"It's a guaranteed supply of money."

   That's how Herschel Shosteck, a telecommunications market analyst, describes the new gold rush where churches are earning money by renting out property -- everything from vacant lots, school roofs and even, literally, the church steeple -- to cell phone companies desperate to find locations for transmitting equipment. An investigation by AANEWS reveals that despite their tax-exempt status, churches have entered the marketplace of suitors involved with telephone giants such as Sprint, AT&T and the "Baby Bells" to strike lucrative deals renting space as companies compete in the booming cellular phone industry. But unlike private land owners or even local municipalities, religious groups have a distinct advantage here. In some cases, communities and states trying to enforce zoning regulations and consider the concerns from neighbors who would be affected by cell phone towers have encountered the specter of "religious rights," including possible litigation by churches under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and similar legislation.

   Our three-month investigation also found cases where religious groups cited their alleged immunity from local land-use statutes and zoning requirements, and where telecommunications companies have even paid for construction of ersatz church steeples and other structures to house cell phone equipment. All of this raises concerns. Should tax exempt entities such as churches be operating rental businesses to earn money? What happens when in the pursuit of potentially lucrative contracts with cell phone companies, churches attempt to declare zoning and land use regulations "off limits" because they happen to be a religious organization?

   There are an estimated 70 million cellular phone users in the United States, and the number is expected to swell in coming years. Cell companies are slashing rates, costs on phones are diminishing, and technology firms are marketing a growing number of wireless information products from palm computers and pagers to cell-based modems for lap tops. Cell phone companies saw earning rise 206% between 1991 and 1995, and the growth curve on the cusp of the millennium is even steeper. In some cases, people are trading in their landline based phones for cellular units coupled with special air time rate packages. And cell phone traffic is up; as the number of subscribers has skyrocketed, average monthly bills have declined -- 60% since 1988 -- but on air usage has increased. For giddy analysts at companies like AirTouch, AT&T and Omnipoint, the market is still wide open.

   There are some limits, though, which are becoming apparent. The shooting at Columbine High school in April prompted a debate about students owning cell phones. Local and state governments have been mulling whether or not there is a relationship between cell phone use in cars and automobile accidents. And there is talk of a new "cell phone etiquette," as phone owners find themselves interrupted at movies, dinners and social events.

   But perhaps the most serious problem facing cell phone providers is the availability of locations for the ubiquitous towers which comprise the basis of the individual "cells" that form the backbone of this thriving wireless system. Even urban areas still have so-called "dark zones" where the radio signals to and from cell phones does not penetrate. In rural sections, cell phone coverage lags far behind the land wire-based system. Providers are scurrying to find more locations for their towering cell antennas; an estimate 50,000 dot the landscape at present, and that figure is expected to rise to over 125,000 by 2005. While most cell phone customers utilize the service within 25 miles of home or work, there is a growing demand for "universal service" and signal availability so that users are never "out of touch."

   And there's the rub. Urban areas are now saturated with cell phone service, and in many parts of the United States one can travel down metropolitan corridors -- say, Los Angeles to San Diego or Boston to Washington -- will little or no interruption in cell phone coverage. Finding locations for cell towers in such areas was relatively easy; companies were able to construct the enormous antennas in industrial zones, or piggyback their transmitter/receivers on existing structures like radio station towers. As the demand for coverage has increased, though, cellular firms have scrambled to find new phone tower sites, and ingenious ways of disguising the "Christmas tree" antennae which increasingly dot our landscape.

   The penetration of cell coverage -- and consequently the need for more cell phone towers -- has prompted a surge of litigation and complaints, especially as neighborhood groups and communities divide over the merits of having the enormous transmitter towers. Some municipalities have cashed-in on the surging demand. West Bloomfield Parks, Michigan, for instance, is collecting nearly $1.4 million for allowing construction of two 140-foot high towers on public land. The money will be used to illuminate soccer and baseball fields for night games. Nearby Oakland Parks is renting space to a cell company for $1,500 per month which seems to be the going rate. Other towns are allowing phone companies to erect antennas disguised as clock towers, or leveraging other locations such as schools in exchange for flat rent fees and other perks. That has helped to cool what some describe as rancorous fights over the aesthetics of the towers.

   Even so, the involvement of churches in the battle for cell phone coverage has fueled a new round of controversy. Churches are increasingly being criticized for acting like real estate speculators, ignoring public input, and even trying to circumvent local zoning and land use ordinances which regulate how certain types of property are rightfully utilized. In Farmington Hills Michigan, for instance, neighbors objected when the First Church of the Nazarene announced that it had brokered a deal with AT&T Wireless Service to construct an enormous 120-foot high transmitting tower with a cross at the top. Associated pastor Craig Dillman told the Detroit Free Press that the deal was "very favorable" to the church. Council members, though, questioned "the idea of a tax-exempt church trafficking in high-tech commerce." Churches have been involved in other controversies over cell phone tower construction as well...

   ¶    In some cases, local zoning ordinances seem to be limiting the options cell phone providers have in where they may install the towers, and as a result favor churches. In September, 1995 for example, the Dallas City Council enacted a special ordinance allowing antennas to be placed wholly inside another structure. That was good news for the Disciples Christian Church which then struck a deal with Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems to erect an 85-foot cellular antenna on Park Boulevard inside a white stucco church steeple. When asked by a staffer at the Dallas Morning News whether the church would have constructed the steeple without the cellular company agreement, an official declared: "I doubt very seriously we would have." The Council approved the deal with the church after several plans proposed by Southwestern Bell Mobile were nixed. News reports confirm that the church has a 10-year lease agreement -- in addition to a new steeple -- and a "good source of income."

   ¶    Zoning exemptions and other perks which have allowed churches to locate inside residential neighborhoods -- unlike, say, a private businesses -- now make churches major contenders in earning money renting their facilities in the "holes" or "dark zones" of many cell phone providers. In Palo Alto, California, for instance, city officials handled nearly 15 applications for new cell tower sites from Pacific Bell last year, turning down two applications in residential areas. Zoning officials were ready to approve an alternative plan, though, to allow construction of an antenna at Crossroads Community Church, but changed their minds when a standing-room only crowd of angry residents showed up at a public meeting to protest.

   ¶    In Seattle, controversy erupted this past June when US West attempted to build an ersatz church steeple to camouflage cell phone transmitters at the Trinity Anglican Church. Irate neighbors objected to the plan, and the city council called for a six month moratorium on cell tower construction while it reviewed ordinances.

   Faced with neighborhood opposition, though, cell phone providers have limited options. Churches, which traditionally have found easy entry into residential zones, now are prime real estate in the new lucrative market for providing antenna locations. A report in the Times-Herald newspaper noted a controversy over a church stepple-based cell antenna, noting that the a proposal by Bell Atlantic to conceal its cellular equipment there "is part of a growing trend prompted by widespread community opposition to towers in residential neighborhoods, and an increased willingness of cash-strapped congregations to do business with cellular companies." Indeed, the First Presbyterian Church of Goshen, Maryland was negotiating a rental contract with Bell Atlantic worth $336,000 over a twenty year period.

   Of the 7,000 cellular antennas owned by Sprint, only about 25 are currently built on property owned by churches. But that statistical profile is certain to change, especially with communities seeking to put more regulations on construction of cell phone towers, and "dark zone" locations -- often churches -- becoming a real premium. Ironically, one major legal decision which explored whether or not local municipalities may regulate cell tower construction was decided by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, and involved the City of Virginia Beach, Va. in a suit against AT&T Wireless and the local Lynnhaven United Methodist Church (No. 97-2389). At issue was a decision by the Virginia Beach City Council to deny an application by the church and AT&T to erect two 135-foot towers in the middle of a "heavily wooded residential area with no significant commercial development."

   Local residents argued that the church was no longer limiting itself to worship, but instead was engaging in "commercial use of the Church property."

   Other important issues arose in the Virginia Beach case, including the application of the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, designed to make it easier for cellular service companies to build their towers. The case affirmed the "Preservation of local zoning authority" for neighborhood and towns. But churches may have another weapon to use in court as the battle for cellular phone tower locations heats up. That legal instrument is the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, now proposed on the federal level as the Religious Liberty Protection Act or RLPA.

   RLPA requires that government use a "compelling interest/least restrictive means test" when dealing with faith-based groups or practices. The proposed federal RLPA has been approved by the House of Representatives, and the US Senate is expected to take up the matter when it returns next month from summer recess. The measure is based on the old Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1997 BOERNE v. FLORES case. According to Dr. Marci Hamilton, a constitutional attorney who argued BOERNE successfully in front of the high court, RFRA legislation "provides a wide range of exemptions for church groups from civil laws and regulation," including matters pertinent to zoning and land use.

   Despite the federal BOERNE v. FLORES ruling and the fact that RLPA has not yet been enacted as law, several states have passed their own versions of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Critics of RFRA/RLPA fear that the legislation is a "green light" for churches to ignore local zoning ordinances and complaints from neighborhood groups. Municipalities may well be discouraged from seeking legal remedies against churches when the latter chooses to defy, say, height restrictions on the construction of edifices, including church steeple cell antennas.

   An incident last year in the small community of Soldotna, Alaska typifies the spreading confrontation between churches and municipalities over "vanity" issues such as the height of steeples. Local zoning officials nixed a proposal by the Soldotna Bible Chapel to erect a 72-foot-high steeple which exceeded local height regulations, and even towered over the local Borough government hall by nearly three stories. But a towering steeple may no longer be just a symbol of prestige for a church; big bucks now enter the picture as cell phone companies seek out new locations in which to place their equipment.

   One trustee told the "Eat the State" web site that churches have a real incentive for linking up with phone service providers. "We just love that cash flow," declared Church deacon Marshal McStay. Another church official said that a steeple that was not earning money as a cell phone antenna was "an asset that is not being used."

   So far, there is no evidence that RFRA is being used by churches in order to circumvent zoning requirements and lease space to cell phone companies. But the legislation provides an incredible temptation, one not lost on the LaGrange Christian Assembly Church in suburban Chicago. At issue is a 116-foot high tower disguised as across erected by Sprint on church property. Neighbors have challenged the tower before the Cook County Zoning Board of Appeals. According to Christianity Online, "If the zoning body ordered Sprint to remove the cross tower, lawyers for the telecommunications giant hinted they might use the state's new Religious Freedom Restoration Act as grounds for appeal." Ironically, the pastor of the Christian Assembly declared that his church would be "no party" to using RFRA, adding "That law is reserved for matters of high religious value."

   But reservations about using RFRA/RLPA could easily evaporate. Already, groups supporting the Religious Liberty Protection Act cite zoning interference by local governments as a reason for why the legislation is ostensibly needed urgently. And the AANEWS survey revealed that churches currently leasing their steeples or other property, or seeking a partnership with a cell phone company, are doing so to raise badly needed cash.

   While placing cell phone antennas inside existing church steeples may provide an aesthetic alternative, the construction of enormous new ersatz steeples seems to result in more controversy and public disapproval, even from parishioners. At the LaGrange church, for instance, one parishioner declared that while the new "cross" was more attractive than a typical cellular tower, it's sheer size made it "a very ominous structure."

   "It's big and it doesn't belong here," she added.

   Indeed, as phone companies seek location alternatives and churches -- especially those faced with stagnant congregations and "empty pew syndrome" -- look for money, the cell phone antenna plan could become a great financial incentive. Tom Wheller, president of the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association, said that many congregations are looking forward to this new source of revue during "hard-pressed times." The hunt for tower space is rapidly blurring the line between the church's perceived traditional role, and its new status as a high-tech landlord. As society becomes increasingly dependent on wireless communications, the proliferation of "wired steeples" also puts churches in control of a valuable communications asset. Finally, supporters of legislation such as the Religious Liberty Protection Act admit that RLPA is a key legal weapon in helping churches, mosques, temples and other sectarian groups to evade local zoning requirements. The temptation to use that legal instrument in pursuit of cell phone tower rents may prove to be irresistible to many cash-strapped congregations.

   The future of at least part of the American telecommunications landscape may be found in, of all places, Hungary. There, the nation's powerful Roman Catholic Church is negotiating a lucrative long-range plan with corporate giants Nokia, Motorola, Nortel, Alcatel and Lucent Technologies, to construct cellular phone antennas in over 1,000 churches throughout the nation. A spokesman for Fundus Kft, the property management agency of the Catholic Church, told Reuters news service last month that rents would start at one million florints (about $4,150) per year for each antenna.

   In the United States, the battle over cell phone antennas will intensify as new territory is developed for coverage, and competition increases. As many as 75,000 sites are expected to be constructed by 2005; and with churches occupying prime real estate, the earnings are truly "heaven sent."

[text only]