Teachers' union enters cell tower controversy
Police called to Back to School Night
BY MELISSA KARSH Staff Writer

The Tinton Falls Education Association (TFEA) filed an unfair labor practices (ULP) charge against the Board of Education (BOE) after the BOE instructed the district superintendent to send a memo prohibiting staff from signing or distributing a petition opposing a cell tower on school grounds.

Schools Superintendent Richard J. Wesler sent an e-mail to all district staff Sept. 26 titled "petition" alerting them to a petition circulating throughout the Mahala F. Atchison School concerning a proposed cell tower on school property.

"The TFEA has filed an unfair labor practices charge based on the belief the superintendent does not have the right to interfere with the associations or individual members speaking out on a very important issue whether by participating in a petition or what they do," said New Jersey Education Association (NJEA) associate director of public relations Steve Baker.

"Well there really hasn't been any input from the teachers ... because when that petition came out and that letter came from the superintendent on Sept. 26 we really had our hands tied," said TFEA President Cherie Ronan Tuesday.

She added, "I'm sure we could've spoken about it, but in terms of really making known what we wanted to do we really felt that we were being more or less forbidden to do so."

Once a ULP is filed, it is sent to the Public Employment Relations Commission (PERC) for review.

"They'll [PERC] review it and there will probably be a hearing at that point if it doesn't get resolved before that," said Baker.

He added, "Oftentimes there is some sort of remedy that if the parties can agree to it [the complaint] doesn't necessarily need to be pursued."

Ronan said the remedy or relief in this case would be for the Board of Education to cease and desist in their efforts to interfere with the staff.

"We're [the association] carefully reviewing everything and taking the appropriate stance on what we believe," said Ronan of the cell tower controversy. "We are concerned about our safety and the health of not only the children of the Atchison school but also the staff."

The proposed cell tower, which would be constructed on the grounds of the Sycamore Avenue school, has been the subject of controversy in recent weeks culminating with a contentious public hearing at the Oct. 9 Board of Education (BOE) meeting.

"We're standing against our own BOE to defend our own community. We're not standing against the cell phone companies. We're standing against the members before us that are choosing to possibly put a cell phone tower [on school property]," said Shellean Foglia, Phipps Place, at the meeting. She said she first heard about the cell tower proposal when her children returned to school.

A petition was submitted to BOE members containing around 300 signatures opposing the construction of a cell tower on school property at the Tuesday night meeting.

This was the same petition that caused concern for teachers who had been barred by Wesler from signing it on school property.

"Be advised that no staff member may personally circulate, circulate for someone else or engage in signing any petitions or other materials of a non-school/educational nature on any school property without first obtaining the approval of the superintendent," the memo said.

Ronan said the memo violates the terms of the contract between the TFEA and the BOE.

"He's basically saying that he is going against the rights that are in our contract," said Ronan.

According to the association's contract with the BOE, "The board undertakes and agrees that it shall not directly or indirectly discourage or deprive or coerce any employee in the enjoyment of any rights ..."

Wesler responded to criticisms of the memo he sent out Sept. 26.

"It does address the issue of persons, staff or local residents engaging in what we see, and what falls under our school policy, as political activity which is not permitted on school grounds," said Wesler.

Wesler said last Friday that according to the school policy, passing out petitions falls under the title "political activity" and the content of the petition did not matter in this case.

"We also had some activity within the school so my e-mail addressed the issue [that] not only is there prohibition against residents doing it on school grounds, but staff can't engage in political activities within the district either," said Wesler.

He added that school staff would be allowed to engage in the signing of petitions on their own time and as long as it did not occur on school grounds.

BOE attorney Martin Barger was not available for comment prior to press time.

Also related to the petition, at a Back to School night at Mahala F. Atchison school Sept. 26., school Principal Mary Polese called the police because some teenagers and a parent were "soliciting on school property."

"There was a call there at the Atchison School," said Patrolman Joseph Muttie Oct. 12. "The nature of the call was middle school children with a parent were soliciting."

The group was handing out fliers to parents as they entered the building to alert them about the Oct. 9 school board meeting where a public discussion took place regarding the cell tower, according to the parent involved.

"It had nothing to do with the content of the petitions, it had to do with the fact that the people who were engaging in this activity were asked to stop doing it and initially they refused and a commotion ensued," said Wesler of the decision to involve police.

"My own teacher called the police on me. A woman that I have respected as long as I can remember called the police on eight teenagers because you told her to," said 14-year-old Monmouth Regional High School student Kaila Foglia addressing BOE members at the meeting.

"Everyone has the right to know what is going on and all we were doing was trying to raise awareness," said the Atchison school graduate. "You stop people from forming their own thoughts and opinions on a very serious issue and I think that's wrong."

The other children involved in the incident were also present at the Board of Education meeting dressed in handmade bright orange T-shirts addressing their feelings on the cell tower.

"Vote No 4 Cell Towers," was written on the front of some of their shirts. Others stated, "Save the children" or "Is it worth it?" on the back.

Also addressed at the BOE meeting was what parents felt was the lack of notice about the original public hearing for the cell tower held Sept. 17.

"I was concerned that [a large notice] would create concern in the minds of people who otherwise wouldn't be concerned," said BOE member Wayne Wiebalk at the meeting.

Wiebalk and two other BOE members gave a presentation to parents at the meeting addressing their concerns, but the presentation was met with lackluster reviews.

"[Four tenths of a percent] to one percent of safe [electro magnetic field (EMF) exposure] would be the equivalent of putting 100 to 250 towers out there. They're all out there transmitting and we'd still be safe according to the standards that have been established," said Wiebalk.

In the presentation, BOE members also pledged that they "will not make a decision that would create a safety or health problem for staff and students."

Concerned parents brought their own professionals to give another perspective on the cell tower.

"I'm not standing here to tell you that it's going to kill children but it's risky and there are no studies that show either way," said biomedical engineer Heather Beam- Brennan, who said there are no studies that have been done on children regarding RF exposure.

She said the effects would be more intense for children because of greater susceptibility to their developing nervous systems.

At the beginning of the meeting BOE Vice President Joseph DeFino said bids had been received and were being reviewed by Barger, but that a vote would not take place before Nov. 12.

The bidders include Verizon, Sprint and Cingular, according to BOE member Michael Laffey.

Even though the BOE vote is still at least a month away, Laffey said his vote would be in favor a cell tower on school property.

"I am convinced that there is absolutely zero risk to our children and that our children will benefit greatly from the revenue that this cell tower will generate and for that reason I am going to vote in favor of it," said Laffey.

The remark was met by a muffled whisper that ran through the crowd, many of whom seemed enraged at Laffey's admission.

"Please understand as we stated at the last meeting we are not all in agreement. The last thing that I am ever going to do is be dishonest to the public so please understand that," said BOE member Michele Slazyk.

After trying unsuccessfully to locate a site for a revenue-generating cell tower on municipal property, the borough approached the Board of Education with the idea of locating a tower on school property.

Other locations that were looked at for placement of a cell tower include borough hall and the soccer complex next to the Atchison school.

BOE Business Administrator Tamar R. Sydney-Gens has said the revenue generated by the Tinton Falls tower, which would be shared by the school district and the borough, would be $30,000 per carrier, or $90,000 in total if there are three carriers.

FSD Enterprises wireless telecommunications consultant Declan O' Scanlon was contracted by the BOE to advise, negotiate and answer questions about locating a cell tower on school property.

The cell tower would be located on property that the borough is leasing from the school board.

According to O' Scanlon, the Atchison school property is the only public property in the area where the carriers could place a tower. He said a wireless carrier is currently looking to place a tower in the area of the school but on private property.

"For every piece of research that you can find on the Web or in books ... every one of them that is positive, there'll be a negative. This board has put a tremendous amount of time and research. I urge everyone to take the same time ... you cannot expect someone to tell you all the answers," said BOE member Sandra Lopez.

A parent of two Atchison students, Gina Varela, asked why, if there are still lingering questions about the risks of cell towers, the BOE is going forward with the idea.

"We take very good care of them physically to protect them from predators that we can see, but this predator we might not be able to see and five years from now it might come back to haunt us and there is no amount of money, nothing, that will give you back your child," said Varela, Hockhockson Road.