PORT ANGELES — The Clallam County commissioners are remanding draft amendments to the county’s wireless communication facilities ordinance back to the Planning Commission after wireless company representatives said it is inconsistent with federal law.
The county conducted a nearly-two-hour public hearing on the amendments Tuesday. Most of the public comment addressed health concerns related to 5G technology, but it also included comments from two officials representing AT&T and Verizon.
The ordinance does not specifically address 5G technology, but places greater regulation on its implementation than the current ordinance.
“We do see there’s a number of places where the proposed draft is inconsistent with federal law,” said Ken Lyons, senior vice president of jurisdiction relations for the Wireless Policy Group speaking on behalf of AT&T. “There’s been a lot of changes with federal law.”
He filed two letters with the county outlining “issues” with the draft and provided suggested revisions — which are supported by Verizon.
“You’re talking about setting back from a lot of areas where you actually need quality wireless service, where first responders need to connect,” he said.
“It’s important that we are able to provide these facilities in locations where we’re able to provide that type of coverage.”
The Clallam County Planning Commission recommended the amendments to the county’s wireless communications facilities ordinance in April after numerous public meetings.
Included in the draft is a provision that requires new support towers to be a minimum of 1,000 feet away from schools, a requirement Planning Commission Chair Connie Beauvais said in April was “pushing the boundary.”
She said in April that the Planning Commission — which recommended the amendment in a 5-1 vote — is not willing to put the county in a position where it might be sued, but also said certain aspects were “pushing the boundary” and that she was “willing to take that chance.”
During public meetings, members of the community have urged county officials to defy federal law by prohibiting or restricting the deployment of 5G technology in Clallam County.
Kim Allen, senior vice president of land use entitlements and strategic planning for the Wireless Policy Group, speaking on behalf of Verizon, said Verizon agrees that the draft is not compliant with federal law.
“We would urge that there be another look at the ordinance and another revision to incorporate some of the changes that will align you with federal law and avoid risking exposure to the public,” Allen said.
She told commissioners that federal law has “aggressive” timelines for permitting and that the process outlined in the draft, which includes using a hearing examiner in some cases, would be impossible.
“With those time constraints, what other municipalities are finding is there is insufficient time to go to the hearing examiner,” said Allen, who previously worked as a hearing examiner.
“I know that with the notice that’s built in and the appeal time built in, it’s virtually impossible to meet a 60-day or a 90-day shot clock.”
Jurisdictions are not allowed under federal law to place restrictions on implementation of wireless communication facilities based on health concerns. Many who have raised concerns have asked the county to ban implementation of the new technology because of their belief of health risks associated with 5G.
Darlene Schanfald, who spoke against implementing 5G in Clallam County, told commissioners they should not allow the wireless industry to write the county’s ordinance.
“It is not right for Verizon and [AT&T] to sit with staff and telling them how to write these rules for their benefit,” she said. “That is just inappropriate. Having industry write the rules in D.C., write the rules in the state and write the rules in your community, that’s objectionable and not objective.”
Former County Commissioner Mike Doherty told commissioners not to trust the wireless industry.
“We’ve had broadband being promised to rural Washington for decades and they haven’t delivered,” Doherty said. “When you hear Verizon of all people and AT&T, I would trust not them.”
Commissioners agreed that county staff need to address compliance issues raised by AT&T and Verizon before the ordinance could be passed, but commended the Planning Commission on amendments it proposed.
“The planning commission has done a good job,” said Commissioner Bill Peach. “They are not making a recommendation for commissioners to violate federal law. What they have put together is workable.”
Peach said he is not interested in doing doing many updates and never passing the updates. He recommended incorporating the feedback the county received to develop final language to present to the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Mark Ozias said he would work with staff to plan a work session and that the planning commission would continue the discussion as well.
He said he could not provide dates of when meetings would happen, but said the county would publicize the next steps.
Peach said the county heard from many people who have “legitimate concerns” about the county not being able to make decisions based on health concerns related to technology and that their energy should be redirected.
“I’d like to take that energy that’s been developed and focus it — asking the commissioners to break the law is not an effective solution — to go to the lawmakers and say it’s time for change,” Peach said. “We don’t have jurisdiction on the health dimension of this issue.”
________
Reporter Jesse Major can be reached at 360-452-2345, ext. 56250, or at jmajor@peninsuladailynews.com.
