LAKEPORT — A new Verizon Wireless telecommunications tower in North Lakeport was approved in a 3–2 decision Tuesday by the Lake County Board of Supervisors.
District 4 Supervisor Tina Scott, who represents the neighborhood which will be affected by the tower, argued in favor of the tower.
“Looking at all the evidence, I do believe this project poses minimal impact,” Scott said. She noted that many of her constituents have told her they want better cell service and internet, which this tower would provide to some areas of Lakeport. Scott noted that her own home was a “dead zone” for cell service (though Scott’s provider is AT&T, not Verizon).
Scott and Supervisors Jeff Smith and Moke Simon voted in favor of the tower, striking down an appeal from residents to relocate the planned tower. Supervisors Rob Brown and Jim Steele voted in favor of the appeal
The 70-foot “broad leaf mono-tree” cell tower will be built at the site of the North Lakeport Water Treatment Facility, less than 1,000 feet from Clear Lake in a largely residential neighborhood.
An appeal filed against the Lake County Planning Commission’s approval of the project by local residents claimed the tower would block views of the lake, cause a decrease in property values, and increase fire risks in the area. Residents claimed they had not been properly notified of their chance to comment on the proposed project before its planning commission approval.
Chief appellant Linda Shields, who lives within 700 feet of the tower site, argued that “not only will this tower be in the middle of the lake views that many owners have up there, it puts this higher fire risk to our neighborhood.” Shields cited evidence of similar towers having caught fire in the past.
Another appellant asked Verizon representatives, who were present at the meeting, to “consider more rural options if they are available,” citing a “devastating reduction of property values” that could be expected based on the placement of the tower.
Verizon’s legal counsel argued that property values have not been shown to decline wherever a cell tower is built, and that the tower would not pose a significant fire risk.
The board of supervisors’ decision was required to comply with a federal mandate stemming from the Telecommunications Act of 1996 that allows companies like Verizon to fill gaps in their service without being blocked by local governments, as long as the company has found the least intrusive means of filling a gap.
Verizon claimed it had looked elsewhere for suitable properties, and found the now-approved project site to be the most reasonable option.
The arguments in front of the board of supervisors Tuesday brought into view the tension that exists between the need for better cell phone service and internet in Lake County, and the lack of consensus about how to bring such service in.
The case for increased communications capability is one reflected in a 2017 study by the United States Department of Agriculture, which argues that “reliable and affordable high-speed internet e-connectivity will transform rural America.”
A recent economic strategy report prepared for Lake County by an outside contractor identifies increased communications capability as one of a handful of objectives to be achieved within one year in order to prepare Lake County for financial growth.
On the other hand, the infrastructure needed to improve internet and wireless phone service is perceived by many Lake County residents as an eyesore and a health risk.
Supervisor Brown stated Tuesday that he had recently opposed a similar tower in his district. Another tower on a Mojave Trail parcel in the Kelseyville area has been objected to by nearby residents on similar grounds.
Before casting a minority vote against the tower, Brown stressed that the placement of the tower was a critical concern for him.
“I can’t figure out why we would force a community to accept this when there are other options available.”
Verizon representatives admitted that other parcels had been looked at, but suggested the chosen parcel had been the only feasible location that would allow the company to fill its gap in service while meeting all legal requirements.
