Our children deserve healthy schools. 
Across the country, wireless companies are seeking to place cell towers on or near school campuses. School districts may be tempted by lease revenue, but budget pressures should never outweigh student welfare.
The U.S. should be leading the way on cell tower safety. 
Numerous countries have already <a href="https://ehsciences.org/cell-tower-radiation-limits-worldwide/" target="_self"><ins>banned cell towers </ins></a>from school grounds. Many U.S. school districts have banned new cell towers or stopped renewing leases, including Los Angeles Unified, Palo Alto Unified, West Linn–Wilsonville (OR), Temecula Valley Unified, and Loudoun County (VA).
Too often, school boards are not fully informed about the potential health, safety, liability, and financial risks associated with cell tower siting. Parents, teachers, staff, and nearby residents may learn about a proposed installation only at the last minute—after key decisions are already underway—shutting the most impacted community members out of a meaningful decision-making process. 
Cell towers on school property can create significant health, safety, liability, and financial risks for districts and the communities they serve.
Here are but a few of the issues.  
<ul>
<li>Fire Risk: Cell equipment has caught fire and caused the closure of school sports fields. </li>
<li>Hazardous Materials: Cell tower compounds contain hazardous chemicals. The back up power systems can include lead acid batteries and diesel fuel tanks which can leak.  County fire departments register cell tower sites as HAZMAT sites.  </li>
<li>Fall Zone: Students and staff will be in the fall zone of the tower and this includes the pole, segments of the pole as well as ice or pieces of equipment that could break and fall down. </li>
<li>Increased RF Radiation: Studies show close proximity to cell towers and wireless antennas increases exposure to radio-frequency (RF) radiation, which has been classified by the World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer as a Class 2 B “possible” carcinogen in 2011. Published research links exposure to cancer and <a href="https://ehsciences.org/are-cell-towers-safe/#scientificResearch" target="_self"><ins>numerous other health effects.</ins></a></li>
<li>Outdated Cell Tower RF Radiation Limits: U.S. FCC limits for cell tower radiation are based solely on avoiding short-term heating effects as the limits are derived from studies on small animals exposed for less than 60 minutes. They are <a href="https://ehsciences.org/are-cell-towers-safe/#USRegulations" target="_self"><ins>not designed to provide protection</ins></a> against effects from long-term exposure as children will experience in the classroom. </li>
<li>Antennas and RF Radiation Can Increase Over Time: Once erected, more antennas and new antennas by new telecommunications companies can generally be added to the tower with little public process. In turn, school cell tower reports <a href="https://ehsciences.org/top-10-health-safety-and-liability-risks-of-cell-towers-near-homes-and-schools/#TTHSLRCT-7-Full-Body-RF-Radiation" target="_self"><ins>document </ins></a>many towers that have increased their emitted RF radiation over the years. </li>
<li>High Risk: Insurers <a href="https://ehsciences.org/cell-tower-radiation-liability-risk-and-industry-disclosures/#CTRLRID-Insurance-Auth-Reports" target="_self"><ins>rank</ins></a> 5G and RF radiation as a “high” risk, <a href="https://ehsciences.org/cell-tower-radiation-liability-risk-and-industry-disclosures/" target="_self"><ins>comparing the issue to lead and asbestos</ins></a>.  Swiss Re Institute, a world-leading provider of insurance, classifies 5G mobile networks as a “high off-the-leash” risk.</li>
<li>Liability: Wireless companies warn shareholders about the risk but not the school administration, teachers, students or community.  Most insurance plans exclude coverage for health damages from RF as the market standard and RF exposure has often been defined as a type of pollution by insurers as well as <a href="https://ehsciences.org/cell-tower-radiation-liability-risk-and-industry-disclosures/#CTRLRID-Wireless-Companies-Define" target="_self"><ins>the cell tower companies themselves.</ins></a></li>
<li>Drop in Home Values: Realtors <a href="https://ehsciences.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/Cell-Towers-Drop-Property-Values-Oakland-Township-Realtor-Letters-2024-1-1.pdf" target="_self"><ins>repeatedly document</ins></a>  studies that <a href="https://www.nationalbusinesspost.com/cell-towers-impact-home-values/" target="_self"><ins>have found </ins></a>cell towers can reduce the property value of nearby homes between 4 and 20%. This nearby tower can also create a loss in tax revenue for the county which in turn will impact school funding. </li>
<li>Lack of Federal, State and Local Oversight for Compliance:: The federal government has no program ensuring oversight for cell tower RF radiation compliance. RF levels in the school and playgrounds and sports fields should be regularly compliance measured and posted online, yet most states and localities do not have such compliance requirements and robust pre and post RF monitoring is rarely done.  </li>
<li>Lack of Transparency and Community Participation in the Decision Making Process:  Parents of the students and the local community are often the last to hear about proposed cell towers, leaving them little time to get informed or involved. Leasing agreements are often being made for entire districts without informing the entire school community and neighbors.  </li>
<li>Today's Decision Makers Lock Future School Boards into 30+ Year Leases: School Boards wanting to limit cell towers on school property are locked into 30 plus year leases or leasing agreements that they never voted for. Even if the entire community is opposed to them, the only recourse they have is to break the contract and pay the legal fees. </li>
<li>Creates Problems for School Remodeling and Construction Projects: Once a tower is built with its long lease, school rehab and renovation projects must work around the tower, rather than be designed according to what is best for the school design.   </li>
</ul>
The U.S. is among the countries that allow for the <a href="https://ehsciences.org/cell-tower-radiation-limits-worldwide/" target="_self"><ins>highest levels</ins></a> of cell tower radio-frequency (RF) radiation in the environment. Children are uniquely vulnerable because they are still developing and spend long hours at school. Children absorb <a href="https://ehsciences.org/science-on-children-cell-phone-radiation-and-health-risk/" target="_self"><ins>higher rates</ins></a> of cell tower radiation. <a href="https://ehsciences.org/are-cell-towers-safe/#scientificResearch" target="_self"><ins>Scientific studies</ins></a>, <a href="https://ehsciences.org/doctors-and-scientists-on-cell-phone-radiation-health-effects/" target="_self"><ins>expert recommendations</ins></a>, and <a href="https://ehsciences.org/cell-tower-radiation-limits-worldwide/" target="_self"><ins>international policies</ins></a> increasingly support stronger protections and greater setbacks for cell towers from schools. Yet in the United States, federal safety rules have not been updated since 1996, and the U.S. FCC has not complied with a <a href="https://ehsciences.org/lawsuit-wireless-radiation-safety/#LFCD-Why-Court-Focus-On-Childrens-Vulnerability" target="_self"><ins>2021 federal court order </ins></a>to address children's long-term exposure.  
Schools should follow a risk mitigation approach and avoid adding chronic environmental exposures that are not necessary for education. Schools should be for education, not commercial industries. 
We urge lawmakers to act now to protect children and restore public trust.
 <a href="https://ehsciences.org/are-cell-towers-safe/#scientificResearch" target="_self"><ins>Cell tower radiation health and safety risks</ins></a>
<a href="https://ehsciences.org/cell-towers-drop-property-value/" target="_self"><ins>Cell towers drop property values</ins></a>
<a href="https://ehsciences.org/cell-tower-radiation-liability-risk-and-industry-disclosures/" target="_self"><ins>Cell towers bring liability and risk</ins></a>
<a href="https://ehsciences.org/cell-tower-radiation-limits-worldwide/" target="_self"><ins>U.S. laws allow high cell tower radiation compared to other countries</ins></a>
<a href="https://ehsciences.org/are-cell-towers-safe/#scientificResearch" target="_self"><ins>Children absorb higher cell tower radiation</ins></a>
<a href="https://ehsciences.org/are-cell-towers-safe/#USpolicies" target="_self"><ins>U.S. school board policies restricting cell towers near schools</ins></a>

I’m asking you to support legislation that bans cell towers and cell antennas on K–12 school property and requires protective setbacks around campuses.  
Numerous countries have already banned cell towers from school grounds. Many U.S. school districts have banned new cell towers or stopped renewing leases, including Los Angeles Unified, Palo Alto Unified, West Linn–Wilsonville (OR), Temecula Valley Unified, and Loudoun County (VA). Yet many campuses still host towers, and too often parents only learn about them after a lease has already been signed.

Cell towers create avoidable risks on school grounds, including:
1. Fire risk
2. Hazardous materials (diesel fuel, generators, lead-acid batteries)
3. Fall-zone dangers (tower sections, equipment, ice/debris)
4. Increased RF exposure in classrooms, playgrounds, and athletic areas
5. Outdated federal RF limits (not designed for long-term daily exposure)
6. Exposure can increase over time (additional antennas/carriers added later)
7. Liability and insurance gaps (coverage exclusions/uncertainty)
8. Property value drops up to 20% and tax-base impacts for surrounding neighborhoods
9. Little to no independent monitoring/oversight of on-campus RF levels
10. Lack of transparency and meaningful community consent
11. Long-term lease lock-in that binds future school boards
12. Campus renovation and planning constraints

The U.S. is among the countries that allow for the highest levels of cell tower radio-frequency (RF) radiation in the environment, with limits 10 to 100 times more than numerous countries including Italy, Israel, Russia, China. Many of the cell antennas now installed on school property in the US would be illegal in these countries.  

Children absorb higher rates of cell tower radiation and are biologically more vulnerable. Numerous published scientific papers support stronger protections and greater setbacks for cell towers from schools. Yet in the United States, federal safety rules have not been updated since 1996, and the U.S. FCC has not complied with a 2021 federal court order to address children's long term exposure.  

Cell towers operate with little real-world oversight or enforcement, especially around schools. 
1. Pre-installation baseline testing is rarely required
2. Post-activation RF compliance monitoring is not required
3. Results aren’t posted publicly, leaving parents and staff in the dark
4. Equipment changes that increase RF radiation levels (added antennas/carriers, power increases) can occur with minimal notice
5. Enforcement is limited, so problems may only surface after complaints or incidents

Please introduce and/or support legislation that (1) prohibits cell towers and macro antennas on K–12 property, (2) establishes minimum setback distances from schools and areas where children spend time, and (3) requires public notice, independent RF reporting, and ongoing monitoring for any facilities near campuses. I would appreciate your written response stating whether you will support this policy and what steps you will take to move it forward.

Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter. 

See research on cell towers at https://ehsciences.org/are-cell-towers-safe/

Read the recommendations of the  scientists of the International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF)  
https://icbe-emf.org/new-icbe-emf-scientific-publication-concludes-cell-phone-and-cell-tower-safety-limits-are-not-protective/

The EMF Scientist Appeal https://emfscientist.org

Scientific Research

International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF). (2022). Scientific evidence invalidates health assumptions underlying the FCC and ICNIRP exposure limit determinations for radiofrequency radiation: Implications for 5G. Environmental Health, 21(1), Article 92. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-022-00900-9

Bandara, P., & Carpenter, D. O. (2018). Planetary electromagnetic pollution: It is time to assess its impact. The Lancet Planetary Health, 2(12), e512–e514. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(18)30221-3

Scarato, T. (2025). U.S. policy on wireless technologies and public health protection: Regulatory gaps and proposed reforms. Frontiers in Public Health, 13, Article 1677583. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583

Uche, U. I., & Naidenko, O. V. (2021). Development of health-based exposure limits for radiofrequency radiation from wireless devices using a benchmark dose approach. Environmental Health, 20(1), Article 84. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-021-00768-1

Belpomme, D., Hardell, L., Belyaev, I., Burgio, E., & Carpenter, D. O. (2018). Thermal and non-thermal health effects of low intensity non-ionizing radiation: An international perspective. Environmental Pollution, 242, 643–658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2018.07.019

McCredden, J. E., Cook, N., Weller, S., & Leach, V. (2022). Wireless technology is an environmental stressor requiring new understanding and approaches in health care. Frontiers in Public Health, 10, Article 894447. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.894447

Miller, A. B., Sears, M. E., Morgan, L. L., Davis, D. L., Hardell, L., Oremus, M., & Soskolne, C. L. (2019). Risks to health and well-being from radio-frequency radiation emitted by cell phones and other wireless devices. Frontiers in Public Health, 7, Article 223. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2019.00223

Fernández, C., de Salles, A. A., Sears, M. E., Morris, R. D., & Davis, D. L. (2018). Absorption of wireless radiation in the child versus adult brain and eye from cell phone conversation or virtual reality. Environmental Research, 167, 694–699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2018.05.013

Davis, D., Birnbaum, L., Ben-Ishai, P., Taylor, H., Sears, M., Butler, T., & Scarato, T. (2023). Wireless technologies, non-ionizing electromagnetic fields and children: Identifying and reducing health risks. Current Problems in Pediatric and Adolescent Health Care, 53(2), Article 101374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cppeds.2023.101374

Time to Ban Cell Towers at U.S. Schools