Haines Borough committee reviews cellular coverage maps; lack of quorum delays formal action

Cheryl Stickler, a member of the gas committee for Haines Borough, convened an informational session to review cellular coverage maps after the committee failed to reach a quorum. "I serve on the gas committee for the Hainesborough," Stickler said, and asked that the group hold a working, recorded conversation so industry experts could explain proposed coverage changes even though no official committee action could be taken.

Industry representatives and borough staff displayed before-and-after maps for a proposed tower site and an existing southeast site and explained that the publicly available FCC coverage map is out of date. "This thing hasn't been updated since 2024 on the FCC website," one presenter said, adding the FCC layer can understate current carrier service and show gaps—particularly by the airport. A carrier engineer explained the technical plan, saying the company has already moved to 4G/LTE and that the proposed site would provide both improved voice and data coverage. "We're already at LTE at par with AT and T," the presenter said, and recommended a minimum tower height near 140 feet; the team said every additional ~10 feet in antenna height adds roughly 5% more population coverage in their model.

Participants flagged public-safety consequences of the current gaps. "When we would fly into the Haines Airport, we would land and oftentimes, we couldn't pick up our clearance, by radio or by the radio," an unidentified participant who said he was a former medevac pilot told the group, describing difficulty making calls and obtaining clearances without reliable coverage. Presenters said the proposed site would reach the airport and address that safety concern while also improving mobile data capacity for residents and visitors.

The carrier presentation included projected reach and a population metric: the team said the proposal aims to add close to 2,000 additional "pops" (a federal-population metric) to their covered area and that a taller tower increases coverage for isolated pockets. The presenters also discussed seasonal capacity questions, noting cruise-ship visitors often roam onto other carriers and do not immediately change local-carrier load, but added that increased local capacity could support future roaming agreements.

The planning commission has previously reviewed and passed the initially proposed location, but the assembly had denied one earlier site, prompting staff and carriers to seek alternatives. An ordinance related to the code revision was spoken aloud during the session as "ordinance 25 0 7 7 1 5," but no formal consideration occurred because the committee did not have a quorum. The presiding procedural speaker said the ordinance and code changes will remain before the gas committee for consideration at a future meeting, and the committee expects additional public hearings before any final assembly action.

Because the gathering was informational, presenters asked the planning commission and staff to develop alternate candidate sites and to return maps and analysis to the gas committee so members can make an informed recommendation. The session closed with thanks to industry participants; organizers said they anticipate reconvening with a quorum to formally consider the ordinance and code revisions moving forward.