Say "NO" to the Eastvalley cell tower!!!

We are asking for your support in opposition of the T-Mobile cell tower at Eastvalley Elementary for the following reasons:
   
1)  Non-compliance with the Cobb County Board of Education Administrative Rule (FJA, C, 1, d) regarding conducting a public forum, notification and gauging of community support or opposition;

2)  Recognition of potential long term health effects due to exposure to low-level, non-cellular heating EMF’s, particularly the risks posed to children;

3)  Consideration of the impact on the community regarding their rights to health, quality of life and property valuation.

Currently, there is a large group of concerned Eastvalley residents, taxpayers, voters and parents who are in strong opposing to the construction of the T-Mobile tower on school property. 

The community has concerns that proper notification was not sent to inform the public of this initiative.  Notification only went out to the school body and not to the neighboring community who do not have children in school.  Concerned citizens also tell us there is documented opposition via email and letters that have fallen on deaf ears by CCBOE.

As concerned parents, we thought the cell tower project was put on hold until we received a certified letter dated August 3, 2009 stating the construction project, the CCBOE approval on July 23rd, and the Cobb County noise ordience.  Ironically, no such “certified” letter was sent regarding a public hearing.

We have already voiced our concerns to the CCBOE at the August 13th meeting.  We object to the July 23rd vote due to this item not being included on that meeting’s published agenda, but being slipped in by Dr. John Crooks.  Prior to this, Dr. Crooks gave the community his word that a thorough investigation and a canvassing of the neighborhood would be conducted and no vote would occur before August.  This is documented via a voice mail message left by Dr. Crooks.

A meeting also took place with a small group of representatives and Dr. Crooks on August 18th to further discuss this matter.  Outcome of this meeting is still pending.  However we are requesting the CCBOE add this to the meeting agenda for a revote at the upcoming meeting on August 27th.   Our goal is to get 500 signatures to present at this board meeting.

We need to acknowledge the actions of the school Board and the school administration on this issue is dividing the community and it is not in the best interests of the children or their education.

Other items in the news of interest that we want to bring to your attention:

1)  Addision Elementary school turned down a proposed cell tower due to public opposition

2)  Most recently a T-Mobile tower was turned down in West Cobb  – near Vaughn elementary (one of the challenges opposing the tower)

3)  Los Angeles BOE recently discontinued the practice of locating cell towers on school property

We find it disturbing that the CCBOE does not have to comply with local zoning laws – why is it not OK to place a cell tower within 150 feet of any residential dwelling (as per zoning laws), however it is OK to place on school property, within 50 feet of a playground and 30 feet of the cafeteria?

1)  Scientific literature cite towers should be a minimum of 1500 feet from any place that children live or congregate (including schools, day care centers, playgrounds and parks)

2)  A more important point that needs to be considered are the long health effects from constant exposure to EMF’s are still being determined

3)  Current FCC standards for exposure are coming into question and are deemed much too high for total body exposure

4)  Recommendations are being made to cut exposure thresholds for children due to incidence and risk of certain childhood diseases (i.e. leukemia).

5)  In September 2008, Congressional hearings took place discussing the need for more focused efforts to ascertain the true risks from long term exposure to EMF’s (Ironically, the cell companies refused to present at the hearing, however numerous health and environmental experts did emphasizing the need for more research and due diligence to exercise caution in exposure).

6)  Other Recent studies have indicated there are public health threats that cannot be ignored:    2007 Studies conducted in Korea has indicated that full body exposure increases the incidence of leukemia in children (from the Statement of David O. Carpenter, MD from the Committee of Oversight and Government Reform – Sept 25, 2008).  2008 studies conducted in Sweden have concluded that young children are at particularly elevated risk from exposure to EMF’s. (cited from Dr. Carpenter’s testimony)

“Current US standards for uncontrolled public exposure to radiofrequency radiation are about 1,000 times higher than levels which appear to increase the risk of cancer on prolonged exposure.”  Dr. Carpenter

2004 German government study found that people living within 1300 feet of a cell tower had three times the normal risk of cancer

FCC and FDA have not conducted full scale clinical investigations, however many private clinicians and scientists support the set back requirements and have noted there are potential health effects to repeated exposure to EMF’s.

Other studies have been conducted supporting public health concerns attributed to cell towers and long term and constant exposure to low-level EMF’s: (“Residential Exposure to Radiofrequency Fields from Mobile Phone Base Stations….” Occupational and Environmental Medicine; 2009:66:550-556; “Public Health Implications of Wireless Technologies, Pathophysiology, 01/11/2009; “Cell Phones and the Brain”, by Dr. John D. MacArthur (Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients)

We also concerned with potential safety issues related to the construction and OSHA involvement with conducting major construction on school property during open session

Neighboring residents are concerned about safety, health and quality of life impacts:  Studies have shown average devaluation of homes is between 5 – 20% within 1000 feet of a tower. 

Modeled tax reduction due to reduction in values for houses within 1000 feet is upwards to $40K annually for the district

Cost Benefit analysis needs to be conducted to assess:
1)  Reduction in property valuation and tax basis
2)  Potential public health threats and costs associated with chronic diseases (i.e., leukemia, etc)
3)  Impact to quality of life of neighborhood and students

To summarize, the principal of the school needs to put the students and their safety first.  We should not make decisions that have long term detriment to the school and community without proper community engagement.

The request to construct the cell tower is dividing the Eastvalley community and it is not in the best interest of the school.  It will become a negative influence on the education and safety of our children.  A decision of this magnitude should not be made purely on economic impact.  This is a large price to pay for $30 per child annually or $0.15 per day.  Our children deserve better!

Sincerely,

Dr. Ricky and Carrie Welkis

www.StopSchoolCellTowers.org