Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Residents press borough to block towers near homes; assembly declines immediate site-redirection
Loading...
Summary
Dozens of residents told the assembly April 13 they oppose new communications towers and data centers in residential areas. The assembly debated directing staff to propose alternate borough-owned sites for a Title Network tower but rejected that motion while approving a separate letter of support for Title Network’s grant-extension request.
Residents filled the assembly chamber April 13 to urge the Petersburg Borough Assembly to prevent communications towers and proposed data centers from being sited near homes and sensitive community locations.
Multiple speakers asked the borough to adopt local ordinance language and to require alternative siting on state or federal lands rather than residential neighborhoods. "We cannot allow Tidal Network or GCI to place communications towers in residential neighborhoods," Joshua Adams of the planning commission said, advocating for a tower overlay that guides carriers toward nonresidential locations. Tom Kowalski, who said more than 300 people signed a petition about tower placement, asked the borough to arrange periodic independent radio-frequency monitoring and to review power-capacity constraints before allowing data centers.
The assembly debated a motion (Item G) that would have directed the borough manager to work with Title Network to identify borough-owned alternative sites away from populated areas. Several members said giving that instruction while negotiations over a proposed site adjacent to the fire station remain active could undercut good-faith negotiation. Others said it was reasonable to ask staff to identify potential alternative sites. The motion failed on a recorded vote, 0–6.
Separately, the assembly unanimously approved a letter of support for Title Network’s request for an extension of its tribal broadband connectivity program award, a procedural measure the borough manager said could assist Title Network in completing site acquisition and planning if more time is needed.
Assembly members repeatedly encouraged passage of local wireless-communications ordinance language to establish siting standards. Member Newman called an ordinance the “number-one tool” to address community concerns and urged the assembly to expedite that code work.
Next steps: The assembly signaled interest in developing ordinance language and encouraged staff to return with options; it also transmitted a letter of support to the funder for Title Network’s extension request.
