LAKEPORT, Calif. – Following a number of meetings stretching over several months, as well as continuations and failed negotiations with a local school district, a company won its appeal of a decision last year to deny it a use permit for a new cell tower.

On Tuesday, the Board of Supervisors voted 4-1 to uphold the appeal of Epic Wireless Group on behalf of Verizon Wireless for a cell tower on 17 acres at 5660 Staheli Drive in Kelseyville.

The Lake County Planning Commission, which acknowledged the outcry from neighbors, denied the project's major use permit last January, finding that the property didn't meet the county's zoning ordinance requirements.

However, in the Tuesday decision, the majority of the Board of Supervisors accepted the argument that more cell coverage was needed for emergency response and community safety, and that all other options had been exhausted.

Tuesday's meeting included the seventh scheduled discussion on the appeal, which was first heard in June and July, and then held over several times while alternative locations – 17 in all – were examined.

There also were negotiations late last year between Verizon and the Kelseyville Unified School District regarding a possible cell tower site on Kelseyville High School property.

However, those negotiations broke down earlier this month after the district asked for an early termination clause just a few years into a proposed contract, when Verizon typically wants 25-year terms. The district also wanted at least $5,000 a month in rent, which Epic Wireless said was more than four times the market rental rate.

Paul Albritton, Verizon's outside counsel, said the early termination clause in particular was a “real show stopper” for the company.

Planning staffer Keith Gronendyke said the tower originally was proposed to be a 75-foot monopole designed to look like a tree.

However, in the updated design, he said the tower's height has been lowered to 64 feet, which company officials said is the lowest it can go and still address the area's 19-square-mile service gap that includes a three-mile stretch of Highway 29 and 3,700 residents.

Andrew Lesa of Epic Wireless Group said Verizon also has proposed an alternative water tower design – similar to a cell tower Verizon installed in Spring Valley in November 2014 – which has been determined to be a better design for the area.

Lesa noted during the meeting that Verizon has been working for three years to find a suitable cell tower location in Kelseyville.

Albritton outlined for the board three key issues with respect to federal law. Those included that wireless faculties can't be denied due to concerns about health effects due to radio emissions; there has to be substantial evidence to deny such a facility; and that they can't deny such a project when a substantial gap has been identified and the site proposed has been determined to be the least intrusive.

Albritton said the company followed the county's own zoning in looking for the best location, and noted that some commercial areas didn't allow for it.

At that point, Albritton said Verizon has nine cell tower facilities in Lake County, with about a dozen more planned, and the company is making an effort to increase coverage due to the emergency situations the county has had, referring to the wildland fires.

Four people spoke during public comment, one for the project, three against it.

Peggy King, the mine closure manager at Homestake Mining Co., said they rely on good cell service at the facility, which is near Lower Lake. She said she felt Lake County is a little behind the times, and she was glad Verizon wants to help it get caught up.

Mark Borghesani said he understood the need for cell service during emergencies, but he was concerned because of the tower's proposed location in the middle of three subdivisions. He has six undeveloped lots right near the site, which he worried would impact property value.

Ron Chips, a past president of the Kelseyville Business Association and a homeowners in the neighborhood, also was concerned about property values in light of the fact that he and his wife are planning to list their home within the next 18 months.

Mike Powers, who at a previous meeting had suggested a nearby cemetery as an alternative location, said the school district was unreasonable for not negotiating more. He also was concerned about a running generator, which Albritton explained only occurred for 15 minutes every two weeks on a duty cycle.

During the board discussion, Supervisor Moke Simon said he believed all other options had been exhausted,and he saw nothing to indicate a negative effect on property value.

Supervisor Tina Scott agreed, noting that, before she was elected, she had sat in on planning commission meetings.

“How I see it is public safety. We need to make sure that we have cell service. There are so many people that do not have landlines anymore,” Scott said.

She said she's lived in Lakeport for 16 years, and while she doesn't know the locations of the cell towers she does know where the dead zones are.

Supervisor Jim Steele – who at the June hearing had faulted the amount of consideration Verizon had given some alternate sites, and encouraged them to look more closely at additional locations – said he appreciated them taking the time to look over everything.

“I think it's time to move forward,” said Board Chair Jeff Smith, adding, “What outweighs everything else is the safety issue.”

The dissenting vote would come from Supervisor Rob Brown, in whose district the project is located.

Brown said he had thoughts on both sides of issue, and he didn't agree with the issues of property value. At the same time, he said no one in the neighborhood has called to say they need it.

While he said he didn't necessarily disagree with King, “I don't think we can just open up the gate and open up every property in the county, either.”

Brown said the project highlighted why the county needs to update its seriously outdated area plan, adding he wished the area plan was getting as much attention as the marijuana issue.

He said he felt there were other places – mountaintops or large acreage – where the tower would be more appropriate.

Brown said it wasn't for him to decide what people want in their neighborhood. “If they don't it, they don't want it, and I'm not going to shove it down their throat.”

He moved to deny the appeal, but his motion died for lack of a second.

Smith then passed the gavel to Steele, the vice chair, so he could move to uphold the appeal, which the board approved 4-1, with Brown voting no.

Later in the meeting, the board unanimously approved the project's environmental document, the mitigated negative declaration.

Email Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. . Follow her on Twitter, @ERLarson, or Lake County News, @LakeCoNews.