Saturday, July 15, 2017

Parents Oppose Cell Tower at ShadySide Elementary School: Watch BOE Testimony

A new cell tower has been proposed for Shadyside Elementary School in Annapolis.
At the recent Board of Education meeting, parents testified in opposition. Please see their testimony here.
Parents are also very concerned that the community meeting is held during the summer? How can parents even know about this meeting?








at

PGCPS School Cell Tower Radiation Exceeds Safety Limits Set By LA School District!!!

Milestone Communications has been measuring the radiation exposure from their school cell towers. This measurement information is publicly shared. You can view the reports of all measurements here.


Here is what we found out. 
According to the documentation sent, PGCPS school cell towers were emitting radiation at levels that well exceed what other localities- such as LA School District allow. 





PGCPS cell tower radiation is higher than the LA School District radiation limits.
Los Angeles School District would not allow the radiation levels PGCPS schools have!

The Los Angeles School District uses a radiofrequency radiation threshold level that is 10,000 times lower than the current Federal Communications Commission standard. The LA School District has BANNED cell towers at schools. 

The LA School District uses a  lower radiation limit of 10, 000 times lower than the FCC. Read a letter here. 

"The District shares your concerns as many questions remain regarding RF exposures. That is why the OEHS established a precautionary threshold level that is 10,000 times lower than the current Federal Communications Commission standard. A supplemental report was recently commissioned by our office to validate the use of this threshold as well as conduct in-classroom monitoring to
document compliance." 
-Yi Hwa Kim, Office of Environmental Health and Safety, Los Angeles School District California

The LA School District states that, “ the District is committed to ensuring the health and safety of its students and staff and will continue to review all relevant and appropriate information regarding RF exposures and health.” You can read the LA report on radiation here http://achieve.lausd.net/cms/lib08/CA01000043/Centricity/domain/135/pdf%20files/RadiofrequencyEvaluationReport.pdf.


Note: The FCC guidelines refer to a power density limit of 1,000 W/cm2. The LA School District uses a limit of 0.1 W/cm2 .

Therefore, it seems that the following calculations apply to Prince George's County Schools with cell towers. Please correct our calculations if we made a mistake here.

The Tasker Middle School cell tower 
Maximum radiation documented by the Report dated 4/8/2015 found radiation levels at 0.6645% of the FCC limits. This means the maximum radiation measured at Tasker was at 6.6545 W/cm2.  

The Tasker Middle School cell tower radiation is resulting in roughly 66 times the radiation allowed at Los Angeles Public Schools. See the Tasker Radiation Level Report.




The Flowers School cell tower
The radiation measurement survey dated 2/4/2015 found maximum radiation was at .50%  FCC limit which which means the maximum radiation level was surveyed at 5W/cm2. 

Therefore, the compared with LA public schools, the Flowers School cell tower is resulting in about 50  times the radiation allowed at Los Angeles Public Schools.




The Oxen Hill cell tower
In a survey 3/29/2016, maximum radiation was at .0490 % FCC limit which which means the maximum radiations level was at .49 W/cm2. 

Therefore, The Oxen Hill cell tower is resulting in about 4  times the radiation allowed at Los Angeles Public Schools.

The Green Valley Academy cell tower 
In a survey 2/4/2015, the  maximum radiation was at .040 % FCC limit which which means the maximum radiations level was at .49 W/cm2. 

The Green Valley cell tower is resulting in about 4  times the radiation allowed at Los Angeles Public Schools.
The American Academy of Pediatrics says this specifically about cell towers.See this screen save from their website.


The radiation measurements show that these towers are not violating federal law which states that cell towers can not result in radiation levels that exceed FCC limits. However, meeting FCC regulations is NOT proof of safety because FCC regulations are 20 years old and based on 30 year old science. Many many medical and expert groups state that FCC limits are NOT protective. Read about that here. 

If any of these calculations are incorrect, please contacts at safeschoolspg@gmail.com.
See this video of firefighters who HALTED cell towers at their fire stations.









at

Wednesday, July 12, 2017

Home Values Drop Up to 20% When A Cell Tower is Erected Nearby: Read Documentation Here


Home Values Drop When A Cell Tower is Erected Nearby

A survey conducted in June 2014 by the National Institute for Science, Law and Public Policy (NISLAPP) in Washington, D.C., “Neighborhood Cell Towers & Antennas—Do They Impact a Property’s Desirability?”, shows home buyers and renters are less interested in properties located near cell towers and antennas, as well as in properties where a cell tower or group of antennas are placed on top of or attached to a building.
  • 94% said a nearby cell tower or group of antennas would negatively impact interest in a property or the price they would be willing to pay for it.
  • 94% said a cell tower or group of antennas on top of, or attached to, an apartment building would negatively impact interest in the apartment building or the price they would be willing to pay for it.
  • 95% said they would opt to buy or rent a property that had zero antennas on the building over a comparable property that had several antennas on the building.
  • 79% said under no circumstances would they ever purchase or rent a property within a few blocks of a cell tower or antennas.
  • 88% said that under no circumstances would they ever purchase or rent a property with a cell tower or group of antennas on top of, or attached to, the apartment building.
  • 89% said they were generally concerned about the increasing number of cell towers and antennas in their residential neighborhood.
Read the Press Release: Survey by the National Institute for Science, Law & Public Policy. A special thank you to ElectromagneticHealth.org for details on this survey.

Research Studies and Publications
Sandy Bond, Ph.D., Ko-Kang Wang, “The Impact of Cell Phone Towers on House Prices in Residential Neighborhoods,” The Appraisal Journal, Summer 2005; Source: Goliath business content website
 
 "Cellular Phone Towers: Perceived impact on residents and property values" University of Auckland, paper presented at the Ninth Pacific-Rim Real Estate Society Conference, Brisbane, Australia, January 19-22, 2003;  Source: Pacific Rim Real Estate Society website,

US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) considers cell towers as “Hazards and Nuisances.”
HUD requires its certified appraisers to take the presence of nearby cell towers into consideration when determining the value of a single family residential property.
HUD guidelines categorize cell towers with "hazards and nuisances." HUD  prohibits FHA underwriting of mortgages for homes that are within the engineered fall zone of a cell tower.
“The appraiser must indicate whether the dwelling or related property improvements is located within the easement serving a high-voltage transmission line, radio/TV transmission tower, cell phone tower, microwave relay dish or tower, or satellite dish (radio, TV cable, etc).” Read it here at the US Department of Housing and Urban Development.

With regard to the new FHA originations, the guide provides that:  “The appraiser must indicate whether the dwelling or related property improvements are located within the easement serving a high-voltage transmission line, radio/TV transmission tower, cell phone tower, microwave relay dish or tower, or satellite dish (radio, TV cable, etc).”



“The domino effect that would occur if a cell tower were installed at Annapolis Middle School would cause a devaluation in home prices, which in turn would lead to lower property taxes, which would lead the local and state governments to increase the tax base, which would result in less money in the homeowner’s pocket; again!”

"The courts in New York and other jurisdictions across the country have recognized that the public perception of health risks arising from proximity to an EMF may be a factor that adversely affects property values, regardless of whether the actual adverse health effects are proven."
New York State Public Service Commission, Case No. 06-T-0650, Exhibit JMO-2
Effect of the NYRIHVTL on Residential Property Values

Windsor Hills/View Park, CA: residents who were fighting off a T-Mobile antenna in their neighborhood received letters from real estate companies, homeowner associations and resident organizations in their community confirming that real estate values would decrease with a cell phone antenna in their neighborhood.  To see copies of their letters to city officials, look at the . Report from Los Angeles County Regional Planning Commission regarding CUP Case No. 200700020-(2), from L.A. County Board of Supervisors September 16, 2009, Meeting documents, Los Angeles County website,  here at: http://file.lacounty.gov/bos/supdocs/48444.pdf
a.    See page 295, August 31, 2008 Letter from Donna Bohanna, President/Realtor of Solstice International Realty and resident of Baldwin Hills to Los Angeles Board of Supervisors explaining negative effect of cell tower on property values of surrounding properties. “As a realtor, I must disclose to potential buyers where there are any cell towers nearby. I have found in my own experience that there is a very real stigma and cellular facilities near homes are perceived as undesirable.”
b.    See page 296, March 26, 2008 Letter from real estate professional Beverly Clark, “Those who would otherwise purchase a home, now considered desirable, can be deterred by a facility like the one proposed and this significantly reduces sales prices and does so immediately…I believe a facility such as the one proposed will diminish the buyer pool, significantly reduce homes sales prices, alter the character of the surrounding area and impair the use of the residential properties for their primary uses.”
c.     See Page 298, The Appraiser Squad Comment Addendum, about the reduced value of a home of resident directly behind the proposed installation after the city had approved the CUP for a wireless facility there: “The property owner has listed the property…and has had a potential buyer back out of the deal once this particular information of the satellite communication center was announced….there has been a canceled potential sale therefore it is relevant and determined that this new planning decision can have some negative effect on the subject property.”
d.    See Page 301, PowerPower presentation by residents about real estate values: “The California Association of Realtors maintains that ‘sellers and licensees must disclose material facts that affect the value or desirability of the property,’ including ‘known conditions outside of and surrounding’ it.  This includes ‘nuisances’ and zoning changes that allow for commercial uses.”
e.    See Pages 302-305 from the Baldwin Hills Estates Homeowners Association, the United Homeowners Association, and the Windsor Hills Block Club, opposing the proposed cell tower and addressing the effects on homes there: “Many residents are prepared to sell in an already depressed market or, in the case of one new resident with little to no equity, simply walk away if these antennas are installed.
f.      See Pages 362-363, September 17, 2008, Letter from resident Sally Hampton, of the Windsor Hills Homeowner’s Assoc., Item K, addressing effects of the proposed facility on real estate values.

at

Monday, July 10, 2017

Neelsville Montgomery County PTA Presentation on Cell Towers and Health

Powerpoint Presentation to the Neelsville Montgomery County PTA on Cell Tower Radiation and Health.


at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)