If a developer is allowed to build a new 195-foot-tall cellphone tower in Wapiti, the structure “will blight one of the West’s most unblemished and spectacular viewsheds,” a group of area residents say.

Nine area landowners and the nonprofit Wapiti Valley Preservation Group made the comments in a late June filing, as they seek to join a federal court case over the proposed tower. They described the project as “a monstrous structure that will forever despoil one of our country's grandest and most spectacular vistas” and said it “would shatter [their] way of life and their dream of living in one of America’s most glorious locales.”

However, the California-based company behind the project, Horizon Tower LLC, is opposing the neighbors’ bid to intervene in the case. Among other arguments, the company says the Wapiti residents’ interests are already being represented by Park County. The neighbors’ participation “would be, at best, duplicative, but more likely would serve to confuse, complicate, and unduly burden and delay these proceedings,” Horizon attorneys argued in a Friday filing in the U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming.

Park County commissioners rejected a special use permit for the tower in February, finding the structure “would not be in harmony with the neighborhood” and would likely have “a significant adverse impact.” It came after an outcry from many area residents; attorneys for the Wapiti Valley Preservation Group say the tower is “vociferously opposed by virtually every resident of this community.”

However, Horizon challenged the board’s decision in federal court in March. The company contends that commissioners ignored the evidence and failed to provide an adequate explanation for denying the permit. Horizon argues that the county’s decision effectively prohibited wireless service in the Wapiti valley, because the existing cell service is spotty and the proposed site is the only viable location for the tower.

The county has stood by its decision.

Horizon intends to build the structure on a vacant piece of private property that sits just south of the North Fork Highway near Green Creek. Verizon has already agreed to lease space on the tower, and Horizon says other companies may follow suit.

In their bid to intervene in Horizon’s legal challenge, however, the Wapiti Valley Preservation Group called it “incredible” that the site is the only viable option in “the 16 1/2 miles of vast open lands from Verizon’s next closest antenna” or that the tower must be 195 feet high.

However, it’s unclear whether the group and the nine property owners — Brian Clarkson, Erik Kinkade, Lacinda and Kurt Countryman, Hannah Vorhees and Jim Wilder, Michael Gimmeson, Robert A. Nelson and Colleen Monahan — will be allowed to join the case.

Horizon says multiple federal courts have rejected “essentially identical” attempts to intervene in other cell tower cases because the landowners’ concerns were “too speculative and generalized.” However, the Wapiti residents say some courts have allowed intervention.

When landowners and conservation groups are prevented from participating, “the tower companies significantly more frequently win,” wrote the Wapiti group’s lead attorney, Robert J. Berg of Scarsdale, New York. He said town and county attorneys “are often outgunned” by the developers’ “Biglaw telecommunications law experts.”

Berg specializes in cell tower litigation and is seeking to “add his expertise to the mix.” He’s being joined by Patrick Slyne, a fellow New York attorney who graduated from the University of Wyoming College of Law.

Horizon is being represented by the Washington, D.C.-based firm Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, along with counsel from Holland & Hart in Cheyenne. Their team includes Scott Thompson, another telecommunications law expert; he’s currently engaged with Berg in a high-profile fight over a proposed T-Mobile cell tower in Wyandotte, Michigan, which is being opposed by area residents over potential health concerns.

Park County commissioners are being represented by the county attorney’s office, which has no objection to the landowners joining the case.

In order to intervene, the Wapiti landowners must show their motion is timely, that they have a substantial legal interest at stake and that their interests are not being adequately represented by the county.

Horizon contends the landowners have met none of those criteria, including because they took almost four months to intervene. For their part, the Wapiti residents say it took time to raise the funds to hire an experienced telecommunications attorney — and they note it remains relatively early in the case.

As for the potential impact, the landowners contend the tower “would forever mar the unique scenic beauty of the renowned river valley where they live and have deep personal interests” and “devastate the value and enjoyment of their adjacent properties” while being “utterly at odds with the neighborhood character and surrounding land uses.”

However, Horizon charges that those claims are “too generalized, speculative and contingent.” Further, the company says the landowners’ interests will be represented by the county attorney.

“Even if there was any value in permitting [the landowners] to intervene in this case, which there is not, that value could not possibly outweigh the additional time, resource, and discovery burdens,” wrote Horizon’s attorneys. 

Berg argued that the landowners’ interests differ from the county’s. For example, Berg suggested the county might be willing to settle the suit if Horizon modified its plans, while the landowners’ sole objective “is preventing this 195-foot tall monstrosity from ever defiling their sanctuary.”

Horizon dismissed the idea of a settlement as “baseless speculation” and said the comment about the county attorney potentially being outgunned by the company’s lawyers amounted to “unfounded derision.”

It’s currently up to U.S. Magistrate Judge Kelly Rankin — a former Park County attorney — to decide whether to allow the Wapiti residents to intervene. The case is scheduled for an April 15, 2024, trial in Cheyenne.