Smoke Rise Residents Reach Out to DeKalb's New Interim CEO on Cell Tower Issue

8/17/13:  Note to Our Readers:  Dr. Johanna Stamper is a research scientist in mathematical biology. She has been trained in cancer research and is very concerned that there would be any possibility of cell towers being placed at schools, especially elementary schools, in our county. She says that once she explains the science, the concerns of the people in her neighborhood became much more elevated.  

If you share the concerns of Dr. Stamper and Get the Cell Out, please take a few moments to email or call, at a minimum, the following people who are critical to this struggle:

• Director of Public Works, DeKalb County:
• Director of Planning and Sustainability, DeKalb County:
• Interim CEO of DeKalb County:
• Interim Superintendent of DeKalb County Schools:
• And your county commissioner, school board representatives and state legislators.

8/13/13

Dear Smoke Signal Editors,

Thank you for printing the Letter to the Editor in your August 2013 newspaper edition.  It was from a new Smoke Rise family that recently learned about the former school board's vote to approve cell towers for several schools in DeKalb County, including one at Smoke Rise Elementary School.  We applaud your publication for helping to educate and inform your community on this issue.

Thank you to Robert Stamper and Dr. Johanna Stamper for stepping up to inform your new community of Smoke Rise about what you learned about the dangers of cell towers and encouraging them to contact their elected officials!  We have reprinted a letter to the editor written by Dr. Stamper which was published in the August 2013 edition of the Smoke Signal, a local newsletter for the residents in the Smoke Rise community.

We also thank the Smoke Rise Homeowners' Association for sending Virginia Reece as their representative to the Tucker Parent Council meeting at Brockett Elementary School at the end of the last school year.  We appreciate her comments and efforts to educate the Smoke Rise community and others in DeKalb who heard her dialogue with the Interim Superintendent Thurmond.

We have listed some contact details here in order to assist your efforts.  As Dr. Stamper noted, it is very important for the residents near any of the proposed school cell tower sites to voice their concerns to Commissioner Lee May as he is now the acting CEO of our county.

The county commissioners have all stated they would uphold the codes at the time, but those codes are now in a review process.  Don't let the cell tower companies slip changes past you that could lead to a tower being built without community input.

We hope you will visit our website, www.GETtheCELLoutATL.org, to keep up to date on this issue.  We want to remind your readers that when they email or speak to their local government officials, it is important to mention concern for ALL the schools in DeKalb County and ALL the children.  The safety of the children must come as the highest priority above anything else.  Our leaders need to know that this is one issue that cannot be used to pit communities against one another.  On this topic, we will not be divided.

Thanks Smoke Rise residents for being GOOD NEIGHBORS!

--- Get the Cell Out Atlanta

Please leave respectful comments below:

DeKalb CEO Burrell Ellis Charged with 14 Felonies

AJC Photo credit.  CEO Burrell Ellis bonded out of
jail late Tuesday after being indicted on charges of
extortion, theft and conspiracy.

DeKalb CEO Burrell Ellis has been indicted by a DeKalb grand jury today on charges he illegally pressured contractors into giving him campaign contributions.

The 15-count indictment includes 14 felonies. Among them, four counts of extortion, two counts of theft by taking and several conspiracy charges.

DeKalb District Attorney Robert James, in an afternoon news conference, said Ellis is charged with extortion and other felonies for soliciting campaign contributions under threat. Ellis has turned himself into the DeKalb County Jail and has been released, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution has confirmed.

Read full article from the AJC here.

Here are other blogs or letters we have written regarding the cell tower controversy at our schools as we appealed to Mr. Ellis for his help:

Memo to CEO Burrell Ellis - New Message for "One DeKalb"  (April 16, 2012)

Dear Mr. Burrell Ellis, CEO, We are contacting you again ...  (May 3, 2012)

Response from The Burrell Ellis Team  (August 26, 2012)

Call Upon CEO Burrell Ellis to Deny T-Mobile Cell Phone Towers at Schools (April 6, 2012)

REPRINT of OCT. 2011 Response from CEO Burrell Ellis' Office (May 2, 2012)

Quality Life For DeKalb - No Cell Tower On School Grounds (Aug. 11, 2012)

Kill the Cell Towers: Updates and How You Can Help!  (April 2, 2012)

Breaking News:  Thank You Board of Commissioners!  (March 30, 2012)

Please leave respectful comments below:

The Devil is in The Detail (How the Cell Tower Votes Shine a Light on DeKalb's "Corridor of Corruption")

Wonder exactly how the cell tower vote shook out and whether or not your own community said they were for or against the idea of cell towers at schools? 

Read more by clicking the headline for the full story. 

On July 31, 2012 Georgia voters took to the polls in the election primaries. In Dekalb County, a question popped up on the ballot with little explanation:

"Should the local, charter or independent school system of Dekalb County place or operate a telecommunications tower on any elementary, middle or high school property?"

The phrase, "The Devil is in the Detail," refers to a catch or mysterious element hidden in the details.^[1]

While opponents  of cell towers on school grounds were happy when the outcome was a strong 62% of voters saying "NO," GTCO-ATL was wondering if there was more we could learn from the data.  So, we dug a little deeper. 

From the start, we were critical of the validity of any data that might come from this question. First, it was asking too many things at once which is a common error people make when they are not properly trained in survey data analysis or proper question techniques.  We tried to alert those who were responsible for the question, Rep. Karla Drenner and Rep. Chuck Sims, but they did not respond. We then asked Gov. Deal to not sign the referendum as it was vague, not necessary and did not come from the people. He signed it anyway.

So, we determined that even though it might not go our way, at least it would tell us a few things that could be beneficial.

1. First, any area that answered yes, or even close, could be an area that is uninformed of the dangers and problems a cell tower could bring. We could focus more effort with our PR there.
2. Second, if we felt there were areas well informed that still said yes, we might be able to see specifically where corruption was influencing the voters.  Why wouldn't we think a yes could be a sincere, honest vote? Because we have been at this for more than a year and have never met anyone who has thought it was a good idea. Even those who like to debate us on the blogs will not take a pro-cell tower stance.
3. The third thing we thought we would learn would be where these "rural" Dekalb areas actually are located where Mr. Cunningham said they "welcomed the towers." Going by the way things appeared in the media, the South regions wanted the towers and money, while the North was leading the protests against them.  What we expected was to see strong opposition regardless of the location.

But, oddly enough, here is how the vote shook out:

(click chart to enlarge)

Here are some questions we had:

• Are these areas (highlighted in yellow) actually ignorant of the dangers of cell towers?
• Is the difference of just a few percentage points even enough statistically to be concerned about or is it safe to say that overall the entire county was against the idea of placing cell towers on the public school grounds?
• Should the school board inform T-mobile about the few areas that skewed slightly in favor of cell towers so they can be the ones to receive them?
• Is there a chance that the very few areas that skewed in favor of the towers had some sort of "inside information" to reassure them that they would not actually be the ones to receive the towers? 
• Are the areas of the county that were not selected for tower placements not going to receive the cooresponding technology either? 
• What is the purpose of a "non-binding advisory referendum" anyway?  Why did state legislators create this alternative to the total ban on towers that the citizens wanted?
• What did they expect to do with the results of this referendum?
• But, who are we advising?  Who will listen? 
• Who will actually do something with these results?
• If no one is going to act upon this ballot question and it will not influence (or "advise") anyone in a decision-making capacity, then why did taxpayers have to pay for it? 
• Why did we even have to take our time and resources to educate people about the question, and its poor wording, if the outcome was for no viable purpose? 
• Or, as we suggested originally, was this question created for someone else?  Someone OTHER than the citizens?  Perhaps if the results would have gone in the favor of the towers, they would have used the results.  If that is the case, then shouldn't THOSE PEOPLE (or businesses) be the ones who should have paid for it?  Not the voters of DeKalb County. 
• Were we really successful in stopping the towers? 
• Is the school board aware that the contracts have expired?
• Why won't our School Board or our county CEO tell us anything?

We may never know for sure, but we plotted the districts marked in yellow, above, on a map of the voting precincts.  After studying the areas and their relationship to each other, here's what we saw. 

 

(We are working to get a scanned version of this map

uploaded here for you.  Check back soon.)

WHERE WERE THE YES VOTES?

1. A small number of Dunwoody communities, and a

2. A small portion of the Lakeside or Emory-Lavista "Corridor" of schools.  

Note:  Almost all areas in favor were ITP, or "Inside the Perimeter."

WHO COULD THEY BE?

Of course this is all speculation on our part, but there could actually be four types of "yes" votes in these areas:

1. Voters who are completely unaware of the issue (just like we once were before this started)
2. Voters who think tower radiation is harmless for children and therefore our public land should be leased to T-mobile without concern (we have not actually met anyone like this, have you?)
3. Voters who have been told to vote yes (by an employer or friend) and do so because they do not have a personal, vested interest in the outcome.
4. Voters who have spoken to their board member, believe they will not be receiving a cell tower and therefore they do not care if a tower goes up somewhere else.

Note:  It is important to note that none of the areas (in the chart in yellow) actually had a cell tower going up near them. 

Of course we have no way of knowing why people voted the way they did.  We cannot go back and review the votes to ask follow-up questions.  And, people who were unaware of the issue had no way of selecting "I don't know" or "unaware" as their response.  These are just a few of the reasons we asked the Governor to veto this bill, but he went ahead and signed it.

Dunwoody

Those who voted in the Dunwoody area may have done so because they were not faced with this issue at their local schools.  Dunwoody did not have any of their schools on the original or reduced list for cell towers.  Does this mean they do not get the technology, either? 

If cell towers are actually a means for distributing the material of a virtual charter school, did certain folks in Dunwoody already know about this concept?  They have been advocating on the School Watch Blog for separate school districts.  So, have they been promised a way that they can make this happen in return for supporting the cell tower idea? 

Do we have a case of ignorant, but financially well-off, neighborhoods where they do not follow school news?  Or is this a case of yet another area of DeKalb selling someone else's neighborhood out when offered something they want for themselves? 

Lakeside / Fernbank and the Emory-Lavista Corridor

That leaves only a few districts that were either divided in their responses or barely tipped the scales in favor of towers on school grounds. But, with the exception of Lakeside High School, these areas were not facing the possibility of a tower at their own neighborhood school, at least not according to our Open Records Requests to see their contracts. 

So, Lakeside High area again emerges as one sticking out like a sore thumb. The school that reportedly initiated the request to their district representative, Paul Womack, who in turn brought the item to the Budget, Finance and Audit Committee while he was the chairman. Lakeside High School wants a tower, and the money of 12 towers so the Vallhalla Group can "finish the dream."   And the rest of us must endure all the baggage that it means to get roped into this issue while they sit back and smile.

In the Oct. 1 meeting agenda, a donation was accepted to finish the Lakeside construction for an outdoor eating area.  Yes, you read that correctly....

Did people really just vote "yes" to radiating other people's children for 30 years in exchange for an outdoor pavilion so their kids can get a little sun while they eat their non-free, non-reduced priced lunches?  Tell us that is not what is happening here? 

Then again, Lakeside has so many towers in a four mile radius, one more could not have possible been what made the difference, could it?

It appears that everything is proceeding according to plan.   But, who's plan is this??

Protests Come From the "North" (But the Public Votes Yes?)

"South" Board Members Vote Yes, but the Public Votes NO? 

Don't you find it interesting that we saw bigger than life protests coming from the areas where many people voted to be in favor?  AND, at the other end of the county, in the areas where we were told they "welcomed the towers," we saw the largest portion of people who voted against it? 

Have you figured out that things are not always as they seem here in DeKalb? 

And, many board members publically stated that they would have voted differently if they knew then what they know now.  See our story on this subject, here.

The cell towerss are a great lesson in not judging a book by its cover.  Rather, we should be judging our school books by the fact that they will soon not have any covers, just screens.  Hell, we don't even have librarians any longer! 
 
Most important:  Most People in Most Places Across the County Said NO CELL TOWERS AT OUR SCHOOLS.  And, for those of us who agree, if it is not a good idea for my school, then it is not a good idea for any school!

But, these are just a few of the ideas we came up with.  We would love to hear what you think.  Email us at sayno2celltowers@yahoo.com and let us know!

We did it once, now let's do it again! 

Vote NO on the charter school ammendment this November!  This is NOT about charter schools!  It is about creating virtual schools under a sneaky initiative put forth by corporations seeking new ways to profit, NOT about our children or parental choice.

VOTE NO to changing the state's constitution! 

NO MORE CHARTER SCHOOL AUTHORITIES!

Don't GIVE AWAY our power!  Let's Take it BACK! 

What can we do instead?  Start looking for well-qualified people to run for the School Board in the next election!  WE can do this if we keep working together!  Stick up for your beliefs!  Inform your neighbors!  Talk about what is happening so that others will not have to suffer the same thing happening to them! 

See you at the upcoming meetings!  (see our meetings page) Ask Questions!  Remain Alert!  Do not Trust those in power who have something to gain from you.  Seek advice only from those uninterested third parties or people whom you trust before acting upon anything you see or hear in this school system.   

 

 

For more info, watch "The United States of ALEC" here:  http://billmoyers.com/



 VOTE NO TO CHARTER SCHOOLS! 

It is time to STOP FEEDING THE BEAST!

1. ^ ^{a b c d} Titelman, Gregory, Random House Dictionary of Popular Proverbs and Sayings, Random House Reference, March 5, 1996p

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

April 25, 2012

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

Dear Mr. Ellis,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thank you sincerely,

Get the Cell Out - ATL

cc: Director of the Federal Communication Commission,

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


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

REPRINT of OCT. 2011 Response from CEO Burrell Ellis' Office

(click headline for the full story)

Did you know?

The WHO/International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified radio frequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B), the same category that includes exhaust fumes from automobiles. So, why do our schools appear to be concerned about one, and not the other?

Here is a reprint of the response we received on October 18, 2011 to an email sent to CEO Burrell Ellis.  We asked him to please explain the process by which the towers would be approved or denied so that we could participate in the public input portion of the process.

The claims that the school system is exempt are not correct.  We later showed the commissioners a Supreme Court case decision that proved the exemption only applies if the land being leased will be used for educational or public purposes, not proprietary (profit-making).

This is the response we received:

To:  Get the Cell  Out - Atlanta

From:  CEO Burrell Ellis' Office

Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2011 2:39:30 PM

Subject: RE: cell tower at MLK Jr. H.S.
Dear (Get the Cell Out - Atlanta):

Your email has been forwarded to the Office of CEO Burrell Ellis. Thank you for writing and expressing your concerns. After discussing with Planning staff, we have learned that the school system is exempt from county zoning ordinances, and that the towers are to be located on school system property, of which the CEO or BOC has no oversight or jurisdiction. ...

However, in the event that a permit application is filed, the County performs an inspection of the site, but has no approval authority on the erection of cell towers.*
I hope this information is helpful.

Sincerely,
Special Assistant, DeKalb County Government
330 W. Ponce De Leon, Decatur, GA 30030
office: (404) 371-6304 | fax: (404) 371-6291 |

(* we believe the author meant "on school property" because otherwise this statement would be incorrect They do have the approval authority of all other cell towers. At GTCO-ATL, we believe they should have the same authority for cell towers at schools. Just because the school is exempt should not mean that the business that is building a for-profit structure on leased property should be allowed to 'inherit' that same exemption... should they?)

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

Dear Residents and taxpayers in DeKalb County:

If you are like us, it probably does not make you feel very happy or safe to know that cell towers, which are huge structures normally seen only in Industrial locations or along Interstates far away from homes or schools, can be constructed in the middle of a residential community, on public school property that's actively being used for education of children, the group of people most susceptible to possible harm from RF Radiation.

These dangerous towers that emit radiation and contain HAZMAT materials at the bottom are normally expected to meet the approval of the county commissioners and pass the zoning and permitting authorities which involves public notice and comment. But, at least here in DeKalb County, the cell companies can avoid all the red tape including paying property taxes as long as they go up on school property. They do not have to follow any criteria that has been set forth to protect the public and maintain property values.

They only need approval from a school board that's willing to lease its property to them. And, this, too, can be accomplished without notification to the public. The people being affected by the decisions - the children who attend the schools and the people who pay the taxes to support the school - are completely left out of the process by which the decision is made.

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

If you are not satisfied with a government that is leaving you out of the equation, we suggest you try to voice your concern at the next Community Council Meeting for your district.

Community Councils are advisory groups of DeKalb County citizens that review applications for land use map amendments and zoning applications such as special land use permits, rezones, and amendments to the text of the zoning ordinance. There are five Community Councils, one for each Board of Commissioners district.

The Councils meet every other month if there are zoning or land use map amendment applications for property within their district. Meetings are held at neighborhood libraries or other County facilities, and are facilitated by DeKalb County staff.

At the Community Council meetings, the public has an opportunity to discuss zoning or land use map amendment applications that will eventually be decided upon by the Board of Commissioners. After the Community Council meetings, the public has opportunities to comment on applications at public hearings that are held by the Planning Commission and by the Board of Commissioners.

For details about when the next meeting will be held for your zone, click here:

http://www.co.dekalb.ga.us/planning/pdf/calendars/ccSchedule.pdf. 

We suggest you try to talk to them now BEFORE a cell tower shows up next door to your home or at your child's school. Let's get some answers and try to make our system work the way it was supposed to work - to protect the citizens, especially those who are too young to have a voice to speak up for themselves.

Please help us stop T-mobile wireless towers at our schools! 30 seconds to sign to stop 30 years of radiating our children! http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/GTCO-ATL/

Posted 27th October 2011 by GETthe CELLoutATL

Should They Call It "Smoke and Mirrors" Elementary?

Reprint from The Tucker Patch and The Stone Mountain - Redan Patch

Posted on April 25, 2012 at 11:00 pm

This is a blog about Stone Mountain's Smoke Rise Elementary School, sort of. But, first a little background...

Ever since my husband and I heard about the ridiculous proposal being considered by the DeKalb County School Board last May, we have tried to warn others. We started with our neighborhood, branched out to our school community and then reached out to other schools near ours.

We wrote to various blog websites, the local media and started petitions. We called and wrote to school board members, the PTA, our principal, the county and state government officials and friends from various school districts across the country. We used the name Get the Cell Out -Atlanta Chapter because we had heard about a group in California that had a similar bad encounter with T-mobile several years before our school board decided they were a reputable vendor to lock in for the next several decades (while they agree to take all the bonus money up front leaving the next couple of generations to deal with the downfall of the already outdated technology and the expense of trying to get out of the contract).

We even had residents contact us long after the decision was already made because they saw a video I put on YouTube that showed the large number of cell towers we already have in DeKalb County all around us.

We've worked together with several groups throughout all parts of the county to bring awareness to this issue. We've asked all the right questions about how something like this can happen without anyone standing up for the rights of the citizens. We just haven't received any good answers, so we have worked our way along the chain of command. And many people have joined in our efforts along the way.

The county commissioners heard the many, many complaints on this issue and jointly penned a letter to CEO Burrell Ellis on March 27. The letter explains the zoning ordinance already in place that would normally stop cell towers (aka telecommunications towers) from being built in residential neighborhoods or with building in their "fall zone." They raised their concerns with the CEO that the BOE or T-mobile may try to apply for an Administrative Permit to avoid the proper review normally necessary and to avoid the public notification requirements of a Special Land Use permit.

School Board Chairman Dr. Eugene Walker was quoted in Neighborhood Newspapers as stating that the commissioners were overstepping their authority by writing the letter. Overstepping? Really?

We're talking about the people who were elected into office for the precise purpose of enforcing our county codes and building regulations. These are the folks who are trained for this purpose and Dr. Walker thinks it is out of line for them to want to do their jobs?

Dr. Walker must have his degree in "Spin" because the Supreme Court of Georgia doesn't agree with his interpretation the school exemption laws. The court ruled that the exemption is only permitted when the property is used for governmental or public purposes, not for a proprietary purpose (money generating), which clearly that is the ONLY reason T-mobile / ATT is interested in the deal at all.

So, what's going on with Smoke Rise Elementary?

That's what we have been wondering because they have mostly kept quiet during all the cell tower discussions. Does that mean they are in favor? Or does it mean they still don't know about what's coming? Or does it mean that someone in charge of their charter had to make a deal with the devil and can't figure a way out of it now.

I have driven through the Smoke Rise community and handed out a few flyers, but a lot of the homes are gated and I thought I might be mistaken for a door to door solicitor. But, I can't help wondering ... does anyone at Smoke Rise know about the cell tower? Do they care?

The school is in a nice neighborhood that might not want to see property values go down, but perhaps they believe the new school will make their value go up. What new school? Oh, that's right, you might not know if you didn't vote this past November when SPLOST IV was the only item on the ballot.

Taxpayers agreed, likely without realizing it, to demolish a perfectly good, solid, well-built historic school with character and charm instead simply refurbishing it and saving us all the expense of higher taxes.

It will be torn down and a new one will go up right on top of the same spot and will house the exact same number of students: 600. We can only assume it will follow the trend of our other new schools, which means it will be replaced with a poorly constructed, inferior quality, overpriced cookie cutter version of an elementary school that will likely start to leak from the roof, grow mold and be closed down for good in a few short years.

Amid the construction chaos, kids will still be expected to attend school. They blow up half of the school and rebuild it while shoving everyone into the other half. When the first half is done, they shove everyone over there and repeat the process. And, when no one is paying attention, a cell tower will also go up, radiating the kids, teachers and surrounding community. Refer to the photos attached to this story to see exactly where the tower will go and how many are already nearby.

The most at risk are the people who live within a quarter mile of the tower as they have no way to escape the damage of being under constant background radiation that has been linked to damage to biological tissues and DNA and may even lead to incrased chances of certain forms of cancer. And, of course, the children stand the risk of constant headaches, dizzy spells, trouble sleeping, lack of concentration, poor memory, brain fog and hyperactivity which are commonly reported after a school gets a tower or sets up wi-fi.

The tower will bring contractors who have to constantly check the tower and make repairs at all hours of the day and night. It will invite copper thieves into the community and give them a handy place to park and hide out, too. School Board Member Paul Womack told a group of parents at a Briarlake meeting last September that this whole mess was intended to solve a communications problem over at Lakeside High School, which is the only school yet to have a signed agreement.

So, what do you think?

Is the Smoke Rise community doing the right thing by keeping quiet and not participating in the protest against the cell towers? Or, perhaps, are the residents still largely unaware of what's to come? How will they react when they find out about it? How will they react if they find out we all knew and didn't tell them about it?

Do you know anyone with a child at this charter elementary school? Do you know anyone who lives near it? Have you warned them about the T-mobile towers and the bad deal the school board has made to lease the property paid for by our tax dollars to a commercial enterprise seeking to make even more money off us and avoid their share of taxes?

Do they know they will get a chance to voice their opinion about cell towers (called telecommunications towers by those who don't want you to realize what they are talking about) on the July 31 ballot?

Don't you think you should tell them? Wouldn't you want someone to warn you if it were your child or your neighborhood? Let's work together for the sake of our entire county. We need to rise above political rivalry or whatever else might be getting in our way. There is still time to put a stop to them and we won't get another opportunity to even try for the next 30 years.

If you would like to learn more, please visit: www.GETtheCELLoutATL.org.

And please email CEO Burrell Ellis to lend your support for the county commissioners and their request to do their jobs. And, please sign the countywide petition at www.thepetitionsite.com/1/GTCO-ATL.

Register to Vote; Learn What's on the Ballot and Prepare to Vote on July 31!

Sound Familiar? "The principal and the PTA have to give it the OK."

We were debating about whether or not to post this article since it is from February of 2011.  That was until we saw something very interesting about the process as explained by a Real Estate Executive for the Maryland Schools.  In case you are pressed for time, we highlighted and underlined the good parts for you.
********************************************

Residents Upset Over Proposed Cell Tower
From the Gazette.net, Maryland Community News Online
Feb. 23, 2011

Neighbors say T-Mobile tower will lower property values
by Jeanette Der Bedrosian | Staff Writer
(Click headline to read full text)


A T-Mobile cell phone tower proposed for a field behind Sligo Middle School has some neighbors upset that the 130-foot monopole will lower property values, take recreation space away from school children and disturb the Sligo Creek ecosystem.

The proposal for the tower went in front of a Montgomery County hearing examiner earlier this month, who is tasked with determining whether T-Mobile should get the special exception in zoning necessary to use school space for a commercial purpose.

While awaiting a decision, however, nearby neighbors are up in arms that the school system and cell phone company did not properly alert nearby residents of what might be moving in next door.

Standing behind the school Monday morning, several Gridley Lane residents looked at the site of the proposed tower.

 "T-Mobile already has so many towers," said John Polletto, 63. "Why do they need more?"

 "They claim they put it here because of the trees, but the tower will be higher than the trees," said his wife, Kathy Polletto, 59.

 "This park wasn't built for that anyway," added Barbara Jarboe, 70. "That's not what people want to see here."

 The cell tower is proposed for a 30-foot-by-80-foot space behind the tennis courts at Sligo Middle School, according to T-Mobile's application to the county. T-Mobile would also install a 10-foot-wide access path along the side of the tennis courts. The tower will help provide in-building coverage to residential neighborhoods surrounding routes 193 and 97 to reduce the number of dropped calls, the document says.

...  (T-mobile text here) ....

 The residents who gathered behind the school earlier this week said they worry the cell tower will lower property values. It cuts into a well-used play area popular among sledders and families wanting to throw around a football or Frisbee. And as they point out deer tracks, they say the cell tower and associated access path will cut into a wildlife habitat and could possibly require removal of trees that could erode the forest.

 They said they didn't receive notice of opportunities for public comment until December, years after the application process started.

 "I didn't hear anything from T-Mobile, I didn't hear anything from the county, it was a piece of paper from my neighbor that alerted me," said Julia Wisniewski, a resident of nearby Gridley Lane in Silver Spring, referring to a note from a concerned neighbor.

 Neighbors said around Christmas, they were given a notice of the special exception hearing.

The process for getting a cell tower installed on the site involves several steps, according to Mary Pat Wilson, real estate management specialist for Montgomery County Public Schools. First, the applicant expresses interest in the site, the principal and PTA have to give it the OK, plans are drawn up and reviewed by a division of the Department of Park and Planning, the company has to get a special exception for zoning, and the superintendant makes the final decision, Wilson said.

 T-Mobile is currently at the special exception portion of the process, she said. The terms of the lease are currently under negotiation, she said.

 Several of the Gridley Lane residents and other Montgomery County residents testified against granting T-Mobile the special exception, John Polletto said. None of those gathered behind the school said they have T-Mobile as their cell phone provider, but they said even if they did, they still wouldn't want the tower. School land shouldn't be used for commercial purposes, regardless of a possible need for improved cell phone service, they said.

 "We can't lease out our backyard if we're having financial woes, so why can MCPS do that?" asked Andrea Crenich, 41, of Gridley Lane. "The whole point of zoning laws is to protect property values of the homes in an area. ... Would you buy a home that backs up to a 130-foot cell tower with an 8-foot chain-link fence and chopped down trees?"

Memo to CEO Burrell Ellis - New Message for "One DeKalb"

Memo (click to read full text)

To:       CEO Burrell Ellis

From:    Viola Davis
CC:       Unhappy Taxpayer & Voter, Get The Cell Out - Atlanta Chapter, Concerned Citizens of South DeKalb, Citizens for a Healthy and Safe Environment, DeKalb NAACP, NoBriarlakeTower.org, Briarcliff Heights Community Action Group, NoCellTowerFund.com, and all appropriate parties
Date:    4/3/2012
Re:       Quality Life For DeKalb – No Cell Tower On School Grounds

Quality Life For DeKalb – No Cell Tower On School Grounds


Viola Davis

One DeKalb Lives restore neighborhoods and build hope. One DeKalb Works create jobs and also build hope. These are two DeKalb logos on the front page of the county website.  However, One DeKalb has a “new message."

We are proud to join the basic message of One DeKalb to say that parents and homeowners from North and South DeKalb have sent a unified message that we do not want cell towers on school grounds and request CEO Burrell Ellis deny any applications for construction of cell towers on school grounds.

We are contacting CEO Ellis to move the One DeKalb political logo and slogan into a public issue action plan. North and South DeKalb have united to send a clear message that we do not want cell phone towers on school grounds especially within residential neighborhoods. We have collectively petitioned our elected officials to pass laws to protect our children, protect our neighborhoods, and protect our overall quality of life.

Parents and homeowners throughout DeKalb County take pride in the following facts:
·        The entire Board of Commissioners has taken a position on cell towers on DeKalb school properties to not ignore its ordinances unless it has been proven in court.

·        Rep. Karla Drenner introduced HB1128, entitled “Prudent Avoidance”, and received the support of 16 out of 18 signatures from the DeKalb Delegation.  DeKalb County has not seen this level of unity before in the history of any given issue and look forward to our CEO joining this history making venture.  We request CEO Burrell Ellis join the DeKalb Board of Commissioners to uphold our local zoning law. We ask CEO Burrell Ellis to prove One DeKalb is more than a political slogan by joining the Board of Commissioners to send a message to T-Mobile that DeKalb deserves a high quality of life and that quality starts and ends with upholding our local laws and ordinances.  

Time to Take Action:  Please write, email and/or phone CEO Burrell Ellis and request he join the Board of Commissioners and DeKalb Delegation to send T-Mobile a message that “it is the policy of DeKalb County to prohibit cell towers on single-family residentially-zones properties” and “this zoning ordinance was established to ensure the safety of county residents and to protect property values of single-family homes” as quoted from Crossroads Newspaper.

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

Open Records Request: April 15, 2012

(click headline to read full text)

4/14/2012 
Walter Woods
Dekalb County School System

Dear Mr. Woods or to whom it may concern:

Pursuant to the Georgia Open Records Law (O.C.G.A § 50-18-70 et seq.) (the “Law”), you are hereby requested to make available for review and copying all files, records and other documents in your possessions as requested below:

1.)  Attendance records for the 12 school meetings that were held in May, 2011, at the schools involved in the cell tower proposal submitted by T-mobile.  These records were recently submitted to Crossroads reporter Jennifer Ffrench Parker.  (see picture at right.)

We are interested in the exact names of attendees, not just the number present.  As these records were made public for purpose of examination by Crossroads Newspaper, we believe they should be made public for examination by the parents and community members as well.

2.)  Attendance records AND meeting minutes for the August 2010 meeting of the Budget, Audit and Finance Committee.  We are interested in audience attendees, not just the committee members.

3.)  “The plans” as referenced in the T-mobile contract with each of the 7 schools that have signed contracts.  The plans were supposedly approved by the board and contain estimated construction timelines, according to the signed contracts dated December 2011, signed by Superintendent Atkinson and Chairman Bowen.  (see below.)

4.)  The signed contracts on or about December 2011 for leasing of school property by T-mobile as approved at the July 2011 board meeting for Lakeside High School and Narvie J. Harris Elementary School.  (These were not present in our initial open records request.)

5.)  The memo, contract or any other written or electronic communication that was signed or authorized by Interim Superintendent Ramona Tyson for the leasing of property to T-Mobile (or a subcontractor thereof) on or about July 12, 2011, as was indicated at the July 11, 2011, board meeting.

If this request is denied in whole or in part, we ask that you cite in writing the specific statutory exemption upon which you have relied, as required by law. We also ask that you release all separate portions of otherwise exempt material. Please waive any costs associated with this request, or first inform me of such costs as required by Georgia law. 

As you know, the Law requires a response by you within three business days of your receipt of this letter and provides sanctions for non-compliance.

Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (sayno2celltowers@yahoo.com).

Sincerely,
www.GETtheCELLoutATL.org

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!