Cellular Towers Pit States, FCC
While millions enjoy the convenience of cellular phones, the question of where to build the towers that allow them to work has created controversy in communities ranging from Arizona to Vermont.
Dale Newton of Cabot, Vt., found himself in the middle of one such fight. He learned that Bell Atlantic wanted to build a tower on land next door to his, but only after he found spikes driven into his sugar maple trees.
Nobody had asked his permission to put a 120-foot tower near his home, and he soon found out that nobody had to.
"You damned well better believe it was a declaration of war," Newton said at a hearing in Hardwick on the towers with Federal Communications Commission Chairman Bill Kennard.
Vermont has local zoning and a 1970 state law that spells out a procedure for reviewing big-scale or regional development projects.
But under proposed rules issued by the FCC, the decision on locating communications towers would be made by the federal government.
But the debate in Vermont has brought up two clear sides.
"The natural landscapes of Vermont are our greatest economic resource," Newton's wife Janet said.
But emergency nurse Deb Moore said that hitting a cellular "dead zone" in a rural area can mean not reaching a hospital in time to save a life.
"I support anything that's going to get rid of dead zones."
Meanwhile, Bell Atlantic wants to build a 150-foot tower on Hardwick's Buffalo Mountain. While some residents are worried about the possible harmful effects of the radio waves, others want the cell phone service the tower would bring.
Under a 1996 law, the FCC has the power to overrule local zoning decisions on towers. Vermont Sens. Patrick Leahy and James Jeffords and Rep. Bernard Sanders are sponsoring legislation that would return the power to the towns.
Kennard said there is a strong role for local and state governments in deciding who can build towers where. But he stopped short of pledging to return all power to local communities, saying it was the mandate of his agency to ensure a "seamless wireless network."
Industry representatives estimate that the network would require about 100,000 towers around the country.
Kennard said the FCC has formed an advisory group to study the agency's role in cases where preemption of local authority may be necessary to achieve the network.
Vermont is not alone in wrestling with the issue. Other states tackling the issue include:
- Tucson, Ariz., passed an ordinance in 1997 aimed at curbing the construction of new towers. At least two counties in North Carolina have implemented similar measures.
- U.S. District Court Judge Michael Telesca ruled Feb. 19 that Ontario, N.Y., had the right to deny Sprint's application to erect three 150-foot towers. Sprint had filed suit when its plans were rejected.
- Last month, Redmond, Wash., residents objected o a U S West proposal to build a steeple for Trinity Anglican Church that would house six wireless-telephone antennas.
Written by Anne Wallace Allen.
©1998 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed