Concern, opposition grows to 5G in Colorado Springs

Since our story Monday about preparation for 5G wireless service in Colorado Springs, KRDO has received many emails from viewers about their concerns and, in some cases, opposition to the initiative.

Viewers are worried about how unsightly new equipment will look and are concerned about potential health risks.

Some viewers want to watch the process as it develops, while others are opposed to it entirely.

Jerry Phillips, a professor at the University of Colorado, Colorado Springs, said there are several reasons why the growing controversy surrounding 5G is getting more public feedback than the arrival of 4G or 3G.

“It’s still an unknown when it comes to the placement of towers or any health risks,” he said. “It’s going to require the placement of more towers because 5G information is transmitted over shorter distances, and it’s easily blocked. It’s based on line of sight.”

Phillips also said 5G transmissions will increase the amount of radiation people are already exposed to.

“Construction material may block the radiation from actually getting into a home,” he said. “But kids play outside. People spend a lot of time outside. There will be a lot of exposure to the radio frequency radiation from 5G technology. And for me, that is a big concern.”

Many other countries have conducted more studies on 5G technology than the U.S., Phillips said, because they’re willing to invest more money in research.

“I came here from California because the money wasn’t there for research,” he said.

On Wednesday evening, a group of 25 neighbors met at the home of Nathan Patton and Sally Maddocks in The Bluffs neighborhood on the city’s east side.

The couple is leading an opposition of what they believe is a plan to install 5G equipment on a nearby abandoned cell tower that hasn’t been used for several years.

“If you put a 99-foot tower right there, it’s supposed to be 500 feet away from any home,” Patton said. “It’s 76 feet away from my home, 76 feet away from the retired general’s home who lives next door and it’s much closer than 500 feet to 38 other properties in the neighborhood.”

Patton said if the city allows the 5G installation on the tower, cell transmissions will penetrate his home and expose several rooms to radiation.

“If the city allows this, it would violate its own codes by failing to take down a tower that wasn’t in use, then installing new equipment on it,” he said. “The city has more authority in this matter than it says it has.”

Jeremiah Johnson, president of The Bluffs homeowners association, also opposes the plan.

“I’ve heard from two homeowners who plan to sell their property and leave if this goes through,” he said.

Patton and Maddocks said they may follow.

“We have three goals,” Patton said. “To stop the 5G installation, have the tower removed, and have the area become open space. If we lose, the area will be sealed off and we’ll lose it for recreation.”

Neighbors said they first learned of the plan three months ago and since then have gathered 360 signatures on a petition.

The petition will be presented to the city planning commission as part of an appeal September 13.

If neighbors lose there, they have the option of making a final appeal to the City Council.

On Friday, a city spokesperson said a service provider has applied to use the tower only for basic cell service, and that no one has applied for a 5G installation there.

Several neighbors who declined to be interviewed said they have no problem with the tower or the installation of 5G technology.

“Ask the opponents if they’ll complain about having slower Internet speeds or lower service quality without 5G,” a neighbor said.

Johnson had a ready response to that.

“I know we all like our wireless devices and we want them to work faster,” he said. “But there has to be a balance between that and the quality of our neighborhoods.”