Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Telecommunications topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Navajo County approves settlement and special-use permit for White Antelope cell tower despite public health objections
Summary
After extended public comment from residents who said a proposed SBA Communications tower would harm people with electromagnetic sensitivities, the Navajo County Board approved a settlement and the tower permit; SBA offered $25,000 to the county, and county attorneys cited federal limits on local review.
The Navajo County Board of Supervisors voted to approve a settlement with SBA Communications and to grant a special‑use permit for a cell tower near White Antelope Road and Concho Highway, following hours of public comment from neighbors who said the structure would render nearby specialized housing uninhabitable.
Residents who live in state‑funded, low‑electromagnetic housing and others who identify as electro‑hypersensitive urged the board to reject the settlement and deny the permit. "Reject this settlement. Continue to deny the permit," said Anna Periscondo, a Snowflake resident who urged supervisors to prioritize residents' well‑being over corporate interests.
Supporters of denial cited health and disability protections. Elizabeth Kelly, director of the Electromagnetics AP Alliance, said the community is "unique" and could be forced to relocate if the tower is built. Susan Malloy, who said she has lived with disabling sensitivity since 1981, told the board the proposed structure would create "an invisible but complete barrier" to receiving groceries, medical care and other necessities.
SBA's counsel, Michael Benson, told supervisors federal law prevents local governments from considering environmental or health effects when deciding wireless‑facility permits. "Under federal law... federal law prohibits the consideration of environmental effects of electromagnetic radiation when deciding whether to approve or deny permits for cell towers," he said, and described a tentative settlement that would resolve ongoing litigation. Benson also said SBA would provide $25,000 to be used at the county's discretion under the proposed agreement.
Board members said they weighed residents' testimony against the limits of their legal authority. "My role as supervisor is to act within the authority given to the board," Supervisor Whiting said, adding that staff and legal counsel informed the board of the county's options.
After a closed executive session with county attorneys, the board moved to approve the settlement and the special‑use permit. The vote carried by voice; the meeting record shows at least one supervisor opposed the motion.
What happens next: the settlement ends the county's immediate defense of the prior permit denial and authorizes the tower siting as described in the settlement. The board did not record a formal roll‑call tally in the public minutes; supervisors said the matter and related legal advice were discussed in executive session.
