No More Cell Towers in City of Stonecrest, GA (or so they say)

From the AJC, Local Update

March 12, 2019

By

• J.D. Capelouto, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

The Stonecrest City Council is moving to enact a moratorium on cell towers after hearing from angry residents about an existing tower that may violate city code.

A Monday night meeting was packed with residents, several of whom held yellow signs with messages like “Do not cell out”and “Remove cell phone tower.”  

The councilors voted to direct the city attorney to draft a 60-day moratorium on the construction of cell towers while the city re-examines the tower built in January off Evans Mill Road.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported Friday that records suggest the tower may have been improperly constructed on land zoned for commercial use for a day care.

The moratorium would not go into effect until the declaration is put in writing, City Attorney Winston Denmark pointed out following the decision late Monday. The City Council would have to vote at its next meeting to approve the details of the written moratorium. 

The move will give the city time to “flesh out details and legalities” about the cell tower on Evans Mill Road and the process for building others, Councilmember Diane Adoma said. 

“I’m asking that we simply take some action, which is the right thing to do,” said Adoma, who represents the district where the tower sits.

residents advocate for the removal of a cell tower at Monday night's City Council meeting. (Photo: J.D. CAPELOUTO / jdcapelouto@ajc.com)

Wall Street Journal Announces Cell Phone Cancer Link

U.S. Studies using rats, costing $25 million dollars, leaves no room for debate.  The most comprehensive study that has ever been conducted.  Exposed for 10 minutes on and 10 minutes off intervals for 9 hours per day to mimic what humans are exposed to daily.  Tumors in the brain and around the heart were definitely linked to the exposure.

Expert in clip states:

"You can't say these are perfectly safe."

"This calls into question the previous standards that were based on thermal effects only."

U.S. True "Causitive" Study Links RF and Cancer

GTCO-ATL followers:  Ever wonder if you supported the right side in the debate over whether DeKalb County should take money to place cell phone towers next to young children on their own public school campuses, in the middle of their  neighborhoods?  Well, if so, you can rest assured that you did the right thing by speaking up for the children in our county and now science is on your side, too.  The more research being done on this subject, the more science is siding with you.  And this time, the study was conducted to the top level of controls, with plenty of funds to cover the expenses and it was done in the U.S.   Here is how things worked out....

Major Cell Phone Radiation Study Reignites Cancer Questions

Exposure to radio-frequency radiation linked to tumor formation in rats

• By Dina Fine Maron on May 27, 2016
• Dina Fine Maron is an award-winning journalist and the associate editor for health and medicine at Scientific American. She is also a contributor to the publication's podcasts and Instant Egghead video series. She is based in Washington, D.C.

Credit: Photo by Christopher Furlong/Getty Images

Federal scientists released partial findings Friday from a $25-million animal study that tested the possibility of links between cancer and chronic exposure to the type of radiation emitted from cell phones and wireless devices. The findings, which chronicle an unprecedented number of rodents subjected to a lifetime of electromagnetic radiation starting in utero, present some of the strongest evidence to date that such exposure is associated with the formation of rare cancers in at least two cell types in the brains and hearts of rats. The results, which were posted on a prepublication Web site run by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, are poised to reignite controversy about how such everyday exposure might affect human health.

Researchers at the National Toxicology Program (NTP), a federal interagency group under the National Institutes of Health, led the study. They chronically exposed rodents to carefully calibrated radio-frequency (RF) radiation levels designed to roughly emulate what humans with heavy cell phone use or exposure could theoretically experience in their daily lives. The animals were placed in specially built chambers that dosed their whole bodies with varying amounts and types of this radiation for approximately nine hours per day throughout their two-year life spans. “This is by far—far and away—the most carefully done cell phone bioassay, a biological assessment. This is a classic study that is done for trying to understand cancers in humans,” says Christopher Portier, a retired head of the NTP who helped launch the study and still sometimes works for the federal government as a consultant scientist. “There will have to be a lot of work after this to assess if it causes problems in humans, but the fact that you can do it in rats will be a big issue. It actually has me concerned, and I’m an expert.”

More than 90 percent of American adults use cell phones. Relatively little is known about their safety, however, because current exposure guidelines are based largely on knowledge about acute injury from thermal effects, not long-term, low-level exposure. The International Agency for Research on Cancer in 2011 classified RF radiation as a possible human carcinogen. But data from human studies has been “inconsistent,” the NTP has said on its website. Such studies are also hampered by the realities of testing in humans, such as recall bias—meaning cancer patients have to try to remember their cell phone use from years before, and how they held their handsets. Those data gaps prompted the NTP to engage in planning these new animal studies back in 2009.

The researchers found that as the thousands of rats in the new study were exposed to greater intensities of RF radiation, more of them developed rare forms of brain and heart cancer that could not be easily explained away, exhibiting a direct dose–response relationship. Overall, the incidence of these rare tumors was still relatively low, which would be expected with rare tumors in general, but the incidence grew with greater levels of exposure to the radiation. Some of the rats had glioma—a tumor of the glial cells in the brain—or schwannoma of the heart. Furthering concern about the findings: In prior epidemiological studies of humans and cell phone exposure, both types of tumors have also cropped up as associations.

In contrast, none of the control rats—those not exposed to the radiation—developed such tumors. But complicating matters was the fact that the findings were mixed across sexes: More such lesions were found in male rats than in female rats. The tumors in the male rats “are considered likely the result of whole-body exposure” to this radiation, the study authors wrote. And the data suggests the relationship was strongest between the RF exposure and the lesions in the heart, rather than the brain: Cardiac schwannomas were observed in male rats at all exposed groups, the authors note. But no “biologically significant effects were observed in the brain or heart of female rats regardless of modulation.” Based on these findings, Portier said that this is not just an associated finding—but that the relationship between radiation exposure and cancer is clear. “I would call it a causative study, absolutely. They controlled everything in the study. It’s [the cancer] because of the exposure.”

Read the full article here.

TURNING POINT: U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) Links Cellphone Radiation and Cancer

Media Coverage and Analysis of Recent Cellphone Study Released on Friday, May 27, 2016 As the Center for Safer Wireless announced on Friday morning, May 27, the U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) was expected to report to the public on its $25 million completed study which showed statistically significant increases in cancer among rats that had been exposed to GSM or CDMA signals for two-years. Thankfully, because of Microwave News' excellent reporting, portions of the study's findings were announced sooner than were originally expected. To the wireless industries benefit, it came right before the Memorial Day weekend when people were focused on the holiday. Despite the quick turnaround, the wireless industry had time to strategize and notify the media with their points and position. As usual, the strategy is to create doubt, question the study and call for more research. The wireless industry uses the same playbook as the tobacco industry implemented years ago because it works. It's quite evident in the following headlines and reporting. Science Magazine - Questions Abound After Study Links Tumors - Cellphone Radiation Washington Post -Do Cellphones Cause Cancer? Don't Believe the Hype Time - Cellphone Cancer Link Seen in Study - More Research is Needed to Fully Understand the Link Better coverage and headlines are at: Mother Jones - Federal Study Links Cell Phone Radiation Cancer Wall Street Journal - Cellphone Study Fans Cancer Worries Business Insider - What the Study on Cell Phones and Cancer Study Found PBS - Major US Study Links Cellphone Exposure to Cancer in Rats ChicagoInno - There May Be a Link Between Cancer and Cellphones Govt Study Finds."  "There are arguments in the literature now that we are at the beginning of an epidemic of cancers," Chris Portier, former associate director of the NTP, told Mother Jones. Ron Melnick, a former National Toxicology Program researcher who worked on early stages of the study before his retirement, told the Wall Street Journal: 'Where people were saying there's no risk, I think this ends that kind of statement.' Louis Slesin of Microwave News believes that the cell phone controversy will never be the same again because the study contradicts conventional wisdom that such health effects are impossible. David Carpenter is director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University of Albany and on the Medical Advisory Board of the Center for Safer Wireless. "This is a game changer, there is no question," he said. "It confirms what we have been seeing for many years - though now we have evidence in animals as well as in humans." Carpenter went on to add, "The NTP has the credibility of the federal government. It will be very difficult for the naysayers to deny the association any longer." "Such positive results ... suggest that human health might be in some danger," Dariusz Leszczynski, a Finnish researcher who focuses on radiation and health said in an email. "The human health risk might not only be possible but it might rather be probable." Joel Moscowitz, Ph.D., Director, Center for Family and Community Health at University of California, Berkeley offered research to indicate health effects from cell phones in the op/ed section of the Wall Street journal on Sunday,  May 23. According to Dr. Moscowitz "The NTP report did not assess the overall risk of tumors for both types of tumors studied. By my calculation, thirty of 540 (5.5%), or one in 18 male rats exposed to cell phone radiation developed cancer.  In addition, 16 pre-cancerous hyperplasias were diagnosed. Thus, 46 of 540, or one in 12 male rats exposed to cell phone radiation developed cancer or a pre-cancerous lesion........ Though not statistically significant one in 33 female rats exposed to cell phone radiation developed cancer or a pre-cancerous lesion.  No cancers were found in 90 male and 90 female rats in the unexposed control group."   The Center for Safer Wireless believes the NTP study offers more credible evidence that products emitting pulsed radiofrequency radiation can cause health effects. We think everyone should take precautions when using wireless devices such as cellphones, iPads, tablets, laptops, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth etc.    Regards, Desiree Jaworski Executive Director info@centerforsaferwireless.us

Were Wi-Fi Standards Updated in 2013 or 20 Years Ago?

ROCKVILLE — A few parents at a Montgomery County Public Schools Board of Education meeting said they worried that wireless computers and devices with wireless Internet was gradually impeding the health of students.

Read some excerpts from the article.. "David Carpenter is a former county resident and a general physician who served on committees with scientists who performed research about the effects of radio frequency radiation.

He wrote a letter to members of MCPS management in November encouraging them not to have the school system connected to the Internet wirelessly. Carpenter also is the director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University at Albany.

“It’s appropriate that every child have access to the Internet, but the problem is when it’s wireless access to the Internet, there is exposure to radio frequencies,” said Carpenter.

MCPS spokesperson Derek Turner said MCPS follows guidelines set by the Federal Communications Commission. One of the repeated concerns of parents who testified at the meeting and said the standard was 20 years old.  Turner said the guideline had been updated in 2013. "

So were the guidelines updated in 2013 or 20 years ago? That is the question.  Read more at http://www.thesentinel.com/mont/newsx/local/item/3154-parents-worry-wi-fi-could-harm-students

Words of the Wise: Citizens Speak Out Against Cell Towers at Schools.

For a historical look back at the fight to keep cell towers off school grounds in DeKalb County, you can view some of the school board meetings that saw parents and community members speak to their concerns and their plans to take the fight as far as they needed to in order to get the school board to reverse its decision.

Starting with this meeting, February 13, 2012: http://view.earthchannel.com/PlayerController.aspx?PGD=dekalbschga&eID=58 

Start at the 40:40 mark for speaker Rudy Evanson (above) and Richard Marion (below).

Dunwoody Could Give Cell Towers a 30 Year Green Light

See our GTCO-ATL Comments at the end of this article!

From the Dunwoody "Neighborhood Newspaper":

City Council on Nov. 9 discussed contracts with Mobilite and Crown Castle to place small cell technology – “mini cell towers” used to boost cellphone signals – on city property.

One agreement would last 15 years with three automatic approvals totaling 30 years, while the other agreement starts at five years, with automatic approvals totaling 20 years.

City Attorney Lenny Felgin said the city-owned property includes traffic signal infrastructure at intersections and the agreements cover this use “95 percent of the time,” Felgin said.

Councilman Terry Nall asked if the agreement included parks property.

“We don’t have any anticipation of this equipment in our parks,” Felgin said. “If that changes in the future, we’ll probably come back to the council and ask that question at that time.”

The agreements allow structures located within the public way, including utility poles, streetlight poles, lighting fixtures, traffic signal poles, sign posts or other city-owned infrastructure.

Ellen Smith, the attorney for Crown Castle, said she doesn’t think the agreement allows the company to collocate on poles in city parks because the agreement only permits the company to collocate on poles in the public right of way.

“I don’t think that an applicant can come in and blanket the city parks with a bunch of mini cell towers,” Smith said. “That is not the intent of this agreement.”

Smith said Crown Castle plans to put up small cell towers around the mall and in the Perimeter area. “For Crown Castle, we’re talking about maybe 12 poles, generally around the Perimeter Mall area,” Smith said.

Nall said he would prefer to have a uniform agreement for all companies looking to locate small cell technology on city-owned poles. He said he didn’t like having two companies with two agreements.

City Council will discuss the agreements again at its Dec. 14 meeting.

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

GTCO-ATL Comments:    First note:  Remember, T-Mobile is Crown Castle.  Just a spin off name to further the same infrastructure plans.  So, the same underhanded tactics will be used and any sort of potential for something out of the ordinary to happen should be looked at very closely.  The  5% loophole mentioned by the city attorney is exactly the reason the council should vote this proposal down.  That room for error or deception is the entire reason for the request, not the other  95% of the time when they are only needed on traffic lights.  The city council should know whether they need traffic light transmissions wirelessly because it's most likely for the traffic ticketing the city does by using that technology.    If they didn't ask for this proposal then it's most likely NOT a plan to help out with that traffic cameras. 

Did they ever discuss whether or not there was an actual "need" for these towers?  What makes them "mini"?  Are they less powerful?  Or are they just shorter, less obstructive to the skyline but actually placing the radiation closer to ground level where they increase the exposure to nearby residents and office workers?  Are these towers needed to provide better quality service to the people?  Or are they simply a way to  police the area that is thought to have higher crime than other parts of the city? 

If there is no current evidence of poor service or no service, why are they considering this at all?  And, typically the medical area in nearby Sandy Springs has kept cell towers at a distance from them as they can interfere with sensitive medical equipment.  Will city council inquire about the possible effects of placing more towers closer to people or will they only look at the potential revenue and be blinded by the dollar signs like we have seen happen so many times before? 

Will Dunwoody residents finally wake up and see what is happening in time to have their opinions heard?  Or will the city council, unfamiliar with the entire controversy, simply be persuaded by the industry and their own studies and promises?  How much of that money is paid up front and what will it be used for?  Unaccounted for funds often become a slush fund and that leads to further corruption.  We wish we could say that everyone in DeKalb County is better educated on this subject after the long fought battle to stop cell towers from going up at our schools, but we know that government tends to have short term memory loss whenever dollar signs are flashed before them.  

Terry Nall asked a great question about the parks since cell towers often went on park property if they were denied at schools .  But, just asking the question isn't doing enough to protect your city's park land if your residents really don't want to turn it into a concrete version of its former self.  The council should be reviewing the zoning code now so they can suggest any updates to it that would prevent such tower placements in the future.  The only way to truly protect the community from unwanted intrusion or incompatible uses is to write the zoning ordinances as tightly as possible and then stick to them as often as possible so there is little "wiggle room" for granting exceptions. 

Dunwoody residents should also take note of the possibility of this agreement opening a door for "automatic" placement and approval of cell towers at schools, if Rep. Tom Taylor is successful in getting city schools approved by the legislature.    This agreement, together with the fact that Dunwoody was one of the few places that DID NOT OBJECT to the placement of towers at schools when asked in a referendum in late 2012, should be all the encouragement needed for Crown Castle to put a lot of effort into seeing this plan pass with as little hype as possible. 

QUICK! Put up that tower before someone tries to stop us!

Parents in 4 communities have all OPPOSED the construction of cell towers on their public school playgrounds.

In one community, the parents appealed the decision to build a cell tower on their local school to the Maryland State Board of Education.  And guess what? The parents have a very good chance of winning their appeal.

Q:  What should a Board of Education that hates public school children do 

when they are about to lose?   

A:  Put up those controversial cell towers as fast as possible. 

8/6/2015 Annapolis Middle School

And that is exactly what is going on in Prince George's and Anne Arundel Counties.  Fast paced construction efforts are underway to put up four cell towers on public school playgrounds.  Crews work frantically, even in the middle of the night and weekends in order to get the towers up.  Why?  Because once a tower is up and running, it is much more difficult to have it taken down than it is to stop it from going up in the first place.

Here is what the Administrative Law Judge who heard this case decided:

PROPOSED ORDER 

IT IS PROPOSED that the State Board order that the Local Board's agreement to lease school property for the purpose of construction a cell tower (or cell towers) as memorialized in the Master Agreement is not consistent with its trust obligations under section 4-114(a)(1) of the Education Article.

Is there a lesson for those who may be aware of a cell tower proposal near them right now? Absolutely.  If you have opposition or concerns about a proposal, speak up as soon as possible and inform as many of your  neighbors as you can.  Regardless of what you believe about the health impacts, cell towers are a blight on a community in many ways.  They often disrupt the view of the sky and they can cause enough fear or concern that  your neighborhood may never be the same again.  People will leave simply out of the fear of the unknown, regardless of whether or not they have even read any of the science behind the belief that towers can lead to cancer.

So, if you like where you live and want to stay there for a while, a cell tower is most likely something that you can do without and if you don't speak up in the beginning, it will be harder and harder to do so later.  You won't be harming your community.   And, you might even be saving people's lives.

Tower companies ALWAYS have alternatives to the proposed spot near you.  They can  actually share space on existing towers and co-locate their antennas to reduce the number necessary.   They will find a way to conduct their business and turn their profits.

GTCO-ATL wishes the folks fighting the good fight in Maryland all the best.  Keep it up because you are doing the right thing!  We will continue to follow your story!

Cell Tower at a Virginia Public School Catches Fire

GTCO-ATL:  When we brought up the many reasons why we did not want to place cell phone towers at our public schools in DeKalb County, most of the politicians and school administrators we spoke to simply dismissed our concerns.  Reading things like this should serve as a reminder to everyone who spoke out against the cell towers that were planned in Dekalb County, GA.  When it is your neighborhood or you child who could be placed in harm's way, the "what if" scenarios suddenly do not sound so far fectched.   

"We did the right thing," says Paul Miller, co-founder. 

Friday, June 19, 2015

Newport News, Va. – A cell phone tower in the 5800 block of Marshall Avenue caught on fire Monday around noon, according to the Newport News Fire Department.

Fire Chief Stephen Pincus says a company was working on the tower doing some welding when some insulation to the wires caught on fire.

Crews arrived to find a massive amount of fire at the base of the tower and wires burning along the full length of the tower.

With heat index values already over 100 degrees in Newport News, fire crews had some difficulty putting the fire out because the heat was so taxing. It took approximately 25 minutes to get the fire under control.

The structural integrity of the tower was compromised due to the heat of the fire and the tower is now leaning. The damage is extensive and the tower has been disabled...

...The tower is located on property in between Heritage High School and Achievable Dreams Middle & High School. Students were not in school but teachers were at both locations.

11 Alive News Exposes Georgia's Ties to ALEC and Cell Phone Lobbyists

An Atlanta TV station just aired one of the best takedowns of the secretive nature of ALEC we've ever seen:
Posted by Media Matters for America on Friday, May 22, 2015

Letter to DeKalb County Commissioners

1/29/15

CEO May and County Commissioners,

Thank you on behalf of the many DeKalb residents and parents for listening to the wishes of the taxpayers on the issue of cell towers on school grounds.  Thank you for the time and effort you took to understand the complexities of the issues surrounding T-mobile and its request for zoning exemption in order to place their towers at our schools.   Thank you for following the letter of the law in terms of responding to their challenges and requests so that our zoning code was ultimately held up in federal court, according to the posting by Commissioner Raider that was recently circulated among parents in our area of Central DeKalb.

It is your hard work on the zoning code updates that should be commended and your efforts to work together on this issue that paid off in the long run for the property values and the good sense of what’s right for our children.

We appreciate each of you for your work on this issue!  And, we applaud your transparency on this issue!  Good job!

Kind regards,

XXXX
Get the Cell Out – ATL

NOTE TO GTCO-ATL Followers:  The fact that the originally proposed 12 schools did not end up with cell towers is an amazing accomplishment.  Nine of the 12 were approved by the school board and even an attempt at new legislation would not have helped them get out of their contracts.  However, the county's existing zoning code did not allow for an inappropriate height structure intended for commercial use to be built on publicly funded land intended for education.  Tmobile sued after the county denied the special land use permit and eventually the case in court went in favor of the citizens.  Tmobile withdrew its plans for all the schools on the list. 

HOWEVER, if new cities are approved on this coming Nov. 3 ballot, everything could be, once again, up in the air.  A city zoning board would decide what rules to adopt and which ones to change.  They could make "mixed use" zoning appropriate everywhere and a cell tower could be approved for placement right in your own back yard or at your child's school or daycare.  

While it might seem futile, now is hardly the time to give up your rights or your beliefs about the danger of these towers.  More evidence is coming to the forefront of the scientific community every day about the very real link between RF radiation and cancer.  While the tower companies have a lot of money, and they have friends in high  places, they still need their customer base and if the elected officials lose their seats on the various boards, they will also lose the little support they have there, too.  

So,  please remain informed on this subject and be aware of any rezoning requests made near your home, church or school.  Speaking up is your right and it is free.  Even if we don't win every battle, we are hardly alone.  The issue will become larger  in the years to come as many early adopters of cell phone technology are just now reaching the age where correlations between an illness and the technology can be studied.  Your voice and opinion can become part of an important public record on the subject that could help someone else one day when they learn they have cancer and they want to prove to a judge that the tower companies should have known because people raised these concerns over and over again.  

DeKalb County recently updated its zoning code and approved smaller antennas that can be disguised in the masts of churches or on top of telephone poles in our communities.  While not as obvious or aesthetically unpleasant, they still carry RF and having them closer and closer to us increases the dangers.  The new "smart meters" being placed on homes also emit this type of radiation and you now have an option to "opt out" of this program and even get your old analog meter put back on your home.

If you have any questions, feel free to email us at sayno2celltowers@yahoo.com.  

We continue to fight because you continue to care.  Thank you.

Towers Just Seem to Stop Once They Get Out of the Poor Communities

From Montgomery County, Maryland:





This report is very similar to what we were seeing in DeKalb, before the contracts were finally cancelled. Now we've figure out even more about why they were going at certain schools and not others. The towers appear to dot the map, quite literally, right around the areas that are now slated for the November ballot where new cities could be formed.

The cell tower fight was only the beginning. savetuckerfromlakesidecity.blogspot.com.

New Radio Tower Atop Kennesaw Mountain Stirs Controversy

By Joe Kirby

August 2005

KENNESAW, Ga. – A new communications tower atop Kennesaw Mountain is more obtrusive than expected and is drawing criticism.

The 112-foot tower was erected in early May and is topped by radio equipment used by a variety of local public safety agencies, local hospitals, the National Park Service and utilities.

But it looks little different than a typical cell-phone tower. And though park officials promised it would be less visible than the four antennas it replaced, it turned out to be more visible.

The new tower rises an estimated 20 feet or so higher than the surrounding foliage near the top of the mountain and, to make matters worse, is on the side of the crest that faces nearby Marietta and Atlanta. Though the old towers could be seen from the base of the mountain by those with a practiced eye, the new tower is clearly visible from downtown Marietta several miles away.

That prompted grousing by local friends of the park and at least one sarcastic letter to the editor of the Marietta Daily Journal.

"I would like to compliment Kennesaw Mountain National Battlefield Park officials for permitting the recent construction of the historically accurate cell phone tower atop Kennesaw Mountain," wrote reader Rick Schick of Marietta. "Now, as visitors stand on top of Kennesaw Mountain, not only the cannons but the cell tower can serve as a reminder of how the war was fought. Our children will be able to picture in their minds the Civil War soldiers making critical battlefield decisions and communicating with their loved ones back home on their cell phones. …

"Lest we ever forget, it is only through the liberal use of asphalt, concrete and steel that true historic preservation can be achieved."

 To read the full story, click here.

Atlanta Public Schools Teachers Taken Away in Handcuffs for Cheating

The investigation found that Beverly Hall, pictured above,
'created a culture of fear, intimidation and retaliation' during
her time as Superintendent.  She passed away beforestanding trial for her role in the largest cheating scandal
in American education history.

Highlights of the April 1, 2015 verdicts in the Atlanta Public Schools cheating scandal:

• Eleven educators face up to 20 years in prison for inflating their students' test scores to get bonus money for their schools . . . and for themselves.
• The 11 teachers, testing coordinators and other administrators were convicted Wednesday of racketeering after a five-year investigation and six month long trial.
• Evidence of cheating was found in 44 schools across the Atlanta school system, with nearly 180 educators involved. 
• A racketeering charge could carry up to 20 years in prison and most of the defendants will be sentenced on April 8.
• The cheating came to light after The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported in 2008 that some students' scores were statistically improbable.
• Prosecutors said the educators were guaranteed bonuses by inflating scores, while improving the poor reputation of their school system .
• Superintendent Beverly Hall, the alleged ringleader who received up to $500,000 in payouts, died of breast cancer as the scandal went to trial.
• One principal would wear gloves to erase answers and write in new ones

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3021915/11-Atlanta-educators-convicted-test-cheating-scandal.html#ixzz3WA2Roc9T

CNN also has in-depth coverage here:  http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/01/us/atlanta-schools-cheating-scandal/