Cell phone tower dilemma
- Sue Robinson -- Free Press Staff Writer --- Monday, September 15, 2003
Three antennas on the side of a water tower in Shelburne, hidden down a gravel path nestled in the shadow of Mount Philo, tell the story of Tom McLaughlin's life in Vermont.
A vice president at Unicel (formerly Cellular One), McLaughlin spent four years and $200,000 to have those antennas constructed.
At no point did he -- or his company -- contemplate giving up.
What happened in those four years shows everything that McLaughlin and other cellular company executives think is wrong with the way Vermont -- and its communities -- deal with cell phones.
Vermonters can find necessary reception to make cellular phone calls in only about 20 percent of their state. The reason is simple: Not enough cell phone antennas in a state that has mountains and is 80 percent forested, yet there is no umbrella state policy -- or process for coherent or consistent siting of towers. The state's 246 communities do little to solve the issue: Each town does things differently.
Underlying the issue is an age-old conflict in Vermont: "quality of life" versus economic development. In a state that bans billboards and is glad of it, the prospect of a bank of cell phone towers on a mountain ridge is a call to battle. Even the prospect of smaller antennas on water towers or silos or church steeples becomes a matter of public concern.
How many towers are enough? What if this technology goes the way of eight-track tapes, leaving behind an unsightly, abandoned network?
"In Vermont, this is something we have come up against over and over again," McLaughlin said.
The Shelburne cell tower debate, however, showed the resolve of Unicel to not give up, to pursue its goal of providing service and making money in a state most companies have avoided -- until recently.
"Vermont is our largest growing market in both opportunity and sales," McLaughlin said.
Other companies are recognizing this. The Shelburne water tower, for example, is now home to Sprint and Nextel antennas.
Unicel is trying to stay one step ahead.
The next frontier
For years, most cellular companies kept away from Vermont. The state's mountainous landscape disrupted cellular signals -- so the companies headed for the flat lands.
The state is also small and rural -- so the companies headed for the urban centers.
The state and its communities have inconsistent -- and often nonexistent -- policies on siting of cell phone antennas and towers -- so the companies headed for places that embraced the technology.
Unicel has had a different idea: It has gone after a business niche of rural, underserved cell phone markets.
Under that definition, Vermont is tops.
The Green Mountain State, McLaughlin said, enjoys the worst reputation in the nation when it comes to cellular coverage. (McLaughlin's opinion is shared by every cellular company executive interviewed for this series.) In the time it took McLaughlin to site and build 21 sites (towers and/or antennas) in other states, he has erected only four in Vermont.
"A lot of the bigger companies, given the opportunity to put a cell site in Boston or Providence or New York City or Vermont, are not going to choose Vermont," McLaughlin said.
"A company like ours, where our most dense population center is Chittenden County, we have been more persistent and more willing to invest in the state, but it is difficult, no doubt about that."
Unicel, the brand name of the parent corporation -- Rural Cellular Corp., based in Minnesota -- made $458 million in 2002 from its rural cellular network in places that larger telecommunications players ignored. Unicel has invested $80 million in equipment here in 13 years.
That's a lot of money for an industry that is still losing money.
In 2002, Unicel reported its third straight year in net income losses along with $1.2 billion in long-term debt. Many of its competitors are in similar financial straits.
Why?
Equipment costs money; siting costs money; and competition has drastically lowered rates or, from the companies' perspective, revenue.
Things are not looking up: As the competition has increased across the nation, service plan prices for basic cell phones continue to decline and have declined 80 percent during the past eight years, according to the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association.
As the competition builds more towers, roaming charges -- which allow customers from one cell phone company to access services in places where the provider has no network -- have decreased, too. Roaming charges used to make up a significant percentage of most companies' revenues.
Unicel and its competitors need to increase revenue in unlikely places, and they are banking on a future technology that will make current cellular phones look like party lines or the first electric light bulb.
Cellular companies believe their infrastructure -- a network of antennas and towers -- is similar to the laying of electric lines at the turn of the century and the fiber optic cables of more recent times. Modern fiber telephone lines transformed phone companies into data companies, providing new means of making money.
Cellular companies believe people will switch to wireless technology for their computers, their datebooks, their e-mail accounts, their cameras, their phones -- virtually anything virtual -- and this will bring the payoff for all this investment and losses the companies have incurred during the past decade.
This is what the companies have been telling Wall Street analysts and investors who've been looking askance at their balance sheets, particularly with the recent collapse of the dot.com companies.
The cellular companies have statistical trends on their side.
In the year 2000, Americans sent 14 million text messages by cell phone, according to the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association in Washington, D.C. By December 2002, Americans were sending more than 1 billion of those data messages a year from one phone to another.
Wireless data revenue is expected to surpass $1 billion by year's end, said Travis Larson of the CTIA. This trend has reversed the companies' trend of losses -- the companies are not losing money at the rate they were even a year ago.
Why Vermont?
Against this backdrop, more companies are beginning to see promise in Vermont.
There is another reason for their interest: The companies that have locked in urban markets in New England are hearing from customers who travel to Vermont and experience lousy service.
Vermont, it seems, is bad business for a cell company doing business in Boston or Hartford or even New York.
In the past two years, twice the number of cellular phone companies have knocked on Vermont's door with pleas for cellular towers and pledges of premium packages at cheap rates.
The state has about 250 cellular sites, up from 50 or 60 in 1997, according to estimates from the cell companies.
From a business perspective, the companies have one goal: to improve service.
"The sentiment for improved service (in Vermont) has gotten a lot stronger in the last few years as people have come to expect full coverage," said Richard Enright, director of engineering for Verizon Wireless in New England. "Certainly the tourists expect it, and we sure hear about it when they don't have a signal."
Roadblocks in the wild
In McLaughlin's mind, there is no better example than Unicel's efforts to site antennas in Shelburne. (See related story.)
Five years ago, Unicel went to Shelburne for permission to install antennas on a water tower. The company's customers were losing service as soon as they drove into town.
The zoning board denied the request -- in large part because the town had no policy concerning cell phone towers. Logically enough, the town decided to develop a policy. It took three years; then, a year after that, Unicel obtained the permit.
From a business perspective, that's way too long and way too expensive, so McLaughlin has developed a strategy.
In his Colchester office, McLaughlin often consults a color-coded map -- generated by new computer software -- that shows concentrations of the company's customers and provides a breakdown of their characteristics -- from how much they talk on the cell phone (250 minutes a month and growing) to their age and income (between 24 and 54, $50,000).
The research also shows where Unicel can find new customers throughout the 14 states in which Unicel operates.
In Vermont, Unicel's customers just want quality voice service, and the potential new customers are mostly in the rural areas surrounding populated towns such Burlington and Rutland where there is little reception.
New technology demands a cellular antenna every six miles -- more in dense areas and areas with lots of "clutter" or trees and buildings that could block signals. Unicel maintains 68 towers or antennas across the state. McLaughlin was not sure how many more the company needs.
"People have asked us how many is enough, and they really don't believe you when you say, 'Well, we don't know,'" he said. "As more and more people use the service, even though we might have good coverage in an area, we will need to continue to add sites to accommodate the demand."
A cellular system divides a large geographic area into cells, assigning the same channels to multiple, nonadjacent cells. Each cellular site can handle only so many calls, then another antennas must be added or the site will start dropping signals as it becomes saturated.
Unicel's strategy for obtaining approval for new antennas and towers is multi-tiered, planned down to who from the company should show up at the local public hearings and what they wear: "Some towns it's better if it's me at the hearing rather than an attorney," he said, "especially an attorney in a suit."
The first tier involves appealing to individuals: The company waves cash in front of individuals and organizations who are in a position (read: own an existing tall structure) to help.
For example, Langdon Smith in New Haven is paid $1,000 a month for the four antennas on his barn silo. A Middlebury church makes an extra $9,600 a year for its steeple antennas.
On a second tier, the company makes sure it compromises with communities, which can mean spending as much as 25 percent more hiding the cell antennas on silos or steeples. Unicel created special territory managers for Vermont who push for the tower proposal from a grassroots level within each community. It also works with the competition to locate antennas on other companies' towers.
On the broadest level, McLaughlin pleads with the state. The company's counsel sat down with then-candidates Gov. Jim Douglas and Lt. Gov. Brian Dubie, and Public Service Commissioner David O'Brien. In March he presented Unicel's strategy to Dubie again.
"We are very encouraged by what we see out of Montpelier today," McLaughlin says. "People realize the infrastructure is important, that it goes hand-in-hand with economic development, that cell phones are a part of life now. The view on these 12 years ago was that they were a luxury item, and now that has changed. These are a necessity."
First he needs to convince many Vermonters they cannot do without cellular phones and the towers needed to make them work.
Opponents question cell towers' health effects
Imagine you're living in a place where electromagnetic waves constantly bombard your body and within your body, your cells.
How can your body ignore the whispered messages of these external signals and know to concentrate on just the ones inside?
It's a question Janet Newton likes to pose to people who want to blanket the Earth with cellular towers. It's not that the Cabot woman loathes cell phones. She's sort of ambivalent toward the gadgets; but bring up the cellular antennas those phones need for an effective signal, and Newton feels the bile rising in her throat.
If you don't know Newton, you might have heard of the group she helped found: EMR Network, Citizens and Professionals for the Responsible Use of Electromagnetic Radiation. EMR Network was formed in response to the Federal Communications Act of 1996 as a vehicle to stem the deluge of cellular tower applications in small towns everywhere.
The Network is the bane of cellular companies' existence, with the members showing up at public hearings and waging war on their means to another revenue dollar.
In Vermont, Newton became aware of the issue when her Cabot neighbors agreed to allow Nynex to put a cell tower in their back yard in 1997.
"We decided we needed to find out as much as we could and see if this was such a good idea," Newton said.
What Newton discovered about the radiation from the towers startled them: that the low intensity of the rays was parallel to the kind of signals every living organism uses to communicate cell to cell. She's not sure the body can ignore all those messages.
No one knows. The studies have conflicting results.
Newton doesn't want to find out that years later her body's cells could evolve into cancer or some other disease. She and about 20 others from 13 states met in 1998 at Lake Morey, created a Web site and began the EMR Network.
It joined a lawsuit against the FCC to contest the standards the government set for radiation. The groups lost the case in the U.S. Court of Appeals Second Circuit, and the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear their appeal.
The EMR Network has an e-mail list of more than a thousand people. She and four others started EMR Policy Institute in June to attack the issue from the legislative end.
What happened to that Nynex tower?
"We were able to keep it out," she said.
Business vs. beauty
During his election campaign, Gov. Jim Douglas vowed to achieve better cell phone reception for the state and said it was an essential piece of his overall plan to boost Vermont's economy and make the state a better place to live.
Today's businesses, he said, need cellular service for executives to be reached anywhere anytime. Without such service, Vermont will fail to become a viable player in the world's commerce.
Better cellular reception, however, requires more cellular antennas and towers, more obscured views and more pieces of equipment throwing off radio-magnetic rays and angering environmentalists and neighbors.
Douglas faces formidable challenges in keeping his promise.
Data about the cellular industry -- consumer use, public opinion, impact and number of towers -- is incomplete and fuzzy at best. No one in state government can accurately say how many cellular towers are in the state, where they are, or how many more might be needed.
No one person deals with the cellular infrastructure issue anywhere in the state, and no single, consistent policy on cellular phones exists.
The state's power to conjure up a miraculous infrastructure -- particularly one that can appease all sides of the argument -- is limited, all admit.
The state can't force cell companies to expand their networks, or even to give out information about what is here so the state can develop a plan to fill in the gaps.
Authority over cellular sites is divided.
Cellular companies must comply with federal and state laws, but must also ask permission from communities to put up cellular sites. The state must convince a skeptical populace to accept more cellular sites in their back yards.
Towns such as Charlotte ask the governor to think about the repercussions his goal might bring.
"We all want to preserve the rural nature of our town, of our state, right?" said Jeff MacDonald, Charlotte Planning Board chairman. "We have to keep all of this in perspective. I mean, how many cellular towers can we tolerate? Where is the line? Is it three? Six? 20?"
The issue goes deep, touching on the inherent conflict with Vermont and its residents who long to take part in the global society but who also live here -- and stay here -- because Vermont doesn't look or feel like the rest of the world.
Many Vermonters also want the benefits of that commerce without the congestion and pollution that are its byproducts. Vermont is known for its serenity and its landscape.
Cell phones represent the antithesis of all this, with their tall antennas and their rude ringing -- disrupting the peace, disrupting the view, according to the standpoint of organizations like the Vermont Natural Resources Council.
Douglas is adamant.
A better telecommunications system by which Vermonters can make use of all the technologies available in America is key to Vermont's progress, its commerce, and yes, even to its quality of life, he insists.
"We are very very committed to improving telecommunications infrastructure in Vermont," the governor said, "so that we can attract more businesses to the state, to aid in our travel promotion efforts, and so that people can be able to use their cell phones anywhere."
Perception matters
There are 182,000 Vermonters who care because they are cell phone users who pick up a signal in only about 20 percent of the state.
Businesses whose executives and employees want to be accessible everywhere cry out for better coverage. Tourists want to be able to access the Internet from their cars when they are lost on Vermont's roads. Politicians who are stuck without offices in the Statehouse curse Vermont's spotty coverage between its largest city and its capital. Residents want to be able to call a tow truck if they break down on the side of Interstate 89.
For better service, people need to know what the "telecommunications infrastructure" will look like, said Stephen Holmes, the sustainable communities director for the Vermont Natural Resources Council.
"When you are talking about 'infrastructure' it is just like with a highway or a transmission line: You need to know the impact," Holmes said. "Until we get those kinds of answers it's hard to say how badly we need these towers. I don't think we want to see the skyline of the Green Mountains turned into a series of towers."
State officials are scrambling to define the scope of the cell phone service deficiency.
Dawn Terrill, state deputy secretary of commerce, said much of the problem lies in perception. When people come from out of state and can't get their cell phones to work, it makes Vermont look backwoods, she said. All that's known is that the coverage isn't available.
"People think that because they cannot get coverage on their cell phone we have a poor telecommunications infrastructure here, and that is just not true," Terrill said, "but we do have a lot of work to do to fill in the gaps."
What do people want?
Getting a good handle on what people want -- and what is needed -- is part of the problem. Concrete data are hard to find.
Most of the numbers involving cell phone use are estimates -- the companies decline to tell the state exactly how many subscribers they have, where those customers are, where their networks cover and where they need antennas.
The lack of information will make it difficult to fulfill Douglas' mission, said Chris Campbell, telecommunications planner for the Department of Public Service. He should know. He has spent years trying to collect the data.
Several initiatives calling for studies either fizzled or are not finished. A statewide map drawn up at the Legislature's request last year shows all 2,000 broadcast and communications towers, not just cellular sites -- and there is no way to segment out only the cell towers.
One state administrator with the Environmental Board became so frustrated at the lack of information, he and his staff hand-drew the known antennas on a giant piece of paper covering his Barre office. He repeats over and over to visitors that the map is "not official."
Even if the state could identify where it needs to fill gaps, it cannot force companies to do it.
"We can help remove barriers, though, and we can incent service providers to build more towers," Terrill said.
And, of course, the companies must follow procedure and obtain the necessary permits.
To build a new tower or a structure higher than 20 feet above any existing structure, a company must go through Act 250 and hearings with the district environmental boards.
"We spent two years and $2 million in Vermont and ended up with no permits," said Jack Rupert, vice president and co-owner of Mesa Communications Group in Virginia, which had contracted ATC Realty to build hundreds of towers up to 160 feet tall every six miles along Interstate 89, U.S. 2 and U.S. 4 to lease tower space to cellular companies.
Although that application was denied, most cellular tower applications are approved, especially those that are on existing buildings, but the process can be lengthy -- a matter of years.
Most cellular companies try to avoid the Act 250 process, but they must go through local planning and zoning boards. This is where many companies have faced the most hurdles.
About 65 of Vermont's 240 towns have adopted cellular ordinances that mirror the criteria evaluated in Act 250. Those criteria include the impact of a potential cellular site on the environment and on the aesthetics of the neighborhood and the horizon.
Those towns that do not have an ordinance may place a moratorium on cell sites until they enact one, or the town's existing laws are enacted. These laws are different for every town.
"If Vermont can get this cloud of obstructionism lifted from its reputation with all the carriers, you could have a competitive war from the standpoint of pricing and service plans and coverage," Rupert said. "Everyone would benefit."
Wait a minute
Not necessarily, said Charlotte's MacDonald.
Communities have many issues to consider before cellular antennas can be approved. He ticked them off: electromagnetic radiation, philosophy, town characteristics and aesthetics.
"If this were being done on a popularity basis, I can assure you we would have voted against all these," he said, "but legally, we have to bite the bullet" and accept some of these towers into the Charlotte community.
Charlotte learned this lesson last year when its zoning board denied a permit to Sprint on the basis that the town had adequate coverage from other companies.
Therefore, Charlotte contended, denying the permit complied with FCC guidelines. The stance landed the town in court. Charlotte lost but was able to delay Sprint's application by years.
A spokesman for Sprint could not be reached for comment.
Collected opposition
Then there are the advocacy groups that also have the power to stymie Douglas' mission to install more cellular antennas and towers.
Citizen groups are allowed to tackle cellular towers' health issues -- which are off limits for town boards as long as the project meets FCC guidelines. They obtain party status in both state and local permitting processes.
Local groups such as the Vermont Natural Resources Council published as early as 1997 a report called "Siege on Our Summits" venting about communications towers and the detrimental aesthetics and health effects.
"We know enough science to get us our inventions but not enough to know, until too late, what we have wrought," the report read.
Another point, MacDonald said: What happens when all these cellular companies die or when some other technology makes towers unnecessary? Most are losing money. Will Vermont be left with a bunch of ugly structures dotting its countryside?
Charlotte officials vowed to work with the companies to abide by the law -- but they don't like it.
"Yeah, these companies have to do more work when they come here. That's a good thing. More towns should deal with it our way. I don't see why we need to make it real easy for them," MacDonald said. "Let's think this through to what this really means for Vermont."
An interesting challenge
Douglas admitted his hands are tied as long as communities dig in their heels. He said he would stop short of passing a law mandating that towns accept towers. That, he added, would go against Vermont's prized sense of independent governance.
Instead, he's hoping two new initiatives will convince Vermont communities about the need for improvement.
The state has hired a director of telecommunications infrastructure and plans to spend $150,000 next year on improving broadband and cellular networks.
"One of the first things we need to do is look at policy or administrative barriers that we have," Terrill said, hinting that the new Legislature would probably have a bill or two to debate on the subject.
Douglas hopes the new information and innovation commissioner in the state, hired in August, will provide leadership. Douglas could not say what that leadership will entail.
Public Service Commissioner David O'Brien said state leaders need to educate people about how important a telecommunications network is to the economy, but also encourage cellular companies to invest in Vermont.
For example, state regulators rubber-stamped an application by Unicel, Vermont's largest cellular company, to obtain federal money -- as much as $1 million a year -- in return for expanding its network here.
This approval was given to help Unicel establish an emergency 911 network on its sites so that any 911 call on any Unicel cellular phone would be able to give the caller's location.
Douglas has also asked his agencies to look into creating policy that would allow building of cell towers on state land.
"It is an interesting challenge because one of the real advantages of living and working in Vermont is the lifestyle and our natural beauty and its relative sparseness of population and the ability to telecommute while enjoying all that," Douglas said, "but in order to do that, there has to be a telecommunications infrastructure to make it possible."
Contact Sue Robinson by e-mail at business@bfp.burlingtonfreepress.com
