO to School Cell Towers

JULY 31, 2012 -  ON THE BALLOT

Gov. Nathan Deal has signed HB 1299, which was the negotiated compromise between Committee Leader Rep. Chuck Sims (R - Ambrose) and Rep. Dr. Karla Drenner (D - Avondale Estates) when the bills introduced by Drenner to ban cell towers from school grounds were halted by Sims with questionable logic of unconstitutionality. 

Sims has ties to the highly controversial group ALEC, recently in trouble for its support of the "Stand Your Ground" law that may play a role in the Trevon Martin shooting death in Florida.    ALEC members seek to push forth a highly conservative agenda that favors big business interests, disguised as being for the citizens.  ATT is one of the large corporate backers of ALEC that has not pulled out of the group recently like so many others have.  For more about ALEC, see ALEC Exposed. 

Coke, Pepsi, Kraft, McDonald's, Wendy's, Intuit, Reed-Elsevier, and others have dropped their membership in the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC).

Click here to tell other firms bankrolling ALEC to do the same.

More urgently for DeKalb County residents is that HB 1299 will result in a question being posed to voters on the upcoming July 2012 ballot.  This question needs your NO vote.  Warn everyone you know to show up for this election, or get an absentee ballot if they will not be in town, so that your area does not accidentally vote that you WANT cell towers at your schools.  It will most likely result in your school being next on the list and may even result in an attempt to overturn our county ordinances already in place to protect our health and property values!

VOTE NO!  VOTE NO!  VOTE NO!  VOTE NO!  VOTE NO!  VOTE NO!  VOTE NO! 

26 "( ) YES   NONBINDING ADVISORY REFERENDUM

27                Should the local or independent school system of DeKalb County or a

28   (X ) NO  charter school in DeKalb County place or operate a telecommunications

29                tower on any elementary, middle, or high school property?"

VOTE NO!  VOTE NO!  VOTE NO!  VOTE NO!  VOTE NO!  VOTE NO! 

LAST YEAR: July 2011 - the month when the School Board of DeKalb County voted to lease property to T-mobile over objections made by Get the Cell Out - Atlanta and others that communities were not properly notified and public opinion had not been duly considered.
Upon return to school in August 2011, the board began to hear exactly what we warned them about, an uprising of parents and community members began coming forward to complain that the decision was snuck past them in the middle of Summer when most families are not focused on school activities and many people are out of town.

THIS YEAR July 2012 - were there any lessons learned from past mistakes? No, in fact, if anything, the school board learned that July is a great time for them to sneak things past the school communities, so they plan to do it to us again.   Not only will they hold school board elections during this Presidential Primary period, they will also add the question about cell towers, without calling them cell towers, and without the support of those who lobbyed their state officials in order to gain their help. 

The question was drafted by a desperate telecomm group seeking to pinpoint where the "uprising" is coming from since they were unable to slow down or quiet the citizens of DeKalb County.  The pressure from the county residents and parents led to the county commissioners doing the right thing and telling the CEO that they wish to exercise their power to deny the T-mobile permits.  They urge the CEO to deny any permits that may come to him or his office for approval that do not follow proper process and procedures.

The unamimous support of the county commissioners should have been enough to stop the state from interfering.  The attempts at state bills were not successful, largely because they were introduced too late in the session to make it through the committee process, esp. when stalled by the committe chairman Rep. Chuck Sims (R - Ambrose).

But, rather than stop there, the telecomm industry is pushing back against the wishes of the people.  By introuducing a question onto the ballot that will do nothing to help the citizens, they are attempting to take control away from the citizens and override the power of local control in a very ALEC-sort of way.  The power of this decision belongs with the county commissioners and the Office of Planning and Sustainability and the Office of Public Works, as headed by the DeKalb County CEO Burrell Ellis.

What will CEO Burrell Ellis do?  We asked him this question MONTHS AGO.  To hear his response, check out our blog entry and YOUTUBE video from the CEO's Town Hall Meeting back in November 2011.  We even wrote to him long before this entire issue got out of control:  our letter here.

Local Power, Local Control

The FCC Telecommunications Act of 1996, the one that the telecomm gurus like to quote so often, actually speaks to the fact that the ultimate power should always remain under local control when it comes to the placement and design of cell towers.  While it does state that a local municipality cannot deny a cell tower SOLELY on the basis of environmental factors if it complys with FCC regulations, it does not state that they must approve anything that is contrary to local zoning ordinances already in place. 

In fact, we have sent a letter to CEO Ellis with backup of a legal case from Cobb County where a federal court upheld the rights of the local government to uphold its own regulations.  We will be posting that letter in the next couple days once we have confirmed receipt by all the intended recipients.

Social media and person-to-person networking is going to have to work overtime the next few months if there is any hope of beating these folks at their own game!

Please, tell everyone you know:  VOTE NO on the ballot question about "telecommuications towers on school grounds."  What they are really asking is whether you wish to have your county commissioners' opinions ignored and your local ordinances disobeyed so that they can put a cell tower at YOUR school in YOUR neighborhood.  They want YOU to be next!

And write to CEO Burrell Ellis asking that he uphold the county ordinances in DeKalb for safe siting of cell towers AWAY from residentially zoned communities.

Contact CEO Burrell Ellis:· CEO Burrell Ellis
Chief Executive Officer
DeKalb County Government
330 W. Ponce de Leon Avenue, 6th Floor
Decatur, GA 30030
· Email: schedulingceoellis@dekalbcountyga.gov
· Or ceo@dekalbcountyga.gov

And, sign the countywide petition at: www.thepetitionsite.com/1/GTCO-ATL

Please, forward this link to as many people in our county as you can.

DEKALB NEIGHBOR: BOE, commissioners at odds over cell towers

click headline to view a copy of this article as seen in the

DeKalb Neighbor newspaper on April 11, 2012

Dear Gov. Nathan Deal: Please VETO HB 1299

(click headline to read entire letter)

TO WRITE YOUR OWN LETTER
TO GOV. DEAL,
USE THIS FORM:  http://gov.georgia.gov/00/gov/contact_us/0,2657,165937316_166563415,00.html


Dear Gov. Deal,

Thank you for taking time to consider my urgent plea for your help.  There is a bill that will be coming across your desk that must be stopped. I am speaking on behalf of all the citizens in DeKalb County who have lobbyed the state for help in the matter of cell towers on school grounds.

The issue that was presented to our legislators has been addressed within our county and we no longer wish to seek a state interference in what should be a matter of local control.

The original bill we were at the capitol to support was not passed and this secondary bill was substituted at the last moment as a consolation that is not necessary. In light of the most recent events, it may actually be harmful to the overall cause that it is attempting to support. 

We were not involved in the process of writiing the question that would be placed on the ballot, but in seeing it now, we do not believe it is an accurate reflection of the issue.  Asking the voters take a side in this fashion would actually be misleading and a waste of taxpayer time and money. 

Please VETO the referendum (HB 1299)
http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/20112012/125418.pdf

It might also lead to further distrust of our government in general if perhaps the information that is gathered as a result is used in a manner inconsistent from what the individual voters may have intended at the time they answered. 

In brief, on March 27 we received the help and acknowledgement from our county commissioners that we have been hoping for since we first started reaching out to them in May 2011.

We are pleased to report that the efforts of our citizens to put aside differences and work together had a positve effect on our commissioners as well.  They jointly signed a letter to the DeKalb CEO stating the validity of our argument against the cell towers and agreed that they would not be allowed via standard zoning process.  They have urged the CEO to deny any requets for Special Administrative Permit.

We believe the CEO will comply with the request of the commissioners as backed by the citzens of the county (more than 1,000 signatures on file).  The only thing that could possibly derail the months of reserch and hard work would be the passage of this confusing and ineffective referendum that would only mislead many voters out there who have not yet heard anything about this issue or at least not enough to form their own opinion on the subject.

We do not have the manpower, money or support of a big time telecomm lobbyist group.  We are therefore at a big disadvantage to being able to get the word out to people beyond our own neigbhrohoods in time for them to undersand the imporatace of voting no. 

To complicate matters, the legislature also passed a bill this session that makes it a high mistimeaner to conduct a peaceful protest in a residential neighborhood or discuss one on public property. 

Therefore, the rights of the citizens will be severely at risk because if they vote "No," they will be actively involved in a protest of a school agreement while in a residential community or on school / public grounds.  If they even discuss this item to try to explain that telecommunications tower means cell phone tower, they might be considered to be discussing a protest.  We do not want to see anyone suffer a $1,000 or $10,000 fine for simply talking about what is on the ballot. 

HB 1299, http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/20112012/125418.pdf, titled, "DeKalb County; nonbinding, advisory referendum by electors to ascertain if schools should place or operate a telecommunication tower on school property; provide." 

As a former Marketing Research Manager with CNN and CBS News, I am concerned about the validity of this form of questioning and the false results that it might result in.  In my MBA-level training in this area, when writing good questions for surveys, we are taught to stay away from asking multiple part questions as if they were all part of the same thing.  It is an incorrect assumption made by the person writing the question to believe that a person who feels one way about one type of school would feel the same way about another type of school. 

Therefore, the conflict of how to answer a question like this could very well result in answers that are not completely truthful or do not get to the heart of how the voter really feels about the issue.  In addition, a telecommunications tower may not be thought of as a cell tower, the real issue we are discussing.  And, the schools will in no way be in charge of operating the towers.  They are stictly for-profit entitities that the cellular company is going to operate as they attempt to go around our zoning laws that are in place for the protection of our residents and our home values.

The question, from a research standpoint, is not asked in a manner that would be considered valid reasoning.  It does not offer anyone the option to answer, "I don't know," or "need more information," which is more likely the sentiment of most of our residents because, unless this issue affects your own home or school, it is not one that is typically followed.  That is why the public notification process in a standard case of zoning would be the appropriate manner in which to handle these towers.  It is what we expected to happen all along and it is what has taken place elsewhere.

We only expected our state legislators to help us with a potential ban going foward and this only happened when Rep. Karla Drenner stepped up to help.  But, it was the Rep. Chuck Sims who headed the committee that shot down the proposed bill, and encouraged Rep. Drenner to seek this referendum instead.  The people are not behind this decision and we urge you to please help us by passing a VETO on this item.

We (collectively), and I do speak for the more than 1,100 people who have signed the countywide petition or other combined hardcopy petitions submitted for inclusion, are satisfied with the county government's ability to properly zone for cell towers and do not think that the general public should be allowed to vote on an item if they have not been educated on it.  In addition, the wording of the question is difficult to ascertain anyone who might be okay with a tower at a high school, but not at an elementary school.  The largest concern is for the youngest of children who are the most vulnerable to this form of radiation.  The question also omitted a group considered to be "comprehensive schools," that run K- 12 and are also being considered as possible cell tower locations. 

While we appreciate the tenacity of Rep. Drenner for trying so hard to get us any type of committment to change, we do not think this voter question will yield results that can be beneficial in any way to those whom they are trying to help.  And, in fact, it may dilute the effect of our commissioners coming forward if the vote is unfairly inaccurate due to the question not being clear as well as the issue still not top of mind for everyone.

Please note we also have 16 of 18 state representatives who signed off on the local bill for a total ban of cell towers on school grounds and we received 7 of 7 county commissioners to pen the letter to the CEO stating that they do not think the permits should be approved.  Again, we have all the support we need and anything else, at this point, should be seen as an attempt to undo all the work and effort this entire county has done to let the decision makers know how they feel.

Please VETO the referendum (HB 1299)http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/20112012/125418.pdf

Kindest regards and thank you so much.

Get the Cell Out - ATL

Q: Where is the WORST Place to Put a "Telecommunications Tower" ?

A:  ... On the July 2012 Primary Election Ballot! 

(we would alternately accept the answers:  on the Nov. 2012 Presidential Ballot or on any Ballot in the state of Georgia)

(click headline to read why)

Not sure why anyone would debate why one school is “worse” as far as a location than another, but perhaps from an eyesore or danger standpoint, every single school has taxpaying citizens who live nearby and have been wronged by this decision. And there are plenty more who do not know.

If Get the Cell Out – Atlanta did not form in order to warn everyone about what had taken place and what to expect, every school on the list would have very likely been blindsided – learning about the tower only when they wake up early in the a.m. to the sound of construction, walking to the tower site to ask what is being built and learning about the new environmental hazard the school system has approved and railroaded through the zoning process without a second thought about local ordiances or zoning laws.

And, the new anti-picketing law in Ga. was designed to make it a felony if those people here were to do any of the typical things that people in this same exact situation do – stand in front of the entrance to the job site to try to stop the construction workers from getting through while they desparately send other neighbors home to call police or attorneys or get in touch with someone at the school to find out what is going on. These people would be fined $1,000 a day for exercising their right to protest in their own neighborhood, a right guaranteed by the U.S. constitution.

As for Briarlake, are they making a mistake by letting their PTA run their opposition?  At other schools, the PTA has been identified as being part of the reason the initial reports of the cell tower plans were kept so quiet.  Recently, they warned residents to set their "No cell tower" signs back 10' from the road and into their own yards.  This advice is not an innocent warning.

With school board member Paul Womack living right there in the same neighborhood, those signs, when placed 10′ away from the curb and into one’s own yard, will constitute a formal “picket” and every individual is at risk of being fined $1,000, maybe more if they have not submitted a request for a sign permit and have it affixed to the back of the sign.  Or, as a group, the No Tower Briarlake, LLC, could be fined $10,000 a day for those signs so there goes any money in the legal fund!

And, if a tower application is filed, the organizers of the protest, protected under their “LLC,” will have only 15 days to file any legal action from the date the application is submitted.   That's half the time an individual would have.  As a group, it may be required that they are represented by an attorney.  But, any individual can appeal an application up to 30 days from the date it is submitted.

If brought within the timeframe (15 days for a group or 30 for an informal group of individuals or a single person), the attorney fees will likely be refunded at the end of the court proceedings, regardless of outcome, because it is guaranteed as a right under the FCC Telecommunications Act of 1996. The Act attempts to deal with all “obstacles to smooth entry” into an area, so they give this incentive to encourage anyone who wants to bring legal action to do so, but within the relatively short timeframe.

Those I-pads will be all the justification that T-mobile will need to show that the new 4G technology tower really was needed for educational purposes all along – and then it will be exempt from zoning regulation. The county citizens need to work together rather than listening to different perspectives that will lead to different results.

To compare one’s school to another when you consider the fact that the biggest concern at the heart of this matter is the fear that long-term exposure to RF radiation may cause cancer and children are the most vulnerable  (followed by unborn children, the elderly, then those with compromised mmune systems, then women and finally men).  Everyone exposed to the unknown effects of being near a cell tower for many hours a day is taking part in the largest human experient in the history of mankind.

Think what you want, but this is not an issue that we can debate – the science of this issue must work itself out and will take time – probably 15 to 30 years, about the length of the contracts. To subject any human being to this type of research, but especially to do this to children, against their will and without the consent or input of their parents will be a tragedy we hope our county is strong enough and wise enough to avoid.

Please, don’t let your school board do what it always does to all of you – don’t let them divide you into bickering little factions where you start to blame each other and then find ways to ask for favors behind each other's backs.  That is the grease of politics, but we must leave that for the politicians and the lobbyists. We must be loyal to the humanity inside of all of us that says, “I wouldn’t want this in my yard. Why would I be okay with it in anyone’s yard?"

There must be a better way – tell T-mobile to take their money back to the drawing board because we do not want to impose this great of a risk on any human being and we do not wish to punish these 9 schools, their communities or anyone else with an eyesore and a burden that they should be legally protected from.

If handled correctly, THIS ISSUE could actually HELP DeKalb bring new homebuyers to our county if word gets out that we decided to put the health of our children and residents first.  We don't need an outright ban (such as the one denied by the state legislature even with support of 16 of 18 of our delegates) to know that we, collectively, do not approve of the practice of cell towers on school grounds.

You may have heard Tom Bowen, former school board chairman, in the press flippantly stating that this is "common" because it has already taken place in Fulton and Gwinnett.  So what?  Good for them.  The big difference is that they made their "deal with the devil" before the World Health Organization legitimized the concerns about the health risks and confirmed that brain cancer has increased in multiple studie that looked at exposure to RF radiation for more than 10 years. 

If we say no where other counties have said yes, that will only make DeKalb more attractive and improve ALL of our home values even more. And, the entire country will be learning from us about how to be good neighbors, good citizens and good parents.

We Need Your Help!

EMAIL OR WRITE:   The CEO Mr. Burrell Ellis, to back up the fact that we are counting on him to follow the advice of the county commissioners since they are well trained and experienced in these matters: 

Mr. W. Burrell Ellis, Jr.
Chief Executive Officer

(can approve a Special Administrative Permit)

(Can influence all permits)

c/o DeKalb County Government

Executive Office --     (404) 371 - 2881

330 W. Ponce de Leon Avenue, 6th Floor
Decatur, GA  30030

This is an easy access online feedback form.

His recent speaking tour was entitled, "DeKalb County - Making Your Priorities Our Priorities."  So, let's put that slogan to the test!  If it is true and his office really does want to make our priorities the priorities that count, Mr. Ellis might have a better chance at re-election that many may have expected. 

DeKalb County Director of Public Works

(can approve a Special Administrative Permit - usually for tempoary structures)
Director’s Office –             (404) 371-4778     
http://www.co.dekalb.ga.us/publicwrks/pw_who.html

The Zoning Board of Appeals

(can approve a Special Exception Permit) 

The Director (or Interim Director) of Planning & Sustainability
Director’s Office –             404-371-2155     
email: planDev@dekalbcountyga.gov

The Director of Planning & Sustainability

(can approve a Special Land Use Permit)

(which would then go to the commissioners for sign-off).

Thank you for reading this far into this article.  We wish we could keep comments brief, but this issue is complex and very important. Please tell everyone you know about it so that we can keep it in the forefront of everyone’s minds when they go to the ballot boxes and with any luck they will understand the importance of voting responsibly this year.

A single cell tower at a single school sets a dangerous precedent. If it happens here the way it has happened elsewhere, the money will go for a slush fund for prinicpals and top administrators. It will not do any good for any child or any school. Look what it has done already to the credibility of the PTA.

Womack knows that Lakeside will not get a tower. They do not even have a signed lease right now. He tried to do this same thing in the late 1990s (from what we have been told from several sources) and the community stopped it. Lakeside doesn’t care about the towers – they need the money to finish their construction because SPLOST III funds ran out.

This is where the money will go and the big winners will be AT&T because they will likely be the owners of T-mobile’s towers and making tons in the subleasing to other providers alone and the avoidance of property taxes. This was a bad deal from the beginning and we should not let it rub off on us – rise above it. Do the right thing for the COUNTY, not just your school. Do the right thing for all the children. If the roles were reversed, I bet the children would choose to do the right thing for you.

DISCLAIMER:  THIS IS A BLOG:  a Web site that contains an online personal journal with reflections, comments, and often hyperlinks provided by the writer; also: the contents of such a site.  (as defined by Merrim-Webster) 

COMMENT:  Yes, we know that sometimes we might be speculating or ruffling a few feathers, but that's what we are here for.  We are just trying to get to the truth.  And when your governement and school board shuts you out of the meetings where you may have learned what they were doing or why, you are left with nothing but pure speculation.  And often, when one fact is uncovered, it leads down the path to another lie which must be exposed if we will ever be sucessful.

Everything we have stated is based in fact or complete reprints of what answers we received.  It is our intention to help the public by providing the transparency we all seek, yet are often denied.  When we do not know the answers, we say so.  When we are trying to figure things out, we share our thoughts.  We are all in this together and no one really knows how this battle will turn out.  Except perhpaps T-mobile or ATT... they have done this many, many times before and they have already moved on in other parts of the U.S. to public parks and other grounds that are willing to provide them locations for their towers, tax breaks and access to areas that are closer and closer to our homes. 

4G technology isn't all it is cracked up to be when you realize the loss of your own privacy that might come along with it.  We hope you do not give up this fight to get to the truth.  Our children and our future is worth every bit of effort you are willing to put into it.  And it is our combined efforts that will, we hope, lead to the success of this movement to keep our children safe and place the focus on education - where it should be.  We hope our county and our country will be able to rise above those who wish to keep us at odds with one another.  We hope more people will learn how important it is that they register to vote, learn the issues, make informed choices and get out there and VOTE! 

If you will not be here for the election at the end of July, please request an away-ballot NOW so you can still have your voice counted!

Commissioners Story Makes Front Page News AND School Board Meeting Recap from April 9

Click headline to view this full story which includes short rundown on some items from the

April 9 School Board meeting. 

Click the caption link to view the interactive version of the CrossRoads print edition. 

http://www.crossroadsnews.com/view/full_story/18055161/article-Commissioners-give-thumbs-down-to-cell-towers-at-school

Update regarding the April 9, 2012, school board meeting. 

FIRST:  There was discussion regarding the building of iPad study labs at two of the county's lowest performing schools using Race to the Top dollars provided by the federal governement.  The total cost = $439,458 paid to Apple Computers, a single source vendor (no competitive bids).  Great questions were posed about the reasoning behind using technology to improve school performance rather than other concepts like lower student / teacher ratios.  In the end, thought, the items went to a vote and was approved.  It did sound like there was a demand for follow-up and reporting on performance before and after the labs start up to look for any correlation between the use of the technology and the performance of the students. 

The Superintendent said that if teachers were hired then they would likely have to be only on staff for the length of time of the grant.  That's a pretty bold statement to make since she was speaking about cutting them, even if they had been effective.  Makes you wonder why the iPad technology isn't considered in the same light... if it can't contribute to the learning, then why keep it?  Or, even more to consider, if the federal grant is the only way the school can afford the iPads and later they become outdated, then who will pay to replace them?  Or, even more urgently, who will pay if one or more of these items which are, duh, wireless, happens to walk off?  Nancy Jester made a great comment that went something like this:

"We have a habit in this distrcit of saying that we are self-insured when we're not.  Self-insured only means we are responsible for our own debt if something is lost or stolen.  And if we haven't budgeted anything in case that happens, we're really just saying we're not insured at all."

SECOND:  There was talk about an eavesment needed by Georgia Power for the Atlanta International School on Briarcliff at North Druid Hills Road.  Those wishing to legally oppose the cell towers should find out about any public hearings that will be helf for the construction of this eavesment as it is likely to be tied into the additinal power and access roads needed to service the cell towers.  If the county approves these eavesments then that is a good indication that they plan to approve the cell towers, no matter what it says in the newspaper and no matter what they said in their letter.

Just because it appears that some people have stepped up to do the right thing, we cannot count on them to follow-through.  The cell companies have more money than God and are willing to throw it around to get what they want out of our communities.  They can be very influential and can stretch the truth to suit their own needs. 

If you have not done so already, please voice your concerns to your Board of Education member, you elected Board of Commissioners member and your school principal, whether or not your school is currently under consideration for a cell tower.  We need to be pro-acive so that these issues cannot "slip by" anyone ever again.

GTCO-ATL will submitting another Open Records Request in the next day or two in order to gain more insight into whether or not the T-mobile meetings qualify as the pubic's chance to provide input into the decision.  We will post any new information,  or copies of our letters on this website.

THIRD:  Whether or not we are able to help the citizens of DeKalb County stop the cell towers on our school grounds, we hope we have at least provided some attention to the way the school board members can get lazy at their primary job of education our children.  When they are all caught up in their big-time construction projects and satisfying major business goals for their friends, they lose sight of why they are there in the first place. 

It was great to hear Jesse Cunningham speaking up for MLK and the fact that they have been overlooked so many times with the SPLOST dollars and he didn't want to see that happen again.  It was great to her the Superintendent reassure Sarah Copeland-Woods that ALL the students are important and that a committee should not have to have every district represented on it by way of a board member or community member who severs, but that every committee member should be doing their job to ensure a quality education for children at all levels and in every school.

Eugene Walker and Paul Womack were quietly giving the evil eye to each other which is typical.  Walker even said "thank you, Mr. Womack, for that most unwelcomed input" when Womack spoke out of turn. Pam Speaks should learn to speak up more often because when she does, she usually has very valid concerns and good questions.  She just approaches her comments from an apologetic standpoint right off the bat which erodes the confidence she might gain if she were willing to be more direct.  She DID ask about other ways that community members could speak up if they were opposed to the cell towers and had just not been informed (like we were telling htem was the case).  Unfortunately, Womack and Steve Donahue led that question astray as they pretended to understand the process and what T-mobile would do next.  What happened, in reality, was that there was no other way to speak up .  The July meeting sealed the deal and the board does not want to look back. 

However, they did  discuss OTHER forms of technology not dependent on iPADs and therefore not reliant on cell towers!  That was good!  Perhaps it means that they are less than optimistic about the county approving the cell tower appplications!  We can only hope!   Well, that and we can keep asking the questions until we get some answers.  Our focus right now is about how our hopes for a bill to ban cell towers has morphed into a survey question designed to trick people into saying yes so they can give the CEO the thumbs up to approve the cell towers, um, we mean.... telecommunications towers.  We're asking the Governor to VETO this ridiculous referendum for its faulty wording and it's abiliy to undercut the power of our commissioners to speak on behalf of theit own districts.

And Nancy Jester was on fire!  It was obvious that she is getting tired of asking for information and answers and not getting anywhere.  It was obvious that others, like Mr. Cunningham, are tired of the staff being humiliated when they come before the board and don't have the answers.  The overstaffed administrative office of this school board should be nervous.  There are a lot of angry parents and taxpayers out there who want someone to blame.  While the school board is the most visible, they also rely upon a lot of their information from the staff.  If the staff isn't pulling its weight AND  they are overpaid AND they have duplication of responsibilities AND they are providing no answers or outright misinformation - then we have a BIG problem with more waste of our money. 

The closer we get to the July election, the more people need to get ready to pack their things and go.  We need new perspective and people who are not tied to the "friends and family" network.  Start thinking about whom you can encourage to run for the job of school board representative now so that they will have time to step up and toss their hat in the ring whenever that time comes!

Call Upon CEO Burrell Ellis to Deny T-Mobile Cell Phone Towers at Schools

(click headline to read full text of press release) 

...  and GTCO-ATL Issues a Call Upon Gov. Nathan Deal to Veto the Cell Tower Referendum.  We do not need state interference in our local issue. 

The general public is not adequately informed to provide input into
this issue.  Placing this topic on a primary ballot (in July) or a Presidential ballot (in Nov.) will not provide any useful data as the question has been poorly worded and actually attempts to ask multiple questions at one time.  It also does not allow for a
"unknown" or "not aware" response which is likely the best way to describee most of the residents countywide.

Click for press release and more details.
Ceo.and.Gov.deal.Plea.gtco Atl.pr.04.06