The two SMUSD cell towers were built without any building permits, inspections or tests.

The two SMUSD cell towers were built without any building permits, inspections or tests.
Cell tower fires cannot be fought with water or foam and are left to burn out on its own. Century windstorms have exceeded the wind ratings of the cell towers and the seismic rating of the cell towers are unknown. In 2000 Los Angeles Unified School District banned cell towers on and near school campuses.

Sunday, September 30, 2012

Bridlewood Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs) Information Service EMFs & Schools & Playgrounds  
Compiled by: Richard W. Woodley

California (1995)
In July 1995 the California Public Health Foundation, in association with the California Department of Health Services, announced a project to assess the results of exposure of California public school and day care center personnel and students to both external power line frequency electric and magnetic fields (EMFs), and to internal sources of EMFs such as building wiring, electrical equipment, and lighting.

The goal of this project is to provide information to assist decision makers in prioritizing school policy options if further research studies suggest that power line frequency EMF exposures are associated with increased health risk.

California (1995)
The California Public Utilities Commission advised cellular telephone companies not to build antennas near schools or hospitals.

California - Laguna Beach (1995)
Parents for the Elimination of the Schoolyard Tower (PEST) is fighting to have a cellular tower, erected by Air Touch Cellular, from their schoolyard. The Laguna Beach Unified School District filed court action on August 30, 1995 and the company has now agreed to meet with PEST representaives.

California - San Francisco (1996)
Cellular towers have been banned on school property in San Francisco.

Florida - Boca Raton (1998)
Two hundred and fifty students transferred out of an elementary school in Boca Raton, Florida that installed a cell tower in the middle of the school.
A magnet program designed to attract and encourage students to transfer has had an unexpected event occur. Calusa Elementary in Boca Raton lost 30% of its students due to transfers to the new magnet school in the area. While most other schools only lost 40-60 students, Calusa Elementary, which had had recently installed a cell tower smack in the middle of the school-directly over the kid, lost close to 250 children.
The school District of Palm Beach County Florida is still scratching their skull. This school district has an indefinite moratorium on towers since 1987.

LOCATION: Montecito, Santa Barbara County
DHS confirmed a cluster of childhood leukemia and lymphoma in Montecito from 1981 to 1988 at a rate 5 times higher than would be expected during an eight-year period in a city of its size. DHS has been unable to pinpoint a specific environmental cause. Community members were concerned about possible health effects from electromagnetic fields (EMF) levels coming from the transformer station near the elementary school and DHS did find elevated EMF at the school. 

Friday, September 28, 2012

American Academy of Environmental Medicine Recommends Patients Limit Exposure To Electromagnetic and Radiofrequency Fields

The new report says:
  • Patients are becoming more electrically sensitive.
  • Physicians should consider the total exposure of a patient to electromagnetic fields.
  • Electromagnetic fields may be an underlying cause of a patient’s disease process.
  • Lists 9 categories of disease or disability where double-blind research in humans suggests avoiding EMFs may be beneficial, including neurological, cardiac and pulmonary conditions.
  • Lists other conditions where supporting research exists suggesting avoidance of EMFs may be beneficial, including neurodegenerative diseases, such as Parkinson’s Disease, Alzheimer’s Disease and Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, plus many more.
  • Patients with the above conditions should not have smart meters on their homes.

Thursday, September 27, 2012

Please attend board meeting on Oct.9 from 7:30 at school district to find out what the experts have found.

Please voice your opinion at public study session on Oct.23 from 5pm at school district 1665 West Dr., San Marino, CA 91108.

It is up to us to protect our children and many many more that are coming to our school district in the next twenty years from cell tower radiation.

Radio Frequencies emitted from mobile phone towers will have deleterious medical effects to people within the near vicinity according to a large body of scientific literature. Babies and children will be particularly sensitive to the mutagenic and carcenogenic effects of the radio frequency radiation. It is therefore criminal to place one of these aerials on or near a school. 
- Helen Caldicott, MD, Pediatrician and co-founder of Physicians For Social Responsibility
  • Connecticut PTA adopts resolution to support legislation requiring that Cell Towers be kept 1,500 feet from schools, and that, to the extent that they are already within 1,500 feet, they be removed at the cost of their owner - Connecticut PTA Resolution
  • Los Angeles Councilwoman Janice Hahn moves to prevent placement of Cell Antennas near schools - 
    November 18, 2009 - Press Release
  • Brattleboro Vermont residents say No Cell Tower on School Grounds - January 12, 2011
  • No Cell Towers Near Schools - Facebook Link
  • No Towers at Schools -
  • New Zealand: Green Party Calls for Banning All Cell Towers Near Schools - News Story
  • The President of The Irish National Teachers Organization Calls for a Ban on Cell Towers Near Schools - "Individuals have a choice whether to use a mobile phone or not. With a phone mast near a school, children have no choice" - Cellular News
  • The Association of Teachers and Lecturers which represents more than 160,000 staff members of schools across the UK has called for the removal of Wi-Fi from schools citing potential health concerns for the children - April 8, 2009
  • Belgium Court Bans Cell Tower near Elementary School Citing Health Concerns - September 6, 2009 - News Story
  • School Cell Tower Denied - Proposed construction of a Cell Tower at Florida Middle School Defeated - Tampa, FL -Watch Video 
  • Cell Tower a No Go - Residents Say No Cell Tower at Middle School - Tampa, FL
  • School Board: No interest in Cell Tower Proposed For Elementary School - Wykoff, NJ - News Story
  • After parents sucessfully defeated Cell Tower on School Grounds, company obtained permission to build it adjacent to School, and without notice. Parents had no opportunity to stop it
  • India Moves to Ban Cell Towers Near Schools - Story Link
  • Telecom Towers Tsunami - There are medical and political ramifications to Cell Tower siting in our country - B. Blake Levitt, former NY Times Science Writer - Article Link
  • Parents Fighting Cell Tower Over School - "Keep it away from our kids", they say - Oceanside, CA - News Story
  • Proposed Playground Cell Tower Nixed by Effective Public Education Campaign in North Idaho - Lake City, ID -News Story
  • Elementary School to Close, Citing Planned Construction of Cell Towers on Roof of Building - Santa Cruz, CA - 
    News Story
  • After hearing from students, School Board bans Cell Towers from Schools in District - Surrey, Canada - 
    YouTube Video
Cancer & Leukemia News
Links to videos, news articles and other records of cancer and leukemia clusters around Cell Towers:
    Below is a series of highly informative short videos which address five aspects of Cell Phone Tower Radiation. Parts 2 and 3 are particularly informative.
    • Cell Phone Tower Radiation Pollution Part 1  [Watch Video - 10:43]

      Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 was written by lobbyists for the telecom industry, to strip homeowners and local zoning commissions of the ability to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the community.

      Blake Levitt
    • Cell Phone Tower Radiation Pollution Part 2  [Watch Video - 9:19]

      How the FCC is Not Protecting School Children from the Constant Bombardment of RF Emissions from Cell Towers.

      Whitney Seymour Jr.
    • Cell Phone Tower Radiation Pollution Part 3  [Watch Video - 10:45]
      How the RF Emission Safety Standards in the U.S. are "Unrelated" to the Actual Dangers of RF Emissions, Especially With Regard to Causing Leukemia in Children

      Martin Blank, PhD, Columbia University
    • Cell Phone Tower Radiation Pollution Part 4  [Watch Video - 6:14]
      How Countries, other than the United States, have deemed the Maximum Safe RF Emissions to be 100 times lower than the standard adopted by the FCC.

      Deb Carney
    • Cell Phone Tower Radiation Pollution Part 5  [Watch Video - 2:32]

      The Impacts of Cell Towers on Wildlife

      Albert Manville, PhD, Senior Wildlife Biologist
    BioInitiative Report:                                    
    A Rationale for a Biologically-based Public Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Fields (ELF and RF)

    Monday, September 24, 2012

    Dr. Martin Blank speaks about Cell phones, cell towers, the associated health effects that can lead to cancer. He also talks about how the cell phone industry has corrupted scientific studies. He is a contributor to the Bioinitiative report.

    Dr. Blank's bio:

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

    We have collected 225 signatures. Thank you for all your support!!!
    An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

    Years ago, we did not have the data we have today .  The appeal of these cell towers was "income for the school"; then the appeal became "broadband for the school".  Now, five-seven years later, we stand with substantial scientific evidence pointing to ill-health from microwave exposure. 

    Is it "ethical" for us to keep these towers, knowing the consequences could be harmful for our students now or in 20 years?   Is it ethical for us to keep the contracts with a mega-communications corporations and unknown sublet-companies ?

    And at what point do we practice "prevention" to avoid serious or fatal illness later?  In English, there is a phrase:  An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.  Now we can practice prevention, later there is no cure!

      Decades ago, we did not know that cigarettes can kill and now their packages labelled so. 

      In the sixties, the govt. said the chemical defoliant agent orange used in Vietnam was "safe", but now we know it was lethal.  As well, chemicals used in the Gulf War in 1991 have killed or maimed those soldiers.

    The real question for the school board is:  Do we take responsibility now, and weigh the futures consequences versus fulfill the unreasonable contracts for many many more years to expose our children and their children?
    High School PTSA meeting - September 19, 2012                           
    • We presented the cell tower issue at high school PTSA meeting.
    • Superintendent Mr. Loren Kleinrock came to address the same issue right after our talk and some of his points are:
      • At home, a lot of things you use are not safe, do you do anything about it? This is one more thing.
      • If we move the tower, it maybe next to your house. (Should I be scared if it is safe?)
      • If the experts say it is not harmful now, we don't know if it will be harmful in 30 years.
      • Don't interchange cell phone with cell tower. (They are the same frequency and signal, except that when you talk you could be much closer to your phone, but tower transmit much higher power and it is transmitting 24/7)
      • If we break the contracts, we can't use health as the reason. 
      • If we break the contracts, we will need to sign a blank check; and we mean you.
      • He mentioned someone donated to school foundation and does not want to pay for removing the tower. (I heard people talking about not donating to school foundation or anything unless the towers are removed)
      • He also mentioned that the experts that T-mobile hired is independent and just happened to be hired by cell company (Maybe they deliver something that the cell companies want?)
    San Marino School Board Meeting Updates - September 18, 2012:
    • Concerned parents and attorney including Dr. Chen, Cindy Yung, Peter Litchman, Garego's associate Ben and Ming Jiang presented more information of harmful effects of cell tower and concern as well as support from legal angel to the board.
    • Parents including Doug, David, Noelle and Cindy also asked how the experts were selected and expressed their view of whether money and time should be spend on hiring biased experts, who have been repeatedly hired by mobile operators.
    • Board approved the two experts that district recommended with the condition that these are not the only people they will get input from.
    • Board also asked Mr. Loren Kleinrock to reach out to Dr. Martin Blank as an expert to hire since Dr. Blank is not affiliated with a mobile operator.
    • Board requested that the experts present their findings at the next board meeting on Oct.9
    • Board also asked district to find lawyer(s) and present them for review at the next board meeting. 
    • Board will hold a public session from 5-6:30 on Oct. 23.  
    September 18, 2012 SMUSD Meeting Minutes available at: 
    September 4, 2012 SMUSD Meeting Minutes available at: 

    Tuesday, September 18, 2012

    San Marino School Board SMUSD Meeting Minutes - September 4, 2012

    Available for download at:
    Dear Fellow San Marino School Parents:
    The school district is currently assessing the potential health hazards of the cell towers located on the campuses. To inform the decision makers, superintendent Kleinrock proposes to hire two consultants, Bio Physicist Engineer Drew Thatcher and scientist Karl Rodenbaugh.  Both of these individuals have already publicly stated that the health concerns secondary to radiation emitted from cell towers are meritless.

    The superintendent and the board should be made aware that obtaining this predetermined analysis would be a violation of due diligence, which is especially concerning in matters regarding the safety of our children and the school staff. We humbly suggest that the board first examines the information collected by the LA Unified School District in their 2000 and 2009 resolutions to ban cell phone towers on or near schools. One assumes that the LAUSD, the second largest in the United States, would have performed a thorough study on this subject. Such examination and potential conservation of resources is especially prudent in light of the financial hardship the SMUSD is presently enduring.

    If you share our concerns about the hiring of biased consultants, please come tonight to the SMUSD board meeting Tuesday Sept 18th at 7:30 pm at the district office near the library. This may be our best opportunity to remind superintendent Kleinrock who he works for.

    Sunday, September 16, 2012

    Contracts between SMUSD and wireless providers.  
    • Contract made on Nov.23, 2004 with Verizon Wireless 
    • Contract made on Jan. 23, 2006 with Nextel of California, Inc. 
    • Contract made on Dec.7, 2006 with Royal Street Communications, LLC.
    The agreements are available for download at: 
    Valentine Elementary School agreement -

    High School agreement -

    At this point, it is obvious that the contracts are so one sided; the wireless companies can terminate the contract any year with a little advance notice but there is no provision as how we can get out of them.

    The terms are four 5 years auto renewal and after that they could do two more 5 years renewal if we don't write written request to terminate.

    Friday, September 14, 2012

    1,500 cellphone base stations to be removedSource: The China Post, November 6, 2007
    Taipei, Taiwan

    "The target of dismantling 1,500 mobile phone base stations (MPBS) this year will be easily achieved by the end of the year, National Communications Commission (NCC) Chairman Su Yeong-chin said yesterday."

    "Su made the remarks in response to questions from opposition Kuomintang Legislator Lai Shyh-bao, who wanted the NCC to ensure that all base stations in the country be established atop buildings of publicly run organizations instead of private buildings, buildings near schools or in residential areas."

    "The NCC had been urged by lawmakers to “strongly intervene” in efforts to cut the number of base stations by at least half, since the coverage rate of existing MPBSs is more than five times the amount that Taiwan actually needs."
    "Residential neighborhoods and schools must not be exposed to the risk of radiation emitted by the MPBSs that could cause cancer, miscarriages and diseases of the nervous system, and could even drive people to suicide, the legislators said, arguing that existing base stations must be moved out of such areas, as studies show that radiation levels at such facilities in Taipei in the north and in Tainan in the south surpass reasonable levels."
    The complete article can be found at:

    Thursday, September 13, 2012

    LAUSD Calls for Increased Setbacks, Advance Notification on Locations Near Schools

    After approving a resolution earlier this year banning cell sites on school property, LAUSD passed another resolution this week calling for increased setbacks and advance notification from all parties for any cell sites near its schools. Board member Richard Vladovick spearheaded the resolution (co-authored by board member Martinez) approved December 8. The resolution addresses Vladovick’s 7th District school families’ objections to the T-Mobile site across the street from a San Pedro elementary school:
    T-Mobile Cell Tower Notification and Condemnation (Waiver of Board Rule 72)

    Whereas, The health and safety of our students and employees are fundamental concerns of the Los Angeles Unified School District;

    Whereas, On June 27, 2000 and May 26, 2009, the Governing Board of the Los Angeles Unified School District adopted resolutions opposing the siting of cellular facilities on or in close proximity to schools to ensure individuals, especially children, are protected from the potential health effects associated with exposures to extremely low frequency electromagnetic and radiofrequency radiation;

    Whereas, The District has been successful in restricting the placement of wireless communication installations on its school facilities, but it has had limited success in preventing wireless service facilities from siting near its schools due to apparent restrictions placed upon zoning authorities to consider the health and environmental effects of radio-frequency radiation;

    Whereas, The desire of the wireless companies to market new wireless services has since led to a proliferation of cellular facilities targeting residential areas and areas near schools;

    Whereas, Wireless infrastructure is being deployed at an unprecedented speed and cellular facilities have been approved without proper justification and proof that the placement is to serve existing demand or provide public safety benefits;

    Whereas, Serious concerns exist regarding wireless permits approved near schools without proper notification to school officials and nearby property owners or proper review and oversight of the wireless applications;

    Whereas, Cities, counties, and local municipalities have relied upon Section 704 of the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 to preempt local communities and school districts from opposing the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of environmental effects of radio-frequency emissions to the extent that the proposed facilities comply with the Federal Communications Commission regulations concerning such emissions;

    Whereas, Cities, counties, and local municipalities have not had to demonstrate that these telecommunication facilities comply with the Federal Communications Commission regulations concerning radio-frequency emissions as they relate to multiple-transmitter sites and complex
    environments whereby all significant contributions to environmental exposures are cumulatively considered;

    Whereas, Based upon new and emerging scientific evidence there continues to be considerable debate as to the adequacy of existing public exposure standards including those promulgated by the Federal Communications Commission;

    Whereas, The full Parliament of the European Union has raised concerns about the exposure of children and young people to electromagnetic fields and continuing uncertainties about possible health risks; and, therefore, adopted on April 2, 2009 a resolution encouraging 1) the establishment of setback criteria for wireless antennas, mobile phone masts and other electromagnetic emitting devices to be set within a specific distance from schools and health institutions, 2) stricter regulations and protections for residents and consumers and 3) more reliable information be made available about the effects of exposure to electromagnetic fields to citizens in an effort to prevent a “proliferation of poorly positioned masts and transmitters”;

    Whereas, The Federal Communications Commission is obliged to conduct periodic reviews of current research and analysis of the health implications associated with radio-frequency exposures in cooperation with industry, agency, and organizations responsible for community health and safety to ensure exposure guidelines are appropriate and scientifically valid;

    Whereas, T-Mobile has refused to consider and implement the requested changes by placing a cell tower on the corner of Westmont and Taper Avenues, located approximately 40 feet from Taper Elementary School,

    Whereas, T-Mobile has refused to considered alternate locations for placement of the cell tower,

    Whereas, T-Mobile or any responsible agency has failed to properly notify the District of the placement of this cell tower located next to a school,

    Whereas, T-Mobile or any responsible agency has failed to properly notify the community or parents in the area surrounding the proposed cell tower; now, therefore be it

    Resolved, That the Governing Board of the Los Angeles Unified School District directs the Superintendent to request local jurisdictions to provide timely notification when new cellular permit applications are filed and provide comment on the health risks from the proposed facility as it relates to compliance with existing Federal Communications Commission regulations associated with cumulative exposures;

    Resolved further, That the Board requests that the County of Los Angeles Board of Supervisors, the Los Angeles City Council and all local jurisdictions that the District serves join in passing a resolution in demanding the revision of Section 704 of the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996’s preemption of consideration of the health and environmental effects of radio-frequency radiation at levels below current Federal Communication Commission standards in decisions involving the placement, construction and modification of wireless facilities, and in favor of amending the California Public Utilities Code to grant local governments authority to regulate wireless facilities in public rights of way pursuant to local planning and zoning ordinances;

    Resolved further, That the Board requests that the Department of Water and Power or any other responsible agency call for the removal of any cell phone towers within 200 feet of a school campus;

    Resolved further, That the Board requests that T-Mobile immediately remove the cell phone tower located adjacent to Taper Avenue Elementary School or any responsible agency use all available legal means to remove the cell phone tower; and be it finally

    Resolved, That the Board expresses its most serious condemnation of T-Mobile’s construction of the cell phone tower adjacent to Taper Avenue Elementary School and urges T-Mobile to remove the cell phone tower to avoid serious damage to its brand in the District and the community at large.

    Source: LAUSD Board of Education Meeting Minutes, Dec. 8, 2009, Available for download at:

    Wednesday, September 12, 2012

    Please sign the petition!                                   Thank you!

    Please ignore the donation request!!!!

    "Remove Cell Towers from SMUSD"

    Subject: Cell phone towers in the middle of school grounds pose potential health hazards to children.

    What can  you do to help?
    1) Please sign the petition calling for the removal of cell phone towers from San Marino school properties.
    2) Next step, share this link with your San Marino friends on Facebook, Twitter, etc. to pass the petition along electronically for signature collection.  Let's get the word out so we can make our schools a safe place without exposing our children to electromagnetic radiation at close distances. 
    3) Come out and voice your opinion in person at upcoming San Marino School Board (SMUSD) Meetings 10/9 at 7:30 at 1665 West Dr., San Marino.

    Tower Location and Exposure:
    I used to be a lead system engineer in cellular infrastructure division with a cell site manufacture.  Recently I noticed the cell phone tower, disguised as a fake tree, on the Valentine campus within 40 feet of classrooms and next to the playground. This tower is located between Valentine and the Huntington Middle School campuses.  Additionally, there is another tower at the San Marino High School near the pool and gym. Children and teachers have been exposed to this for more than 6 hours daily at an extremely close distance for the last 6 to 7 years. Notably, peak tower output occurs during school hours.

    Between the years of 2004-2006, the SMUSD entered into 25 to 30-year lease agreements with cell phone carriers without a public hearing. In turn for using school property to place 4-5 cell phone carriers on these cell phone towers, the industry pays the school district around $4,000 monthly as income.

    Health Concerns:
    There is a significant debate about the health hazards associated with cell phones. Recent studies show that electromagnetic radiation of this type is linked to headaches, sleep disorders, poor memory, mental excitation, confusion, anxiety, depression and appetite disturbance. Most disturbingly there are scientific studies in which cell phone radiation has been associated with a 2 to 4 fold increased risk of developing incurable brain tumors (for a good review of this topic: J Neurooncology (2012) 106:1–13). In fact, there is currently sufficient evidence for the World Health Organization to classify electromagnetic cell phone radiation as a Class 2B carcinogen. A class 2B carcinogen is a possible cancer causing agent, same as gasoline.

    Although research will take many more years before it is conclusive, cell phone towers placed on or near school grounds warrant particular attention. One reason is that these cell towers are immensely more powerful than your cell phone handset; therefore, the probability of harmful effects increases. For example, a study showed that people who live within 400 meters (1,312 feet) radius of a tower had significantly increased rates of cancer, such as leukemia and breast cancer, and premature death. The second reason for additional concern is that children maybe especially susceptible to short and long term effects due to their thinner skulls and rapid rate of growth. Even the studies in which negative effects were not found urge much caution regarding pediatric exposure.

    Local and Worldwide Efforts:
    Los Angeles Unified School District adopted resolutions in 2009 banning cellular facilities on or in close proximity to school property to ensure individuals, especially children, are protected from the potential health effects associated with exposure to radio-frequency radiation. In 2009 Huntington Beach city leaders voted to stop construction of a T-Mobile tower 100 feet from an elementary school. Even as far away as Taiwan, 1,500 cell phone towers were removed in 2007.

    Action Goal:
    Cell phones are wonderful tools, but risks to our teachers and children should be minimized. Our goal is to remove the towers from all school grounds and ensure in the future that no new towers are put closer than 400 meters away from any school.

    We are asking the SMUSD Board of Directors to act without delay to decrease our children's exposure. We do not feel it is necessary for the board to conduct a time consuming, separate independent study to determine if RF-EMF radiation could be harmful.  The decades of research and investigation conducted worldwide have raised enough safety concerns that we ask the SMUSD to err on the side of caution in protecting our children as well as the staff.

    PTA meeting on Wed, Sept 12, 2012                           

    There were around twenty parents participated this part of the meeting. Only one person raised hand when asked whether they knew about the cell tower a few weeks ago.

    The issue was raised almost three weeks ago, Superintendent Loren Kleinrock yet need to find out exactly when the contracts were signed, how long the contracts are and what carriers are involved and what penalty it might be if we have to break it. 

    Summary of meeting :
    • Key points & studies listed on the cell phone towers blog were presented to the PTA
    Superintendent Kleinrock gave an update on developments since the School Board & School District meetings last week:
    • The School Board has made the cell phone towers at Valentine & SMHS issue a priority. A private investigation will be conducted.  Also, someone from Caltech was contacted to provide expertise on this matter.
    • The School District was given about 1.5 inches thick of current studies and information by the group of concerned Valentine parents - they will have them reviewed & evaluated.
    • A copy of the long-term contract for the cell phone tower will be given to Ming in the next few days.  Many parents and spouses are lawyers and can give "free legal advice" to review the contract closely.
    • The school district has an old meter and are in the process of getting a new meter to read the radiofrequency (RF) amounts coming from the cell tower, and compare that to other cell towers around San Marino. 
    •  One parent pointed out that the height of the antennas at Valentine seemed low compared to other towers.  
    • There are many unknowns - how many people live near a cell phone tower? 
    • Mr. Kleinrock has attempted to reach someone at LAUSD, where cell towers were banned from school campuses in 2009.  The main IT person there left, so he will continue to call to get information as to how LAUSD arrived at their decision.  
    • He is also in the process of contacting other school districts.  Mr. Kleinrock mentioned that Monrovia school district has a cell tower on their campus.
    • Mr. Kleinrock asked the question - if the cell towers at Valentine and SMHS were shut down and removed, how would that affect our ability to use our cell phones on campus in an emergency? 
    • Mr. Kleinrock also commented that when he was principal at SMHS, he was also concerned and questioned the installation of the cell tower.  However, all regulations were passed at the time, and he admitted that maybe he should have questioned it more.  But he is not in the position to make that evaluation.
    • Commented that he has no idea the cost of breaking a long-term contract; there are also multiple cell phone carriers involved.
    • Projected time for information gathering & evaluation for the School Board: 3 months
    Questions & comments from the audience of Valentine PTA and parents:
    • Many parents with older children were not aware of the cell phone tower at Valentine nor heard of a public hearing by the School Board back then (~2004).
    • A question was asked by a parent if the cell towers can be shut down during the months of investigation by the School Board. Mr. Kleinrock did not seem to think that was possible with the contracts.
    • A question was posed by a parent to see if Valentine children can line up before school in front of the classrooms rather than at the blacktop & also to relocate the 5th graders whose classrooms are closest to the cell tower.  Mr. Kleinrock did not have a confirmed answer, saying that the School Board would probably not oppose this action, but it may be up for discussion with the individual site principal.
    • One parent commented that it is your choice to live near a cell tower, but it's another situation when the cell tower is present on campus where young children and staff have no choice but be near it 6 hrs/day, 5 days/wk
    • One parent commented that regardless of what is found from the investigation, these cell phone towers need to be removed from San Marino campuses ASAP.  Many parents in the audience agreed on this point.  Parents stated they were willing to fundraise to break the cell tower contracts....lawyers may be able to find a way with new evidence on effects of cell phone towers to get out of the contract without a financial penalty?