Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Telecom Infrastructure topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council approves Verizon's limited first-right-of-refusal for cell tower lease, declines perpetual easement

5765906 · September 17, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Riverton council approved an amendment to a 2001 cellular tower lease to add a limited first right of refusal and accepted a $10,000 payment; the council declined staffs recommendation to convert the lease into a perpetual easement.

The Riverton City Council on Sept. 16 approved an amendment to an existing lease for a cellular tower near the citys water tank to add a limited first right of refusal, with Verizon agreeing to a $10,000 one-time payment in exchange for the change. The amendment gives the lessee a right to purchase the property should the city ever opt to sell it; council members and staff emphasized the city likely will not sell the parcel while the water tank remains in place. Legal counsel warned that converting a lease to a perpetual easement would shift long-term control and reduce city oversight, and staff recommended approving only the first-right clause and rejecting an easement. Councilman Eric Carr moved to adopt the staff recommendation to add the limited first right of refusal; Councilman Mike Bailey seconded. Council voted in favor; no recorded opposition. City staff said the current lease, last amended in 2018, pays the city just over $20,000 annually and escalates with the consumer price index. Staff noted Verizon proposed two options: (1) the limited first right of refusal with a $10,000 payment; and (2) converting the lease to a perpetual easement for a lump-sum payment (roughly $435,200 paid over terms with interest to net about $515,000$525,000). Legal counsel explained a perpetual easement would grant the telecom a limited ownership-like interest specific to telecommunications, removing some municipal oversight. Council members discussed the market value of the current lease payments and the trade-offs between steady lease revenue and an upfront easement payment. Staff flagged a potential one-time unbudgeted revenue of $10,000 and said further negotiations would be required if council wanted to pursue the easement. Council directed staff to implement the lease amendment adding the first-right clause and to decline the perpetual easement option for now.