Tularosa trustees delay vote on 190-foot cell tower after residents pack hearing

TULAROSA, N.M. — The Tularosa Board of Trustees heard more than an hour of testimony Monday on a proposed 190-foot cell tower at 44 Sunset Road, and then put off its decision. Most of the testimony came from residents who oppose the project. The board will vote at a special meeting that has not been scheduled yet.

"I don't like to make this like quick decision," the mayor said at the end of the Oct. 19 special meeting. "I want to look at everything, look it over, take considerations in before we make that quick decision." The trustees agreed.

The village attorney, speaking by phone, told the board the item had been noticed properly and it could have acted that night. She also said the vote could not go on the board's regular meeting this Wednesday because there was not enough time to put it on the agenda.

The application

Flagship One LLC is asking for a special use permit, case 2026 SUP 002, to build a wireless tower on a parcel of about 15 acres behind a home. The applicant's representative, Sean Milks, said the parcel needed its own address for the tower. The hearing was quasi-judicial, which means trustees were reviewing the record built by the Planning and Zoning Commission. That commission adopted findings of fact on Sept. 8.

Shannon Naysenzer of Planning and Zoning told the board the commission does not recommend approval or denial of special use permits. It does recommend 12 conditions that Flagship One would have to meet before getting a building permit. They include:

• engineering and structural certifications
• soil reports
• a radio-frequency emissions report showing the tower meets federal limits
• state historic preservation and federal environmental reviews
• a gravel driveway
• an 8- to 10-hour battery backup with no generator
• a $75,000 removal bond that rises each year with inflation
• yearly proof that the tower is still in use

Flagship One has also agreed to reserve a spot on the tower, at 150 feet or lower, for village and emergency equipment at nominal cost.

Milks joined by phone after about 15 minutes of audio problems. He said the company now proposes a monopole instead of a three-legged lattice tower. A monopole is 70% to 75% smaller in diameter and costs more to build, he said. He also said it is designed to fold onto itself in sections instead of falling over, and that it will not carry a light.

"I know we upset people from time to time," Milks said. "We're trying to do a happy medium, which is another reason I opted to offer to make the [pole] significantly smaller."

He said his company has built 46 sites in New Mexico, and 30 to 35 of them sit close to homes. He said he had never seen or heard of a tower falling in the state in his 29 years in the business.

Setbacks dispute

The sharpest exchanges were about the fall zone. Eva J. Gonzalez asked whether the tower meets the setback, the tower's height plus 10%, on all four sides of the property. Milks said it meets three. In cases like this, he said, the company submits an extra analysis from a New Mexico licensed engineer certifying that the pole and foundation are over-engineered.

"I'm telling you under oath, the pole will not fall down," Milks said.

"And I'm telling you under oath that you cannot guarantee anything like that," Gonzalez replied.

David Gonzalez, of Cortez Drive, said county assessor records put the parcel at 362 feet wide. By his math, a 190-foot tower plus 10 feet on each side would need 400. He also said the application includes drawings dated August 2018 that refer to Raglan, New Mexico. He listed five different tower heights in the paperwork, up to 203 feet, and said the federal antenna registration still describes a lattice tower. "Why are we even looking at this application if all this information is wrong?" he asked. The mayor ended his comments when his five minutes ran out.

Naysenzer said the main application does list Tularosa and that the permit is preliminary. The village attorney said the commission's findings clearly describe a 190-foot tower with a one-to-one fall zone. She added that trustees could make the monopole design a condition of approval.

Coverage, petition and alternatives

Eva Gonzalez cited CarrierLytics, an analytics platform that uses FCC coverage maps. It shows T-Mobile coverage at 98.6% and Verizon at 98.3% in the 88352 ZIP code. "There is no significant gap in coverage warranting the installation of another cell tower in the village," she said. She then submitted a petition with 198 signatures from Tularosa residents asking the board to deny the permit. Milks answered that capacity, not just coverage, is driving new sites, and that the carriers have signed a 30-year lease.

Several speakers suggested other sites. Frank Portillo said a landowner east of the site has a small range of hills that could hold a shorter tower out of residents' direct view, and wants to talk with the company. Milks said the project had already gone too far through surveys and reviews to start over. Kevin Ferguson asked about land the village plans to buy. The mayor said the village cannot offer land it does not own yet.

Billy Hobson questioned whether a personal relationship with the property owner influenced where the tower would go. Milks said the site was chosen from a search area set by a radio-frequency engineer.

Other residents talked about Tularosa's place on the National Register of Historic Places, their mountain views and home values. "We don't have high rises. We don't have skyscrapers. We don't need a cell phone tower here," said Denise Ottaviano, whose mother lives on Cortez Drive. Juan A. Osorio raised health concerns. Before testimony began, the mayor had reminded the audience that the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 bars local governments from denying a tower over radio-frequency health concerns if it meets FCC standards.

Larry Berry asked what happens to the removal bond if the company goes bankrupt. Milks said FCC rules require the owner to take the tower down if no carrier broadcasts from it for six straight months. He said the bond is paid up front and stays tied to the tower.

Village staff said they sent 49 certified notices to nearby property owners, reaching farther than the required distance. Six were not picked up.

More News from Alamogordo

• Presumptive Sheriff Elect Geraldine Yazza Martinez Shares Halloween Safety Tips Halloween safety tips from the inbound sheriff…
• 'Easy to be a Monday morning quarterback': Dr Hernandez answers critics of city projects Dr Hernandez says most of the projects were inherited, grant-funded and on deadlines, and that delays would have put the money at risk