Westmore Residents Are Battling a Tower Near Lake Willoughby

Donna Dzugas-Smith pointing to the proposed tower site as Ray Lanier looks on Credit: Kevin Mccallum ©️ Seven Days

The view of Lake Willoughby from Donna Dzugas-Smith’s home is stunning, and she’s fighting to keep it that way. The 71-year-old Westmore resident is leading the local opposition to a 140-foot telecommunications tower planned just across the lake from her property.

Dzugas-Smith knows that cellular coverage along the cliff-lined lake is spotty, and the tower might lead to better cell service. But she thinks it would be a mistake to allow an industrial structure to rise above the treeline near a lake so special that in 1967 the area was designated a National Natural Landmark.

“The views of the gap are going to be marred forever,” Dzugas-Smith predicted, referring to the fjord-like cliffs that rise 1,000 feet on either side near the lake’s southern end.

Hundreds of telecommunications towers have been built throughout the state in recent decades as telephone and wireless internet service providers seek to serve the growing digital demands of Vermonters and the millions who visit the state each year. But residents —in Ira, Tinmouth and Manchester most recently — are increasingly pushing back against proposals for new towers, rejecting the idea that they must sacrifice scenic views to improve digital connectivity.

The number of such projects is on the rise, and so is the contention surrounding them, according to Hunter Thompson, director of the telecommunications and connectivity division within the state Department of Public Service.

“Every time one of these goes up, someone takes issue with it,” said Thompson, whose department has expressed support for the Westmore project, which is currently before the Public Utility Commission.

The resistance has been especially active in Westmore, a town of fewer than 400 people that surrounds Willoughby and prides itself on the lake’s scenic beauty.

“This is the Lake Lucerne of North America!” said Ray Lanier, who has owned a home on the west side of the lake for 34 years.

He and many others are upset that the Massachusetts-based company Industrial Tower and Wireless plans to build a tower just two-thirds of a mile from the town’s beach at the north end of the lake. The company says it would begin by providing two-way radio service that could be used by police, fire and ambulance agencies. Later it expects to rent space on the structure to cellular providers, though no agreements are in place.

“This tower, in my opinion, is built on speculation.” Ray Lanier

That’s been one of the sticking points. Residents are being asked to accept a tower that won’t necessarily improve their cell service, opponents say.

Distrust deepened when people realized the tower would be built on land owned by selectboard member Peter Hyslop, who signed a 100-year lease with ITW in 2023. He says he has recused himself from votes on the project and has not otherwise used his office to influence the outcome. The benefits of improved emergency response and the prospect of better cell coverage outweigh any downsides, he said.

“If it was going to affect the views, I definitely would not support it,” Hyslop said. “I feel it’s going to be a very, very minimal impact.”

He declined to tell Seven Days how much he’d be paid for the lease.

A simulated image of the tower from opponents Credit: Courtesy

Opponents say the complex permitting process has been confusing, infuriating and exhausting.

Dzugas-Smith and her allies have pleaded with local officials, represented themselves before the state Public Utility Commission and tangled with ITW’s lawyers. (ITW has sued regulators in federal court, claiming they are dragging their feet. That case is pending.)

“They are bullies. They intimidate you. They talk to you like you are nothing,” Dzugas-Smith said. An attorney for ITW declined to comment.

Dzugas-Smith warns that Westmore is not alone. Nearly 30 towers have been planned around Vermont by ITW, Verizon, AT&T, and other providers. In many cases, residents don’t get wind of the proposals in time to mount an effective opposition, she said.

“If they can do this to this little town, the rest of Vermont is screwed,” Dzugas-Smith warned.

Success in blocking such towers is rare, though there are exceptions. In 2023, the PUC rejected plans for a 140-foot tower ITW wanted to erect in Enosburgh. The utility commission ruled the tower would be “obtrusive” because it was taller than it needed to be. The company sued, but a federal judge agreed the tower would have a “negative visual impact on the community.”

Just how visually intrusive the proposed Westmore tower would be is a matter of intense debate. Plans call for it to rise 140-feet from a wooded area on Frog Hollow Lane, about 200 feet above the lake. Five skinny radio antennas would rise another 13 feet, for a total height of 153 feet.

“If they can do this to this little town, the rest of Vermont is screwed.” Donna Dzugas-Smith

The average tree height in the area is 72 feet, meaning the tower would stand about twice the height of the forest. Future panel antennas for cellular service could be located at 113 feet and 123 feet. The structure would be a triangular-shaped lattice tower, its base and equipment enclosed by a 100-by-100-foot fence.

Bob Kennedy, chair of the Westmore Planning Commission, initially told regulators he believed the tower would amount to “an insignificant detail in the wide panorama.”

“I would be hard-pressed to find a better spot,” he told the PUC.

Photo simulations submitted to regulators vary dramatically.

ITW’s engineering firm, DuBois and King, took photos of red balloons it floated to 140 feet to represent the tower, but most of the pictures were taken from so far away the balloons were barely visible above the tree line. Simulations done for the commission by independent Burlington planning firm T. J. Boyle Associates show the tip of a tower just peeking over the trees.

Opponents paint a very different picture. Their images taken from a cemetery next to the town beach depict the tower clearly visible on a ridge. The images, produced by a freelance graphic designer, also show the tower visible as a tiny white speck from the top of Mount Pisgah nearly four miles away.

Annette Smith, executive director of Vermonters for a Clean Environment, said ITW has intentionally downplayed the impact of the tower by offering images of small red “party balloons” taken from distant locations. The renderings don’t represent how jarring the tower will really be, she contends.

“This is an industrial intrusion into a very important area,” Smith said.

Regulators are charged with assessing whether a utility project like this tower would have an “undue adverse effect on aesthetics” of an area. The commission’s consultant, Michael Buscher, concluded that the tower would have a limited visual impact but noted that it would still be visible from the south end of the lake, where the cliffs are most dramatic. The “high sensitivity” of the views of Lake Willoughby mean that the tower “would likely be considered to result in adverse impacts to the aesthetics and natural or scenic beauty of the area,” Buscher wrote.

But that alone is insufficient to reject a utility project. Regulators must also find that the impact is “undue” — legal shorthand for a complex question. In a nutshell, the consultant found the tower would not have an undue impact because it wouldn’t violate any town rules, was located in a manner meant to reduce its prominence, and “would not be considered shocking or offensive to the average person.”

Another contentious issue is whether the tower is needed in the first place. Opponents concede that cell service in the area is poor; Lanier said he gets no service at his home. Dzugas-Smith tells guests at her short-term rental that to make a call, they should drive to the town hall to use its Wi-Fi. Cellular service could be improved in other ways, the opponents say, by putting more antennas on existing towers or using fiber internet.

It is the policy of the federal government and the state to provide as close to universal cell coverage as possible. The pandemic exposed a significant digital divide that Vermont has been working to bridge so all residents have cell and internet access. Low-income residents often can’t afford high-speed internet, making cell service their primary connection to the web, Thompson noted.

But residents such as Lanier respond that improved cell coverage isn’t even part of the company’s pitch.

“This tower, in my opinion, is built on speculation,” he said, adding that ITW is gambling on a “build it and they will come” strategy.

Thompson confirmed that “there is no guarantee that the Big Three national cellphone providers — AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile — will ever colocate on that structure or provide better service.”

“I can completely understand the frustration of the residents of Westmore, but that is the value proposition,” he said.

The company has one local organization on board. The Glover Ambulance Squad, which provides service in the area, said there are “dead spots” in its radio network. It supports the application because ITW has agreed to allow it to place its radio equipment on the tower at no charge.

Tower opponents are skeptical. Kathy Holmes, who manages several vacation properties in Westmore, said offering the local ambulance company a free berth is a thinly veiled attempt to win support from town residents and regulators.

“It’s so they can say, ‘You’re turning down an ambulance service, PUC? How dare you!'” Holmes said.

The town’s position on the project has shifted, fueling more controversy. Kennedy, chair of the planning commission, initially told the PUC that the project conformed with the town plan. But later, after the PUC public comment deadline passed, the full commission, following some turnover of members, concluded it did not because it was within the National Natural Landmark.

In any case, the PUC doesn’t have to respect the wishes of a town when it comes to issuing a permit, known as a certificate of public good. The commission’s staff is expected to file a proposed decision any day. Then both sides will have the chance to sway the three-member panel before its final decision.

The original print version of this article was headlined “Communication Breakdown | A proposed tower near scenic Lake Willoughby riles the tiny town of Westmore”