top of page
Search
SL Resident

Verizon Files Suit: What’s Next for Spring Lake’s Fight Against 5G Towers? TAP into Gold Coast

Lawsuit Ignites Local Resistance as Residents Fight to Protect Spring Lake’s Iconic Landscape


By Jim Lonergan

Published November 13, 2024 at 5:02 PM

Last updated November 14, 2024 at 1:14 PM

SPRING LAKE, NJ - At last night’s special Spring Lake Council meeting, Mayor Naughton informed the public that Verizon has filed a lawsuit against the town for missing their “shot-clock” deadline of October 15 for responding to waiver requests to install six cell towers along Ocean Avenue. The town was officially served on November 12th. Approximately 200 residents attended the meeting.

The September 24 meeting initially served as a forum for the town's legal advisors to address residents' questions and record public comments. This meeting, however, was resident-focused, with citizens, backed by their own legal counsel and experts, presenting concerns and voicing opposition. With a lawsuit now pending, the town and its legal team will likely be restricted in making public statements.

Verizon's lawsuit aims to compel the town to approve their waiver requests or seek a court order enforcing the waivers due to the missed deadline. Mayor Naughton opened by explaining, “Verizon’s request, which is not permitted under our current ordinances, seeks waivers and Borough approval. Spring Lake shares jurisdiction over Ocean Avenue with Monmouth County, and Verizon has also applied to the County for approval. On November 12th, Verizon filed suit in federal court. Neither the council nor our attorneys have had time to review the complaint in detail. Verizon was invited to present tonight but did not respond. After tonight's public comments and presentations, we will close the record.”


The “Spring Lake against 5G towers” residents' group, led by Kelley Badishkanian whose lead attorney, Scott McCollough, began by outlining the three areas they are most focused on, 1) Municipal Land Use Law, 2) legal issues and property assessment valuation impact from cell towers, and 3) how these relate to the federal law that is behind much of these challenges. 

 Under Municipal Land Use Law (MLUL), Verizon is legally required to submit a Site Plan review as part of their waiver request to Spring Lake. They haven’t. They must seek a Conditional Use Variance. They haven’t. They are obligated to provide public notice to Spring Lake residents and appear before the board. They haven’t. The burden is on Verizon to prove they've met all requirements to justify consideration of their waiver application, yet they haven’t. Attorney Wentz emphasized, “These unmet requirements raise health and safety concerns that both the ordinance and MLUL mandate the planning board to review.” The central question remains: why would Verizon avoid meeting basic legal requirements that could support their waiver request? Is it due to arrogance, an over-arching or correct assumption of federal protection, or creating risk to the project by exposing their plan?

Municipal Land Use Law (MLUL) - Verizon is required by law to have provided Spring Lake with a Site Plan review as part of their waiver request. They haven't. Verizon is required by law to seek a Conditional use variance. They haven't. Verizon is required by law to provide public notice to Spring Lake residents and appear before the board and the public. They haven't. Verizon has the burden of proving they have met all the requirements that would warrant the right for Spring Lake to consider the waiver application. They haven't. Attorney Wentz highlighted, ”these open and unanswered requirements raises health and safety concerns that both the ordinance and MLUL's require to be reviewed and addressed by the planning board." The most fundamental question is: why would Verizon not be willing to meet the basic requirements of the law that technically could help in their efforts to get their waivers? Is it arrogance or over-arching protection from federal law?  


Property value Impact and Land Use Appraisals - In weighing a legal challenge, courts consider a cell towers “adverse effect on nearby property values” when objectors present expert testimony. Verizon is required to assess the effects on nearby property values and the effect on the town's master plan or zoning ordinance. Expert appraiser, Katherine Tantinan of Federal Appraisals LLC, reviewed what defined characteristics that affect property values and outlined her initial assessment. 

In summary, her review is that cell pole and tower development DOES affect property values. Tantinan performed an impact study, leveraging a proprietary local  realtor survey, data, news, and court cases using assessed valuations. The results of the survey showed that of the 14 local realtors who responded, 100% perceived a negative impact on property valuations by having cell towers within 1,273 feet, a median of 1,000 feet from property lines. The impact values ranged from a -2% to -35% decline in value. Further, some existing studies and articles show the impact ranged from -30% to +12%. Sources have the median average at -6.86%

For the initial property value impact study, Tantinan used what she said was a very conservative -3% impact on homes within 1,000 feet of proximity to a cell tower. In numbers, according to Tantinan, utilizing the -3% Impact to value on just 4 homes on Ocean Ave with cell poles in front of their homes, the net impact value is -$1.263 million


Taking property values further, with Spring Lake's overall assessed valuation (averages of 98% of market value), the potential impact of cell towers could be substantial. Using Councilwoman and realtor Kathleen McDonough's rough estimate of $500 million in market value for Ocean Ave properties only, a high impact value of -35% would result in a $175 million loss. The median estimate of -6.86% suggests a loss of $34.3 million, while appraiser Tantinan’s conservative estimate of -3% indicates a $15 million loss. These figures apply solely to Ocean Ave properties and do not account for other areas. Click HERE for an earlier article covering Ocean Ave's estimated market value.

McCollough concluded, “We believe the Borough can raise several defenses, especially regarding the 'shot-clock' question and whether Verizon is entitled to the relief they seek. Even if a right-of-way permit were issued, Verizon would still need a municipal land use permit.”

During public comments, numerous residents urged the council to reject Verizon's proposal, citing safety concerns. Tara Leone stated, "They call them small cell towers, but at 44 feet tall and only 42 feet from homes—like mine—they pose a serious risk to children and families. Tower 2, at nearly 45 feet, is within striking distance of our house. After a car once crashed into our flagpole, hitting our home, we understand the danger firsthand. A similar accident or severe weather event could cause catastrophic damage, fire, or injury. The proposed proximity creates an unreasonable and dangerous risk for our family."


“Residents are fighting to protect a way of life. It is a collective, sincere effort to preserve what makes this town special,” said Attorney Scott McCollough.

Yolonda Masterson emphasized Spring Lake's unique aesthetic, saying, “Our boardwalk is iconic for its open ocean views, free of power poles and wires.” Laura DeMeo shared, “It’s as though we are inviting the very thing we’ve worked so hard to avoid.” Long-time resident Joe Rizzo, a leader in preserving Spring Lake’s historical character, stated, “I am deeply concerned about these towers’ impact on our town's historic landscape.”

Mayor Naughton concluded, “Our record for public comments is now closed. Everything shared tonight, including presentations, is part of the public record. Our next meeting on December 3 will likely include an executive session to discuss the lawsuit, and our final meeting of the year on December 17 will be when we make our decision publicly.” Responding to a question on the town’s status with Monmouth County, Naughton confirmed, “We were served separately, but we expect continued support from the County as they have throughout this process.”

For added insight on the 5G process, click HERE

Find TAPinto Gold Coast on FACEBOOK  Sign up for E-mail News Alerts and, under town, select GOLD COAST

5 views
bottom of page