NO CELL TOWER ON BARTON MOUNTAIN

Surely no proposal for the erection of a cell tower goes completely unopposed. Just as with zoning, the Act 250 Commission must balance many competing interests in resolving dispute and achieving efficient resolution. Commonly, and in the dispute at hand, the Commission must weigh private business interests against public aesthetic ones.

Verizon has made few friends in Barton with its effort to construct a cell tower on the Town’s namesake mountain. It sought no local input in its site selection. It deceived local residents into believing that Barton Village would benefit from improved cell phone service, when in fact it would not (this would not have come to light without private money for an engineer, and local people never possess the financial resources to rival such a corporate behemoth). When no local citizens attended the first hearing regarding this proposal (actual notice was lacking for most citizens: presumably this has been remedied by subsequent legislative amendments expanding notice requirements), Verizon sought to prevent a reopening of that hearing. In short, Verizon has demonstrated disrespect if not hostility toward the population affected by its project.

With federal laws prohibiting public objection to cell towers for any health reasons, and Verizon’s tremendous economic power and profit interest in expanded service, it is small wonder that people are growing increasingly distrustful of such corporate bullying, enabled and empowered by the government which is supposed to protect their health and welfare. And it appears that state and local government is all too willing to present the pretense of public protection in bodies which actually benefit corporate America more than the populations with whose tax dollars they are created.

In the instant case, the regional plan does not appear to carry much weight for Verizon or the Town Zoning Board: why then are Vermonters’ taxes used to pay salary and benefits for people to produce essentially meaningless documents? The regional plan clearly and specifically seeks to protect Barton Mountain from development, recognizing its scenic importance to the region, not just Barton. What of the Barton Town Plan and Zoning regulations, so quickly and easily swept aside by the Zoning Board in the name of “flexibility”? Flexibility is apparently a catchphrase for the protection of Verizon and other corporate powerhouses, for it surely was not employed by the Town to benefit local business interests like Taylor’s Automotive and others. And there is no “flexibility” in the foothold granted Verizon on Barton Mountain, which will certainly enable further development and be employed as a justification for more towers in future. The public is smart enough to see this occurring in practice elsewhere, and at this site. The Barton Town Plan specifically endeavors to protect this area, and the Act 250 Commission has specifically represented that it will not simply rubber-stamp the town Zoning Board’s ill-advised and biased approval of a site permit to Verizon.

Both the Barton Ladies Improvement Society (in an excellent summary) and the Barton Village Board of Trustees have publicly and stridently objected to this proposal. The objections to this site are not just the whining of a few, but the opinion of the Town. Had local people been paid the respect they deserve by Verizon (and the Town Plan by the Zoning Board), their opinions would have been elicited early on, an alternative site might have been considered (there are many, but Verizon has bullied this site because it best serves I-91 and therefore corporate profits), and much controversy avoided. Perhaps the company (or the Zoning Board) would have even garnered some good will…. Instead, there is growing resentment that the institutions and processes purporting to protect the public have been employed to co-opt it.

This Act 250 Commission has an opportunity to gain credibility for itself, for the Act 250 process, and for applicable laws by acting to reject Verizon’s proposed site. Instead of just pretending to protect aesthetics (the public has the burden on this issue, and if it has not met that burden here, in what hypothetical case can it possibly succeed in doing so?), this Commission must actually affirm its power and intent to do so. No offense is intended toward any individual Commission members, but if this proposal is granted it will add tremendous fuel to growing public cynicism that government is in league with wealthy corporate influences. This Board can give citizens the satisfaction that its public bodies are indeed listening, and that Verizon and companies like it won’t be easily permitted to slip in the back door while individual citizens are working hard and trusting government to do its job.

The proposed location is aesthetically objectionable, and other sites may not even raise an eyebrow. Let Verizon have their tower, but not here, at the expense of the scenic beauty of the area, and with great risk of further encroachment in the future in the name of “Progress.” The regional and local plans “say” they will protect the Barton Mountain area, and the Act 250 criteria provide that aesthetics will be considered in this process. Opponents have amply met their burden, so please respect the people who choose to live here because of the area’s scenic beauty – protect Barton Mountain, and adhere to the many laws and “plans” that say they will do just that.

God bless you,

J. K.