Login
Residents of Polk County, Wisconsin, with help from the Children’s Health Defense (CHD) Stop 5G initiative, are appealing the approval of a 199-foot cell tower that Verizon wants to install next to where their children live and learn.
Stephanie Jansen, a Polk County mother who homeschools her 5- and 9-year-old children, owns property with two houses right next to the proposed site. “The cell tower will sit within 500 feet of one house, within 800 feet of the other,” she told The Defender.
Jansen’s two neighbors also homeschool. Among the three families, there are roughly 10 young children.
If constructed, the cell tower would subject the families to radiofrequency (RF) radiation 24/7. “We’re home all the time. We have no way of shutting this off or giving our bodies a break,” Jansen said.
Jansen said she’s been fighting the tower ever since she learned it would loom over her and her neighbors’ families. “Everything that I do as a parent and a mom, I put my kids’ health and safety first.”
She said she knew enough about cell towers to know they were “not good.”
Research has linked RF radiation from cell towers to negative health impacts, including diabetes and chronic immune stress.
Town board sides with telecom company
In February, TowerNorth Development and Verizon applied for a conditional use permit from the town of Garfield to erect the tower. Garfield is an unincorporated town in Polk County.
The companies wanted to install the tower in a corner of a cornfield, next to a river, even though another tower, run by AT&T, was only one-and-a-half miles away.
Since then, Polk County for Safe Tech, a grassroots group of residents including Jansen, has sought to defeat the tower plans.
“The Garfield community is very well informed about the ill effects of constant RF exposure and wants to raise their children in an environment free from this toxic exposure,” said Miriam Eckenfels, director of CHD’s Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) & Wireless Program. “We believe they have the right to do so and are proud to support their appeal.”
On April 21, the Garfield Town Board held a town hall meeting about the issue. More than 20 residents attended, and nearly all of them opposed the tower, according to Jansen.
The meeting transcript reveals heated exchanges in which numerous residents voiced their concerns about the towers.
Jansen said the board members initially tried to advocate on behalf of the residents.
For instance, board members asked the tower representative why Verizon could not instead use the nearby existing AT&T tower. They also asked if the tower could be placed at the corner of the field farthest from the residents.
The tower representative was unwilling to consider these options, Jansen said.
At the end of the meeting, the board greenlit the plans after the tower representative claimed that Wisconsin’s “shot clock” rules would allow the company to build the tower, even if the town dragged its feet.
Under Wisconsin law, if a telecommunications company submits a permit application, the state or local government typically must approve or deny it within 60 to 90 days. If the government fails to act within that time frame, the application is considered approved.
On June 22, the residents appealed the board’s decision. The residents asked the Garfield Board of Appeals to hold a public hearing on the matter and conclude that the town board lacks authority to issue the permit.
The residents argued that permitting authority rests with Polk County, not the town board. They also allege that the board violated the town’s zoning ordinance when it issued the permit.
Coalition pushes to change federal law so residents can fight cell towers based on health concerns
Eckenfels said the proposed tower is “yet another example of a poorly chosen location, where telecom seeks to build harmful infrastructure that folks on the local level simply don’t want or need.”
Although Jansen and others are concerned about how chronic RF radiation from the proposed tower would affect their health, they can’t base their appeal on those concerns.
That’s because under Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, federal law prohibits local authorities from denying cell tower applications based on health and environmental impact.
Jansen said the federal law makes her angry. “It makes it difficult to advocate for your family on the basis of health.”
CHD is leading 704 No More, a nationwide, nonpartisan coalition effort to legally challenge the law.
Eckenfels said:
“The Polk County residents’ fight is a good reminder why 704NoMore.org is so important: The health and environmental effects of RF radiation must be taken into consideration when decisions about cell tower locations are made, and any law that states otherwise must be changed.”
As telecommunication companies race to put up their infrastructure across the country, more and more residents are finding themselves in a position of having to fight to keep cell towers away from their homes.
“The issue of unwanted cell towers close to homes is really affecting people everywhere,” Eckenfels said.
Aires Tech, a company that sells products designed to protect against wireless radiation, has created an interactive map that U.S. residents can use to find out how many cell towers are near where they live.
This article was funded by critical thinkers like you.
The Defender is 100% reader-supported. No corporate sponsors. No paywalls. Our writers and editors rely on you to fund stories like this that mainstream media won’t write.
Residents concerned about bees, local wildlife
Polk County residents are also concerned about the towers’ potential impact on wildlife and the environment.
Jansen said there’s a river next to the field where Verizon wanted to erect the tower.
“We have walleye and suckers that spawn in our section of the river, and that field is home to migrating birds like sandhill cranes, blue herons, snow geese, Canadian geese, swans.”
Her neighbor has a bee colony that she fears will be harmed by the tower’s radiation, Jansen said.
At the town hall meeting, the neighbor said bees are very sensitive to EMR, according to the transcript.
The tower representative admitted that the company avoids putting towers in wooded areas where bats live because cell towers are known to reduce bat populations, Jansen said.
However, the representative refused to acknowledge risks to life-forms other than bats.
Related articles in The Defender
- Court Knocks Down Verizon Cell Tower: ‘This Is Why It’s Important to Have a Strong Wireless Ordinance’
- People Living Near Cell Towers at Greater Risk of Chronic Immune Stress
- EMR Radiation From Cell Towers, Wireless Devices Linked to Diabetes Epidemic
- Sitka Residents Block Cell Tower Project With Help From CHD’s Stop 5G Initiative
