In a split vote, the Leelanau County Board of Commissioners Tuesday formed a committee to look into preventing a proliferation of new towers to support broadband Internet service in the county.
Concerns about construction of an 88-foot tower in the Gills Pier area of Leelanau Township led to the move.
At its regular monthly executive committee meeting Tuesday morning the county board heard comment about the issue, including from Tim Maylone, general manager of Cherry Capital Connection. He is working to expand high speed wireless Internet service in the county. Leelanau Township Planning commission Chairman Ed Reinsch also spoke at the meeting.
“Just help us, please!” Reinsch told county commissioners. “Aid us in whatever way possible so we don’t have towers springing up all over our township.”
Reinsch noted that FCC regulations supersede township zoning ordinances in terms of allowing towers for wireless Internet. Reinsch presented a letter from the township Planning Commission that states the commission’s position on wireless Internet service.
At its Nov. 8 meeting the commission approved 4-0, with members Denise Dunn and Tom MacDonald absent, a resolution asking the County Board to make wireless Internet service available to all county residents by utilizing existing towers used by the county.
District No. 4 commissioner Mary Tonneberger, who represents Leelanau Township, noted that “AT&T laughs at you and Charter (Communications) ignores you,” when the major Internet Service Providers are asked whether high-speed access will be provided in certain rural areas. Tonneberger said the county board should form a committee to see how it might help avoid the proliferation of towers because of a growing demand for high speed Internet access.
District No. 5 commissioner David “Chauncey” Shiflett noted that wireless Internet equipment could be installed on existing, private towers as well as silos and church steeples. He suggested the committee could look into such alternatives.
Maylone said he had already identified several locations. He is already renting use of a private, 100-foot tower erected many years ago in downtown Leland, for example.
He said his deal with Leelanau County was separate from those efforts. Maylone is paying the county $125 per month to place his equipment on one county-owned tower and $585 per month on another county-owned tower.
Maylone said his goal was to find cheaper tower sites to provide wireless Internet access not to just the advertised 65 percent of Leelanau County, but 100 percent if possible.
Maylone has submitted requests to the county to allow Cherry Capital Connection to locate antennas and supporting equipment on other existing county owned or leased towers. He has also asked that these antennas be allowed on towers at the same reduced lease rate as the first two.
In a letter from Max Machuta of Radio North dated Nov. 5, Machuta states the county established guidelines for installing antennas on county-owned structures. Part of the guidelines include leasing rates for locating antennas and feedlines on these structures.
So can the county give Cherry Capital a reduced lease rate when it will receive no direct benefit to the county? The answer, according to attorney Timothy M. Perrone of Cohl, Stoker, Toskey and McGlinchey, P.C. of Lansing, is “no.”
“In summary, the County may not offer a private entity, such as CCC (Cherry Capital Connection), leased space on the County’s towers at a reduced or non-existent rental rate, without receiving new consideration in the form of additional goods or services sufficient to constitute a fair exchange of value.” Perrone wrote, summarizing his position.
District No. 6 commissioner Robert Hawley said he was “reticent to create a committee to deal with issues that Mr. Maylone should be dealing with.”
District No. 2 commissioner Mark Walter said he believed it was “not in the county’s purview to get involved in this private enterprise – the (Internet service) industry needs to evolve on its own.”
The board voted 4-3 in favor of Tonneberger’s motion to form the committee, with commissioners Mark Walter, Melinda Lautner and Will Bunek opposed.
Following the vote, the board agreed that Shiflett would chair the committee, with Lautner and Tonneberger to serve as members.
Among other tasks, the group will prepare a set of recommendations for the county board to consider next month on what might be done to reduce the need for more towers to accommodate increased wireless Internet access. This could include obtaining an inventory of existing towers kept by the county 9-1-1 Emergency Dispatch Center and consulting with representatives of each of the county’s township governments.
Considering all options is exactly what Robert Doyle of Gills Pier Road wants the county to do. Doyle, like many of his neighbors on Gill’s Pier Road in Leelanau Township, has his Internet access through HughesNet, a service provider that uses satellites to provide access to properties not serviced by other traditional high-speed providers like cable or telephone.
Doyle said he has no ill feelings toward nearby property owner Paul Hunsinger, who had the-88 foot-tall tower and antenna structure installed to receive the high-speed Internet connection he needs to be part of his Florida employer’s virtual private network.
“What this issue comes down to is this,” said Doyle on Nov. 9. “Unlike other forms of Internet providing, this type of wireless is line of sight. The county needs to answer two questions: How many broadcast towers will he (Maylone) need to keep his Internet signal going; and how many tall towers will he need for his network?”
The Leelanau Township resident said he’s not happy with how the county has dealt with the matter. “These questions I’m asking, how many towers and how tall, should have been asked and answered before the county entered into any agreement,” Doyle said. He added he was surprised that Maylone did not know how many towers he would need to meet the minimum requirement of covering two-thirds of the county with wireless Internet service.
“I don’t accept that answer. It seems to me if you’re going to install this technology, you should know the answer to this question,” Doyle said.
By Eric Carlson and Chris Olson
Of The Enterprise staff
Print This Post









2 Comments
So where is this right now? Why can't this county get it together enough to attract high speed providers? Nobody in affluent Leelanau should have to suffer with dial up internet and in another 5 years, dialup will be obsolete. There is a huge market here that WANTS high speed access and many of us are willing to pay top dollar for it, who is going to jump in first and actually be able to provide it?
Charter and AT&T don't want our business since they laugh at you when you ask about it, how about SpeedNet? How about the other satellite providers? I want an explanation from the county as to why they have been so lax in this area and thus far have been unable to persuade any high speed providers to set up shop in this county to offer access. I'm ready to build my tower, is the county going to help me with access or should I start building my tower in YOUR backyard?
The FCC exemption for satellite TV and Broadband reception antennas is not as broad as some would have you believe. Essentially it provides for an END USER to install an antenna in space fully under their control to receive these signals, but it does not exclude reasonable zoning or safety concerns. In essence, it provides for installation up to 12 ft above existing structures. It also does not apply to network assets such as a provider's tower.
http://www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/otard.html
Post a Comment