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

Service Request Submitted to DeKalb Planning and Sustainability Office

(click headline to read full text of this article)

If we can't get help from a real person, then maybe this will work...

Experts say that when a cell tower falls, it will "fall like a tree."  This is a big concern when you think about what might be in the fall zone of the cell towers planned for 9 DeKalb County schools... schools, daycares, homes, traffic... people - it could be any one of us.  So, what are the odds of one of these planned towers falling?  Unfortunately, a LOT higher than you probably would expect. 

Experts say that when a cell tower falls,
it will "fall like a tree."

Read on...

The thought of a cell tower falling over and landing on a school is one of the reasons GTCO-ATL formed in the first place.  It isn't enough to point out a bad idea to a few people and stop something like this from happening down the street.  If YOU knew there was a REAL possiblity of children's lives being placed in danger, what would YOU do?  The responsibility should NOT be placed on the parents at these seemingly randomly selected schools to alert other citizens about a possible danger to their home, their school or their lives, but that's exactly what has happened. 

While others may be okay with keeping quiet about what they know, the thought that these dangerous towers could be built without proper permits or proper review literally keeps some of us awake at night.  So, to that end, we continue to do what we can to spread the word and hope that you will do your part in telling others about this website so that they can spread the word in their neighborhoods, too. 

This is more than a school debate or a political decision.  This is about a moral obligation to do the right thing.  So, here is one more thing we are doing to try to get some answers, which is all we have ever wanted in the first place. 

Code Compliance and Complaints

DeKalb County has a method where you can complain about any code compliance issue online.  Your complaint is given a tracking number and you can ask that they follow-up with you directly in regard to their progress on your issue. 

To begin the process, go to the Planning Department's Main Page, then click the submenu for "Permitting," and then "Code Compliance and Complaints." 

We decided to give it a try (as you can see from the screen shot of the submission page) because GTCO-ATL is still very concerned about the documents that were posted on the DeKalb School Board's website at the time that they were considering the lease of property to T-mobile. 

GTCO-ATL has uncovered the fact that the structural documents provided to the School Board's Tower Committee were not only years out of date, they also provided specs that are not up to current codes necessary to ensure public safety.  In facts, these documents themselves even gave a poor rating to the proposed tower's ability to remain standing under certain high wind conditions. 

Upon reviewing the Emergency Planning Documents for DeKalb, Fulton, Gwinnett and Cobb counties, we learned that the wind conditions that might cause this type of tower to FALL OVER are not at all uncommon in our area!  The industry standard was changed to what is known as a "Rev-G" construction which is still not adequate when there is the potential for a falling tower to come in contact with structures expected to be inhabited by human beings (ie. schools and homes).  The "Rev-H" standard is necessary to ensure a higher degree of safety. 

But, T-mobile told our school board that they planned to build to the outdated "Rev-F" standard for the base plate and mounts.  And, since school board members and staff are not trained in the engineering field and do not have the necessary information to determine if tower designs are safe to put next to schools or homes, they approved the entire deal without a second thought about the importance of the technical jargon.  They essentially trusted T-mobile who has a very good reason to want to build to the outdated tower codes - it's cheaper, faster and easier for them.

We have more information about this topic if anyone is interested in reviewing it. Just send an email to sayno2celltowers@yahoo.com and ask for the "Rev-F" code documents.

Here is the full text submitted by GTCO-ATL to the Planning and Sustainabilty Department regarding this issue.  We will provide an update if anyone gets back with us regarding our questions.

I am concerned about the T-mobile request for permits to construct cell towers at 9 or more DeKalb County Schools (orig. list of 12) because I have been told that the permits will be issued by Special Administrative Permit and not by Special Land Use Permit.  I would like to know why /how the Administrative option would apply in this case as these are not temporary structures and should be subjected to the already defined cell tower standards determined by our county via the Special Land Use Permit process, in my opinion. 

In addition, I am very concerend that the documents the school board posted on their website for the public that were stated to be the construction documents submitted by T-mobile indicated that they were wanting to construct a tower with Rev-F standards for the base plate and mount mechanisms.  Rev-F has not been industry standard for many years now and the industry has stated it expects all towers to be built to Rev-G or the new Rev-H standards as these standards lower the chances for the tower to fall over in high wind condititions.

With towers being located so close to schools and homes, it is a major concern if our county is merely planning to "rubber stamp" these towers as I have been told and will not be responsible for the safety of our citizens.  I would like to know what law exempts the schools from zoning codes and why a Special Admin. Permit would be issued that would eliminate public input.

Annoymous Tips - More Towers to Come SOON!

(click headline to read full text of article.)  Unconfirmed right now, but the communites near Brockett Elementary School in Tucker and Sagamore Hills Elementary School in Atlanta should be alerted that they may be next on the cell tower hit list!

It has been reported annoymously that there are more cell tower sites being prepared right now with the majority of the schools and their communities completely unaware.  Rumors in the Brockett Elementary neighborhood in Tucker have turned up reports of ATT vehicles on every street at various times of the day.

Is the board retailiating against the community for speaking up instead of shutting up after their school was removed from the list? 

Some residents believe a cell tower build may be attempted and therefore anyone who hears such a rumor should contact their county officials to inquire about building permits on file.  If this is the case, we hope the neighborhoods can stick together and speak up for themselves.  But, is there anyone who will listen and take action to protect them?  The dead ends of this process have proven to be more frustrating than having to wait on hold for 30 minutes before ATT answers its helpline for DSL! 

It has also been rumored that M.L. King High School may soon receive a second tower, this one from Verizon Wireless.  Will this maddness ever stop?  Our schools, our homes, our property, our reputations, our hope for the future - it still isn't enough?  They want to take our last dollar and our lives, too, and they probably do not even need to have an Open Meeting to make that call either.

To review the Georgia Open Meetings Act, go here: 

http://sunshinereview.org/index.php/Georgia_Open_Meetings_Act

Minority Groups Really, Really, Love Telecom Consolidation! (NOT!)

(click headline for the full story)
(ATT Rolls Out Astroturf to Push for T-Mobile Deal)
by Karl Bode Tuesday 12-Apr-2011
Reprinted with permission
One of the most effective ways the phone companies have gotten what they want politically over the years is to fake the fact that they have consumer support for often anti-consumer policies. This is done via PR, farmed think tank science, hired bloggers (who don't allow comments), fake consumer groups and astroturf (fake grass roots) campaigns. Such efforts can make it appear that anti-consumer positions -- such as the elimination of consumer protection laws -- have broad consumer support. Another tool at their disposal is the "co-opting" of existing groups. Groups receive significant sums of money from these providers, and regurgitate their positions on political matters as a favor.

Randall Stephenson, CEO and president of ATT,
and Rene Obermann, CEO of Deutsche Telekom AG

With their bottomless lobbying budget ATT is the largest player in this shady space, over the years using phony consumer groups to cheer for metered billing, or senior citizens groups (run by ex bell marketing execs) to fight against network neutrality (the process by which all information on the Internet is delivered at the same speed, regardless of which service provider you use to access the web). They can also take the form of a phony opposition group, or infiltrate a real one, with the intention to make a lot of noise in order to drown out the voices of true opposition groups, then leading the opposition down a dead end, and stopping members from taking action independent from the group as they believe they are being represented well.

With ATT's proposed acquisition of T-Mobile immensely unpopular, it's not surprising to see ATT firing up their disinformation engine to try and pretend the deal has broad support. That has involved ATT using groups like The Hispanic Institute whose website suggests they simply adore less competition in the wireless space:
“The proposed merger of ATT and T-Mobile will move us closer to universal mobile broadband deployment. When we consider how essential mobile technology is to empowering communities, we conclude that this proposal is good for Hispanic America...it creates an opportunity to harness and support America’s innovation economy. Moreover, it provides an opportunity to amplify the growth in mobile broadband adoption by both English and Spanish speaking Americans.”
You'll find very similar gushing for the deal by the Latino Coalition:
“The proposed merger of ATT and T-Mobile holds great promise for all Americans, and especially those of Hispanic heritage.”

The similarity in language is, of course, because these groups are being told what to say by ATT. One DC insider informs us that rumblings on K Street suggest ATT had called every civil rights group in the United States for support within fifteen minutes of the deal being announced. Fearful of losing ATT donations -- most of these groups quickly got to parroting prepared ATT statements, unconcerned about the actual impact of a T-Mobile deal. Getting funding for a new events center apparently dulls any ethical pangs felt using your organization as a hired stage prop.

As we've noted, ATT's acquisition of T-Mobile does virtually none of what ATT suggests it will accomplish, has little to no impact on national next-generation wireless deployment, and aside from satisfying ATT's desire for relentless acquisition and expansion -- offers few if any benefits to anyone -- especially consumers.

What the deal will do is reduce competition, raise prices and degrade the quality of service for T-Mobile users, something any real Latino or minority group worth its salt would find runs contrary to their constituents' best interests.


GLAAD Drops Support For ATT Deal With T-Mobile After Activists Speak Up

Sarah Lai StirlandJuly 13, 2011, 9:33 PM  reprinted in part

The Gay Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD,) reversed its support for ATT’s proposed merger with T-Mobile Wednesday after its initial endorsement of the deal caused an uproar within its own community.

“A rigorous review process considered GLAAD’s unique mission and concluded that while ATT has a strong record of support for the LGBT community, the explanation used to support this particular merger was not sufficiently consistent with GLAAD’s work to advocate for positive and culture-changing LGBT stories and images in the media,” said Mike Thompson, GLAAD’s Acting President in a Wednesday press statement.

Thompson sent a letter to the Federal Communications Commission Wednesday after an initial supportive May missive from his predecessor Jarrett Barrios.

That letter caused a firestorm of controversy within the activist community, members of whom believed that GLAAD had been bought off by AT&T’s charitable donations.

POLITICO reported early June that GLAAD had received $50,000 from ATT. It also noted that many other non-profit groups supporting the merger had received money from the telecommunications company.

Comments

when will you start supporting the merger, and how much did you cost?

I would have a high sell out price myself, but i don't run a website or anything, so i won't get any offers.

how does one get hired as a corporate shill, i wonder?

________________________________________________

have they ever approached this website with an offer? i'd be curious how much they have hinted at before being told to pack sand.

________________________________________________

Even someone in kindergarten could figure out that taking away competition brings nobody closer to so-called universal or near universal broadband. Verizon will get there all by itself whether the merger occurs or not. Besides what difference does it make if T-Mobile plus AT&T equals 100 percent coverage or AT&T (after gobbling up T-Mobile) on its own equals 100 percent. 100 is 100 no matter how many companies are involved. There is absolutely no logic to AT&T's position and it gives me a headache thinking about the shills who support it.

__________________________________________________

Jonesboro, AR Re: Dumb

But we are dealing with pre-K minds in CONgress.

__________________________________________________

@rr.com Re: Dumb

pro is the opposite of con, thus congress is the opposite of progress.

said by mtech:But we are dealing with pre-K minds in CONgress.

__________________________________________________

·Millenicom

What AT&T means is universal higher prices!

Once the merger takes place what an excellent opportunity for AT&T to conspire with Verizon to raise prices. By the way why hasn't any government regulator asked why the contractual prices both carriers charge are basically the same.

__________________________________________________

Re: What AT&T means is universal higher prices!

said by Mr Matt:contractual prices both carriers charge are basically the same.

Because it's not.

The base plans might appear to be the same but when you factor in the differences between them (rollover for AT&T, friends and family for Verizon, mobile to mobile for each carrier) the actual per-minute cost you wind up paying will vary depending on your needs and usage.

Nor do they charge the same for data since the last time I checked Verizon still has unlimited plans for smartphones and AT&T doesn't.

__________________________________________________

payoffs take away our rights to at&t

So att can payoff everyone in usa. Well bottom line is they sold off their rights to company that bite you later. HOPE ALL THE SELL OUT GROUPS ENJOY THE PRICE THEY HAVE TO PAY FOR SERVICE LATER. THANKS for how you treat your follow poor and middle class to not being able to pay att service later. Hope you calls drops like the do now forever guys.

__________________________________________________

Marietta, GA I really have been shocked at the dishonestly

that AT&T has used . The Latino support media blitz was a real eye opener . The headlines that went to multiple sources never really said anything about supporting the merger . It had catch phrases like it " recognizes " the positive this or that . This merger would hurt Latinos maybe more than any other group . A GSM standard seems like it would benefit them more than any other group . I wonder what the fringe latino groups got just for letting their name be used ? The other blitz I noticed was how it is able to roll out the " most advanced mobile broadband experience" to this city or that city due to this merger . Thus the merger is good for you . I never really noticed the lengths a company would go though to deceive from the CEO down. Just really evil stuff . Everyone will pay more if this merger goes through indeed . Just really shocked at how this merger has grabbed my attention . It almost has a good vs evil feel.

__________________________________________________

Hello! That's why AT&T is a.k.a. "The Death Star". Just look at their logo

__________________________________________________

AT&T is right! If they control all the pipes they can spoon feed us via walled gardens/portals.

It will be a more open internet, because it'll be their version of it

Welcome to the future!

__________________________________________________

Why do members of minority groups allow for other groups, which may or may not hold their individual interests at heart, to speak for them? Why do these organizations get to be allowed to "state" with what "everyone" in that particular minority group is "supposed" to be thinking?

--

"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service.

__________________________________________________

Re: You Know

said by pnh102:Why do members of minority groups allow for other groups, which may or may not hold their individual interests at heart, to speak for them?

There are many rea$on$ why any group, minority or not, allow corporation$ to $uggest talking point$ to them. Merger or no merger, The Hispanic Institute and The Latino Coalition aren't really directly affected. $o if they pro$titute them$elve$ as corporate mouthpiece$, they really don't hurt their member$hip on way or another.

__________________________________________________

Hazelwood, MO I guess it is the same reason in that a corporation gets to speak for its stock holders and make it's (current board) political opinions known.

Lets ignore the fact that not every stock owner of the company is even a US citizen having US voting rights (thus should not have any say) and every US owner already has a vote and is able to speak on their own with their own donations.

__________________________________________________

If you can't convince 'em, confuse 'em

__________________________________________________

said by pnh102:Why do members of minority groups allow for other groups, which may or may not hold their individual interests at heart, to speak for them? Why do these organizations get to be allowed to "state" with what "everyone" in that particular minority group is "supposed" to be thinking?

They get to do it, because in the US it has been legal forever to sell your support to anyone you want to. I am sure they all see it as getting a piece of the corporate pie any way they can. Can't get good jobs in these companies like AT&T & Verizon, so take a payoff instead. At least they get something.

__________________________________________________

At the end of the day, GREEN is the only color that counts

AT&T has the cash to buy comments from consumer groups, bloggers and so-called minority groups. When you think it is a black and white issue, simply follow the money trail and you will see it is really a GREEN issue. The question that AT&T asks is how much green can we get?

--

A citizen of The United States of Amnesia. How quickly we forget.

__________________________________________________

kudos:2 Wow, SOMEONE doesn't like AT&T

As a T-Mobile customer I'm not thrilled about the takeover, but could this writing be any more biased and

__________________________________________________

Re: Wow, SOMEONE doesn't like AT&T

said by quatrix:As a T-Mobile customer I'm not thrilled about the takeover, but could this writing be any more biased and inciting?

__________________________________________________

Oh hey you must be new here.

__________________________________________________



kudos:4 i HATE T not because its "cool to hate at&t" but because of years of crap service.

The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese

__________________________________________________

Mobile, AL makes me sick

It makes me sick to send AT&T my hard earned money every month. Their dishonesty is enough for me to switch carriers. When VZW deploys LTE in my market I'm gone.

__________________________________________________

I am just wondering if they are buying T-Mobile as a band-aid solution to their broken network and they will just let it fall into further disrepair once the two networks are merged.

__________________________________________________·Verizon FiOS

how abouts that astro turf:

at&t's new salespitch men: Mit Romney and (J.J.) Jimmie Walker...

__________________________________________________

After you become an AT&T customer, you will feel like Florida Evans:

»www.youtube.com/watch?v=ap5Sw3xsZhU

__________________________________________________

A citizen of The United States of Amnesia. How quickly we forget.

permalink · 2011-04-13 11:36:22

__________________________________________________

AT&T... really? Smart people can already figure out this is a good thing, as long as the FCC puts some conditions on it.... why the need for astroturf? It just makes you look bad, AT&T.

It doesn't really affect different groups particularly differently, if anything the affects are different urban vs. suburban/rural, but urban T-Mobile customers have the most to gain, although AT&T customers have a lot to gain too.

__________________________________________________



Marietta, GA Re: oooookay

I'm an urban T-Mo customer & the only thing I feel that will be gained is the size of my bill . I have what I want , a GSM phone with stellar rates & great service . A T-Mo customer will not come out ahead . The astroturf & AT&T's refusal to guarantee our rates while continually bring up that rates in theory should be dropping is just validation that in the end we will be getting hamered in this deal .

__________________________________________________

Re: oooookay

Why do you think you are entitled to cut-rate prices when you will gain the amazing coverage and superior building penetration of AT&T Mobility's nationwide network?

Rates per se won't drop, but rates relative to the speed, coverage, and quality of service have dropped significantly and will continue to drop in the future.

AT&T shouldn't rate guarantee Magenta SIMs just like they didn't for Blue SIMs. If you want a new phone, you should have to get an Orange SIM and an Orange plan. However, I would also say that AT&T should be required to unlock your Magenta devices so that they can work on Orange as a backup phone or whatever. Even 3G devices will work fine on EDGE post-AWS 3G.

__________________________________________________

Also, Orange plans have Rollover, A-List (which T-Mobile ironically invented and then killed with MyFaves), and AnyMobile, while Magenta plans don't.

__________________________________________________

I think they should clean out all the legacy as quickly as possible. And if that means losing our 850 minute legacy Orange plan too, that's fine. AnyMobile would probably even it out with the current 700 minute plan anyways.

_________________________________________________

Marietta, GA Re: oooookay

I think I'm entitled to keep my plan . I have fine coverage & speed right now . Why do YOU and AT&T feel entitled to buy the company I do business with ? Entitled ? If AT&T didn't feel so entitled they wouldn't have to buy out the only national GSM competition . They would work on their infrastructure & have real customer service not telemarketers . But they do feel entitled . Thats why they are sending another wave of lobbyists to Washington right now as I type . I guess we will see if anti trust still exists . What makes you sure this merger will benefit you ?

__________________________________________________

You're entitled to keep it for the remainder of your contract OR to be let out of your contract. I've had great customer service experiences at Corporate stores, better than the rest of the sleazeballs out there who sell cell phones.

I get more coverage. I get more efficiency. I get more spectrum. I get more capacity. I get more cell sites. I get more backhaul. I get a larger selection of phones. I get better competition since it throws the current duopoly off balance.

AT&T already has the best coverage and the fastest data of the two carriers, this is just going to make them even more awesome. Now Verizon will be in the position AT&T was in a few years back with a newer, faster technology, but more limited coverage, except that AT&T has built out blazing-fast 3G to virtually everywhere anyone goes (even though it is still less than probably 40% of the network land area wise).

__________________________________________________

Re: oooookay

Keep gorging on that corporate kool-aid. How does the elimination of competition bring better competition? AT&T may do some nice things to keep the FCC off their backs but once the deal is given the PASS stamp the real raping will begin.

More capacity, more spectrum? Faster data rates? So you can hit the draconian 2GB limit faster? Coverage is debatable, since you have done nothing to back up your claim that AT&T+T-mo will actually have any significant increase in coverage, since we don't know how much of it actually overlaps.

__________________________________________________



Marietta, GA It doesn't benefit AT&T or T-Mobile customers to have only one GSM provider . You seem to be suggesting that by having less competition you are getting more . I suspect unfortunately that this merger will go through . I more than suspect AT&T won't come out of this looking good . AT&T's unpopularity after this takeover might do more to " throw the current duopoly off balance " than anything else . 10's of millions of TMO customers are livid about this merger & there is growing sentiment that this falls under anti-trust .

__________________________________________________



Jackson, MI BiggA has a Verizon phone. He just wants the deal to go through so your service can go down in flames. Now that I think about it, so do I.

__________________________________________________

·Comcast

It brings better competition two ways:

1. Most people need a carrier with a true nationwide network, and low-band spectrum. There are two of those. This throws the duopoly, which is near deadlock now, and has been for years, completely off balance.

2. Sprint and T-Mobile are scraping at too small of a market to both be financially sustainable and build out a world-class 4G network. Now Sprint will be able to sweep up the lower-cost less coverage market while AT&T and Verizon duke it out at the top.

More spectrum and more tower both equal more capacity. This is fundamental and basic to wireless services.

The coverage boosts are all in urban areas, where they don't have the same tower sites. They will end up with a lot more tower sites.
It probably won't help on street, but in-building will increase a lot. Out in more suburban/rural areas, it won't help AT&T very much, although T-Mobile has been more aggressive in the last couple of years in building new towers, and does have a number of sites that AT&T hasn't gotten on yet.

What you people don't get is that NO ONE CARES about the whole GSM vs. CDMA thing. 95% of people don't KNOW THE DIFFERENCE, and even then, most people buy a phone from their carrier, AND there are VERY FEW phones that currently have both AWS and NAM. I know that all of my phones are NAM only, so they are effectively locked to AT&T in the US.

Correction: 10's of T-Mobile customers are livid. There's somehow still a lot of people who don't know this is going on, and after that, the majority either support it or don't really care.

This is NOT anti-trust. HOWEVER, I hope that the FCC puts some strict rules on ALL of T-Mobile's spectrum (which would basically carry over to AT&T's since the networks and spectrum will be combined and managed as one) about overage fees, bill monitoring, allowing SIM cards in any device and allowing tethering, open application access on platforms that support it (Android), and the like. This would be a win for everyone involved, and usher in even better mobile services.

__________________________________________________

If this merger is approved, I'll will be either dropping service completely or, dare I say it, switch to Sprint or __________________________________________________

@comcast.net What ignorance

There's an old name that keeps ringing in my head ..."Ma Bell" seems like we're taking several steps backwards. I'm all for competition. With competition, we the users can benefit from cheaper services. If we only had one company offering telecom do you really think rates would be so affordable? with T-mobile gone, the only other major carriers up for grabs will be Sprint and US cellular. We keep going on this path all we will have is VZ and ATT, their argument, we can't compete because they are bigger...common when does this stop. In the meantime most people forget that the way of the merger means less jobs. When did we start preaching comptetition isn't good?

__________________________________________________

New Jersey

kudos:1 maybe 100 % consoliation ?

Have ATT merge with Verizon and Sprint, and all the others. Of course data access prices would drop ? - sarc !

__________________________________________________

Shallow Astroturfing (The So-called Precusor Blog)

I just tried six times to post the following message on the Precursor Blog by Scott Cleland (www.precusorblog.com):

"I used to live in the UAE which had a single state run phone company (Etisilat). When the World Trade Organization required competition, they created a second primarily state owned phone company (Du) and nothing changed. ATT and Verizon may compete, but they generally march in lock step thereby denying customer choice. They are essentially our version of the UAE companies mentioned above. Canada has three large providers (Bell, Rogers, and Telus), but Canada found that there was inadequate competition and pried the doors open for new competitors Wind and Public who are shaking things up. A duopoly is very much the same as a monopoly. While your position is well argued, I just don't see it."

As the poster of the original article correctly noted, the precusor blog appears to be deliberately rigged to stop posting while maintaining the appearance that posting is permitted. Everytime I tried to post to the blog, Mr. Cleland's blog said I was not filling out the captcha correctly or that I wasn't hearing the audio captcha correctly.

I hope people who are searching for articles to get a sense of public opinion about the proposed ATT and TMobile merger do not regard Mr. Cleland's views is representatives or accepted because no one has "chosen" to put a post up on his "precusor blog."

Stu

__________________________________________________

Miami, FL Re: Shallow Astroturfing (The So-called Precusor Blog)

You mean the Google is the most evil company in America blog?

Scott doesn't care about the truth. Just that his checks from the telecomunication companies keeps rolling in.

_________________________________________________

kudos:29 Re: Shallow Astroturfing (The So-called Precusor Blog)

The frightening thing is he continues to be called before Congress as an objective and independent sector analyst.

__________________________________________________

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

UPDATED VIDEO SHOULD START AT CORRECT POINT NOW:

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

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

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

Click Photo for YOU TUBE VIDEO:

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

UPDATED 4/11/12: Margaret Harris Comprehensive School

Update as of 1/3/11: The permit mentioned in this article is not a DeKalb County permit as we previously reported. We have learned that the permits listed on antennasearch.com are actually the FCC permits which must be obtained first before the local permit is issued. As of today, we have not heard of any county permits issued for our cell tower schools, however, the due diligence period for applications should be ending as early as 1/12/11. We expect to see those permits approved and construction to begin shortly thereafter.  (Or, a second due diligence period of 6 months shall begin.)

4/11/12 update:  The second due diligence period is expected to end on 7/11/12.  Construction shall commence shortly thereafter.

Administrative Permit Approved for a Vulnerable Population at Margaret Harris Comprehensive School. Listed as unregistered, T-mobile's application on 9/19/11 appears on the list as .06 miles from this special education school for students with severe and multiple disabilities, ages 3 – 21 and grades P-12.  UPDATE===  This is an FCC Permit, not a DeKalb Administrative Permit.

From the school's website: Values -- DeKalb County School System:
• Value and promote parent involvement
• Regard quality public education as essential
• Honor universal human rights
• Contribute to the common good of our community
• Hold high expectations for ALL

Click photo to view larger version.


What is the Human Right to A Safe and Healthy Environment?

Every woman, man, youth and child has the human right to a safe and healthy environment, and to other fundamental human rights linked to and dependent upon a healthy environment.

Human Rights relating to the environment are set out in basic human rights treaties and include:

* The human right to a safe and healthy environment.

* The human right to the highest attainable standard of health.

* The human right to ecologically sustainable development.

* The human right to an adequate standard of living, including access to safe food and water.

* The human right of the child to live in an environment appropriate for physical and mental development.

* The human right to full and equal participation for all persons in environmental decision-making and development planning, and in shaping decisions and policies affecting one's community, at the local, national and international levels.

* The human right to safe working conditions, including adequate safeguards for pregnant and lactating women.

* The human right to freedom from any type of discrimination.

* The human right to education and information, including information relating to links between health and the environment.

* The human right to share in the benefits of scientific progress.

Click image above to view larger version.

What's at the Bottom of a Cell Tower Anyway?

Most everyone has an idea about what the top of a cell tower looks like by now... but have you ever wondered what's at the bottom? If you think it is similar to an electric or telephone pole that just sticks straight into the ground, you would be incorrect. The base of a cell tower may actually be more dangerous than what's at the top!

Although the top emits radiation, at least it is generally 150' above ground or higher. But, since your child may soon be playing on a playground right next to a cell tower base in DeKalb County, you might want to get familiar with the dangers that will exist so you can warn your child not to go near it and never, ever cross the fenced in area or attempt to climb a cell tower! Here's a look at some base stations at ATT and T-mobile towers that are operational in our county today.

A parent who is actively fighting cell towers in Maryland via the Parents Coalition of Montgomery County, www.parentscoalitionmc.com, had this advice to offer to us here in DeKalb County:

6:32pm on Tuesday, June 21, 2011

It doesn't seem that the people in this community really understands what a cell tower on school property means. It means a commercial entity on public school land. It means 24/7 access by company workers. It means the placement of a HAZMAT (hazardous materials) site on playgrounds. It means trucks driving over school grounds (can mess up football fields, playgrounds, trucks arrive DURING recess) and it means maintenance of the grounds issues as the compound becomes overgrown.

Cell tower and stranger danger:
http://parentscoalitionmc.blogspot.com/2010/01/stranger-danger-cell-towers-on-school.html
Summary: There are some facts you as community members, parents and tax payers need to know about.

While you read these facts, consider the following questions:
* What benefit is it doing to our children?
* What benefit does it bring to our community?
* Why are other schools benefiting from the cell tower in our backyard?
* How is this tower helping the value of our homes?
* When did a public school become a profit generating business?

1. Towers bring very little money into the school system and even less, if any, will be spent at the school that's assuming this huge 30-year risk. For example, if MLK, Jr. High School in Lithonia, GA, with approximately 1833 students (according to education.com), were to actually be allowed to keep all the money from their tower so it could be spent at their school, it would be the equivelent to less than $5.00 per student per year! Did anyone think to ask the parents if they would like to contribute $20 per year per child so that the school board would NOT place a cell tower nearby?

2. The cell tower funds the school receives are not appropriated by county and are separate from the general fund. It ends up being essentially nothing more than a slush fund that can be utilized, and not be penalized, as the school board wishes.

4. The schools with the towers believed they would get 25K per PTA. They have since learned the money all goes to the general fund and they will then be able to "direct" the spending of $25,000 in the first year. After that, all money goes straight to the general fund. Why are all schools able to benefit from a huge health and safety issue being forced upon only a few?

5. T-mobile wants to add up to three additional devices per tower, once they are operational. This increases the radiation exposure and nothing in the contract states what would be in it for the schools with the towers.

6. T-mobile and frequently visits the cell tower site and as it has happened at other schools, they do not check in or check out.

7. The DCSS did not include anything in the T-mobile contract that would require the employees or subcontractors of T-mobile to have background checks. If you have a child in a trailor or at recess when these people are inspecting the towers, this is a major concern.

8. The driveway and eavesments have been known to create an eyesore for the school and the community.

We as parents and tax payers need to demand that the money being brought into our school is used appropriately. If you are a member of the PTA at your school, it is recommended that your PTA take a vote about whether or not to allow the extra devices to be co-located on your tower and whether or not the school should enforce the check-in policy that exists for volunteers or anyone else coming onto school property. You can then deliver that message to your principal and school council member and ask that it be brought to the attention of your board member.


Look at the dirt road created by all the truck traffic to the cell tower on the playground at this elementary school: http://parentscoalitionmc.blogspot.com/2010/01/weast-puts-strangers-on-playground.html

Read about the HAZMAT issue and T-Mobile response to comply with county law:
http://parentscoalitionmc.blogspot.com/2010/03/weast-puts-hazmat-on-playgrounds.html

Here is what the base of the cell tower looks like at one school:

Maintenance of site:
http://parentscoalitionmc.blogspot.com/2010/01/weasts-cell-tower-jungle-gym-for-kids.html

RESPONSE FROM CEO ELLIS'S OFFICE: Does This Seem Right to You?

Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2011 2:39:30 PM
Subject: RE: cell tower at MLK Jr. H.S.
(click headline for the full story)

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?)

Caption: 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?

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.

CEO Ellis Responds - States No Oversight or Authority Over the School System

6/28/11

Dear CEO Mr. Ellis,

We have been appalled at the lack of notice and impropoer notice that DeKalb County Schools has give us as parents to speak out against the proposed cell towers slated for 12 of our schools. We have not even been privy to the dollar amounts or the agreement terms. All meetings have been in secret for close to a year now while, just before Summer ends, the board will vote and they are expected to have zero input as far as public comments. 

We are assuming the school board will approve the towers, but we would like to know how do we stay involved when the issue goes to the next level?   How can we be informed when the Brockett Elementary School tower will be discussed for zoning so that we might finally have the chance to voice our concerns?

Thanks, Mr. Ellis, for your time.  We look fowrad to your reply,

C and P Miller

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

7/11/11

Dear Mr. and Mrs. Miller,

Your email has been received in the Office of CEO Burrell Ellis. Thank you for writing and sharing your concerns.

Regarding the DeKalb School System, this is a separate governing agency from county government, and CEO Ellis does not have any oversight or authority over the school system. Responses to your inquiries about the school system may be better addressed by one of the elected school board members or the acting school superintendent for DeKalb, Ms. Ramona Tyson. Contact information for the School System can be found at http://www.dekalb.k12.ga.us/.

I hope this information is helpful.

Sincerely,

Nina A. Hall | Special Assistant to

CEO Burrell Ellis, DeKalb County Government

330 W. Ponce de leon, Decatur, GA 30030
office: (404) 371-6304 | fax: (404) 371-6291 |

Email: nahall@dekalbcountyga.gov