PRINT ADS

A cell phone service provider that has come calling in an attempt to get a new cell phone tower in Green Coulee might get disconnected, if public opposition is any indication.

At a meeting Aug. 27, close to 50 citizens of the Green Coulee area surrounding Pierce Park let representatives of U.S. Cellular know that cell phone transmission towers, even disguised as flag or light poles, were not welcome in Pierce Park.

The company has proposed installing on the park grounds either a 75-foot flagpole, which would have two antennas enclosed within the top of it, or two 65-foot telephone-size light poles with visible antennas on top. According to U.S. Cellular representatives, if the city agrees to the proposal, the city would lease the park space to the company for $15,000 a year.

City Land Use and Development Director Jason Gilman said the city had received no lease proposal as far as he knew.

As children raced around the park, residents challenged claims made by the representatives that there were no health issues and that the towers were needed. They listened to the presentation, asked questions and demanded answers. It wasn’t a public meeting where each speaker had to provide their name and address, but they all seemed to have something to say.

Tom Bethea, a representative for U.S. Cellular, said there have been a number of complaints from customers in the area that cell phone reception was poor in Green Coulee and the company wanted to put in a tower to resolve the issues.

“In this immediate area, there are a number of complaints that people can’t get a signal,” Bethea said. “There is a problem serving this area because you are in a bowl.”

He explained that cellular phones need signals from transmitters within a line of sight. “You can’t bend a signal to this area.”

Bethea acknowledged they had not explored other locations within the coulee.

Most residents at the meeting said they have no problem getting a signal from any carrier. “I have U.S. Cellular and I have no breakup of coverage,” said Justin Silcox. Another resident said he has had some issues with reception, but he had bigger issues with cell towers in the park.

Silcox, an attorney, is organizing the residents to oppose the placement of the towers. “I’m a resident here and I am going to fight this,” he said before the meeting began. “We’re circulating a petition. We’ll listen to what they have to say, but this is not an appropriate place. There are laws in place for these towers. There’s also environmental concerns, concerns with migratory birds and animals, housing and health concerns. It’s not the most healthy thing to put in a neighborhood.”

Silcox said he obtained at least 50 signatures on the petition when he was out on Sunday.

A pediatrician who lives nearby wanted to know what research the company had available that showed there were no health risks. “How do we know there aren’t long term health risks for children who play under and around these towers?” she asked. “Where’s the research on the long-term effects? It’s an unknown, and until you show us the data otherwise, you’ll get resistance from us.”

Some residents likened it to tobacco — the companies denied there were long-term health risks for years that have now been proven.

“That has been the universal concern since cell phone use began in the 1980s,” Bethea responded. “There is so much research that shows there is no health risk that the Federal Telecommunication Act of 1996 stated that local zoning boards cannot prohibit cell towers based on a health risk argument.

“I won’t stand here and say forget about it,” Bethea continued. “But you have more radiation in your kitchen than you’d ever receive standing immediately under an antenna.”

An elderly gentleman challenged the health risk assertions. “These signals can stop pacemakers,” he said.

When another representative, Todd Klassy, tried to dispute that claim, the older gentleman said, “I’m a retired cardiologist. You can’t tell me otherwise.”

Silcox said the residents were trying to do a cost/benefit analysis. “Until you present evidence that a significant number of us would benefit, the overall consensus is that the costs are greater,” he said.”

The residents argued they bought their homes in the neighborhood because of its beauty and the towers would damage that beauty and reduce property values. Bethea said his entire background was in real estate and there has never been any evidence of an impact on home values from cell towers.

“The problem is you can’t isolate a direct effect of towers,” he said. “There’s too many other variables.”

Another resident warned that the city might face a class action suit from those who have moved into the area within the past six months. “They’ve been discussing this for six months without telling people moving in that it was under review. They should have been told.”

Residents also expressed distaste for the prospect of having a bright light shining on a flag 24/7 or the telephone pole lights on all the time. Bethea said U.S. Cellular would pay the electric bill and would negotiate with the city about times lights would be on if light poles went up.

A resident also complained the tower(s) would limit the number of options for future uses in the park: “We wouldn’t be able to put in a softball field or a soccer field.”

Residents also were angry the company had not identified where the complaints were coming from and seemed to not have explored other alternative sites. They pointed across the valley to another neighborhood where there is a flat area that might be more appropriate because there was no park there and where they believed the complaints originated. “Put it over there,” they said.

The representatives promised they would come back to them with more information to help answer the questions.

Louann Pierce Keane, who was among generations of family born and raised in the valley said, “I disagree with this. This is meant to be a park and it should remain a park.”

A large problem for U.S. Cellular is that the covenants of the homeowner’s association specifically prohibits antennas such as those being proposed. George Parke III, the developer of the Aspen Valley neighborhood and involved in the deeding of the park to the city, submitted a letter to the city reiterating the agreements with the city and opposing the towers.

The U.S. Cellular representatives said they would regroup, try to provide more information and have another meeting in a couple weeks to answer questions.

Contact Jo Anne Killeen at joanne.killeen@lee.net or (608) 786-6816.