County Commissioners Deny Request AGAIN for Cell Tower; “We don’t know if the technology that exists today is more harmful, less harmful”

By B.N. Frank

Decades of research have already determined that exposure to Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) from cell towers and other wireless radiation emitting sources is biologically harmful.  This being the case, a growing number of Americans – including firefighters, lawmakers, and celebrities – have been trying to stop cell towers and antennas of all sizes, 5G and 4G, from being installed especially near fire stations, homes, and schools (see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31).  Of course, another reason to oppose the installation of a cell tower is a lack of evidence that there is an actual cell service gap.

From Inside Towers:

Another Nay From Kootenai

Around this time last year, Idaho’s Kootenai County Commissioners put the kibosh on AT&T’s plans to build a cell tower on Potlach Hill. The Commissioners kicked off 2024 by denying a request from WEIS Towers, LLC and Inland Cellular with a 2-to-1 negative vote, reports the Coeur d’Alene/Post Falls Press. Both cell towers were envisioned as 180-foot lattice structures designed to improve digital connectivity along Interstate 90.

The two commissioners who voted against the tower, Bruce Mattare and Leslie Duncan, said that they were skeptical there’s a coverage gap. “We don’t know if the technology that exists today is more harmful, less harmful,” stated Duncan, pointing to the second reason she and Mattare gave for denying the cell tower request. Duncan also added that constituents were concerned about lightning strikes, property values, and cell tower aesthetics.

“I haven’t seen anything other than anecdotal evidence,” responded Commissioner Bill Brooks, who voted in favor of approving the cell tower application. “And if that anecdotal evidence is what we should be ruling on, then I suggest the next step would be to remove all the cell phone towers in Kootenai County. All of them.”

Activist Post is Google-Free — We Need Your Support
Contribute Just $1 Per Month at Patreon or SubscribeStar

After garnering some positive reaction from crowd members after making this statement, Brooks reportedly laughed and clarified that his comment was made jokingly.

Before the vote was cast, Kootenai County staff reminded the commissioners that WEIS Towers, LLC and Inland Cellular met all requirements and standards under Kootenai County code and demonstrated that there is a lack of cell coverage in the area. Both the hearing examiner and the staff recommended that the application be approved.

Civil Deputy Prosecutor for the county, Pat Braden, cautioned against making decisions based on anecdotal evidence, telling the Press, “I don’t think that’s a valid basis for denial, to be honest. That falls into the health effects category that cannot be a basis for a decision on these issues. You have to base your decision on substantial evidence in the record.”

It is unknown at this time whether WEIS Towers, LLC and Inland Cellular will issue a challenge to the Kootenai County Commissioners’ decision.

Activist Post reports regularly about cell towers and unsafe technologies.  For more information, visit our archives and the following websites:

Become a Patron!
Or support us at SubscribeStar
Donate cryptocurrency HERE

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Follow us on SoMee, Telegram, HIVE, Minds, MeWe, Twitter – X, Gab, and What Really Happened.

Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.

Activist Post Daily Newsletter

Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

Be the first to comment on "County Commissioners Deny Request AGAIN for Cell Tower; “We don’t know if the technology that exists today is more harmful, less harmful”"

Leave a comment