The Town of Clifton Park is holding on to its proposed telecommunications law revisions for a little longer. The legislation was set to be voted on at a Monday, Sept. 8, meeting, but was taken off the agenda to allow attorneys more time with it.
We thought it was best to dot our I’s and cross our T’s, said Jude Hazard, town spokesperson. Specifically, the town will be examining details of the SEQR process and consulting with the county planning department.
The new law would make updates to a 1998 communications towers and antennas law, which was also updated in 2000. Town Attorney Tom McCarthy said that the law has been adjusted with consideration of suggestions made by the industry and consultants to create a `streamlined` law that complies with the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996.
`All of these provisions that some of the applicants and some of the boards have fought for over the years is now codified in this law,` he said.
A 60-day moratorium on new cell tower applications expires on Thursday, Sept. 18, so the town board is likely to either adopt the law or extend the moratorium at its Monday, Sept. 15, meeting.
With increasing cell phone and other wireless usage, the town is reviewing the law to residents with protection against encroaching towers. Provisions for noise regulation, tower location and a focus on co-location ` where antennas are built on preexisting structures`were just some of the changes.
Councilman Scott Hughes said the law updates benefit residents at a Tuesday, Sept. 2, public meeting on the legislation.
`It is not an easy subject matter, and I think everyone has come to it with the idea that we will do what’s best for the residents of Clifton Park,` said Hughes. `This has been done by the book and it is a good law.`
Industry representatives are taking issue with some of the additions, however.
The law requires any new towers to be built at least 500 feet away from residential property, a matter Town Supervisor Philip Barrett said the town would `stand firm` at the final public hearing on Tuesday, Sept. 2. He read letters from industry representatives criticizing the measure as `unreasonably burdensome.`
Scott Olson, a member of the New York State Wireless Association board of directors, was an industry representative who attended the public hearing. The 500-foot buffer is of concern to him and the association, but he also pointed to what he described as hurdles in the application process.
`I can go into the Town of Clifton Park, I can make an application for a special-use permit for any kind of use except for tower use, and pay $200,` he said in a later interview. `It’s $5,000 for tower use.`
The law also requires applicants to place $7,500 in an escrow fund to go toward the costs of processing the application. Any unused portion will be returned, but if the fund falls below $2,000, it must be replenished by the applicant. According to Olson, this `blank check` escrow could be illegal.
`The potential is there for the application review to be never-ending,` he said. `If they pass the provision, it could expose them to risk down the road. A provider could sue the town and seek a refund.`
Some residents questioned why greater restrictions couldn’t be placed on cell towers because of health concerns. The board explained that the federal act prohibits strengthening regulations based on potential health risk outside of federal standards.“