Lisa & Mike Hayden: your hard work to fight against the Goliath that is T-Mobile (& those that may possibly follow them) is exemplary to all those families (Davids) across the nation in similar situations & battles. You are an inspiration to all of us. As a research scientist at Children’s Hospital, San Diego, with the increases we are seeing in childhood cancer, it is commendable that fights against consience-less big powers such as T-Mobile be fought, as we truly do not have enough evidence to fully deny the role mobile cell towers may play in adverse effects upon our children, our families, ourselves. Shame on T-Mobile for being so myopic as to focus on the immediate “gain” rather than examining possible long-term, terrible consequences. If the powers-that-be do not listen more closely, along with their political cohorts, the blood will be on their hands. Shame on you, T-Mobile. Listen more closely. Good luck, Lisa & Mike - & the community - keep fighting the good fight.
Helen Wade, Ph.D.
By Jane Celltower
In an article titled,"Communications Tower Sitings: The Telecommunications Act of 1996 And The Battle For Community Control," by Susan Lorde Martin, holds both legal contentions of telecommunications providers and State rights. Enacted by Congress on February 8, 1996, the Telecommunications Act - 1996, was aimed at promoting a competitive, deregulatory environment for telecommunications providers in order to enable lower prices, top rated service, and faster access to new technologies for consumers. Therefore the act served to remove hinderances that would serve to delay telecommunication services. Problems with both implementation on the state and local level have continued to flood the fuel and fight in litigation wars, concerning the siting of telecommunication towers and antennas. The Telecommunication Act states that "(n)o State or local statue or regulation...may prohitbit...the ablity of any entity to provide any interstate or intrastate telecommunications service;" while, the Act also dictates that "(n)othing in this section shall affect the ability of a State to impose ...requirements necessary to...protect the public safety and welfare, ...and safeguard the rights of consumers."
Kirk R. Wines (www.celltowerslayer.com ), is the city attorney for Medina and Hunts Point, Washington. He won the city of Medina's case for moratorium rights, to delay the process of a cell phone company siting of a cell tower, albeit even temporarily. The moratorium provided the city of Medina, adequate time to develop their planning and zoning guidlines in relation to cell tower placement within their city. Wines concludes the industry makes every effort to obtain favorable legislation at the federal, state and local levels. Petitioning the FCC to take away local zoning authority, asking state legislature to open up all rights-of-way to all telecommunication company providers.
Wines writes, "Every effort needs to be made to work with the industry, and to oppose it where necessary, in order to require the industry to develop an infrastructure which does not necessarily impact property values or the quality of life. ...prepare to go to legislature. Ask them to allow these facilities on all state rights-of-way. Try to keep track of innovactive providers. You can call 1 800 Unisite for a company that will install a tower on city property co-locate all of the wireless providers in one location and share rent with you for the space."
On Wines website case study page is listed BellSouth Mobility Inc. v. Gwinnett County, 944 F. Supp. 923 (N.D.Ga. 1996). The proponent and opponent party was given 5 minutes to defend his case. In the Gwinnett County case the point was made by the opponent to a cell phone company, that an ugly tower would reduce property values. The proponet was "trained" as in conditioned, to be ready for all and any arguments, building a complete case record in five minutes. Everything needed to support the proponet was written down. Whereas the opponent did not really know how to defend his position. The district court took the proponets "expert" testimony, and claimed the proponet win, ordering the county to issue the cell tower permit. Case in point, you have to be prepared. I pray the Cractt website helps you as much as possible in the process.
Jane Celltower's Notes:
To issue a complaint to any public service commission, agency, or government official, be sure to have thoroughly studied and compiled a data report, concerning the location of alternate cell tower placement. Including but not limited to available post offices, fire stations, and commercial property tower siting choices, within "very" close (I am no expert, but I suggest within 1/4 of a mile or less) proximity. Your residential property visual asthetics, an example being your subdivisions underground utilities, and adjacent residential property districts. Compile a traffic and crime analysis report in relation to the cell tower's access road. Such crime analysis is usually posted online under your county or local goverments website details. Of course you can call your local police department if in question. They will be able to lead you to your area's crime facts, including an area sexual offenders list. You can also go to: www.familywatchdog.com for help.
Also to be noted, is your county or city zoning and building permit choices in the past concerning the siting and placement of cell towers. You can go to your local county or city zoning and building department, and ask to see every cell phone tower file they have for the last two years. It is public information, made possible by the Freedom of Information Act. Make notes, pertaining to the placement of cell towers in the past. Has your local government commissioners or board, always placed cell towers within, or near RA and residential property districts? If so, that sets a pattern by local government officials. As they shoud strive to encourage cell tower collocation, and/or place cell towers on public property, or commerical property districts. You can also request copies of the cell tower reports, or sections of the reports, to follow up your research details. My county charged me .25 cent per page copied.
Get the list of area subdivisions, addesses of people involved, and interview them for additional information. Start a petition. Send letter's by mail with your contact phone number listed. Also note your subdivisons restrictions and covanents. Which may or may not be, applicable to your case, as some states only confirm restrictions and covanents in effect for twenty years. A subdivisions restrictions and covanents are usually onfile as part of your county Superior Court records. The clerk at Superior Court is usually very helpful in answering your questions. Also refute the false claims of telecommunications reps, in relation to tower's already siting and built near by. Colocation possiblities are usually available, on other towers. Point out every tower within a four mile radius. The height, and colocation possiblities, which can usually be found online by goggling different telecommunication companies, i.e., At&T, T-Mobile, etc... Note 911 service, is available throughout your area, and is not a fact or necessity in tower siting. An excellent example of cell tower research was done against a T-Mobile tower siting in a residential neighborhood, complete with utube videos, at: www.getthecelloutofhere.com .
YOU CAN FILE A COMPLAINT WITH YOUR STATES PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION - IN RELATION TO YOUR CASE. REMEMBER, YOU ONLY HAVE A 30 DAY WINDOW OF TIME IN WHICH TO DO EVERYTHING.
Georgia Public Service Commission
244 Washington Steet
Atlanta, Ga. 30334
Website: http://www.psc.state.ga.us - Here you will find your PSC Commissioners photo, phone number, and email. And NARUC - Committee members contact details.