Tempers flared Tuesday night at an informational meeting at Lakewood Bible Fellowship, 2520 W. Sale Road.

The church has applied for an exception from the parish to allow a 120-foot AT&T communication tower to be placed on their property at the corner of Sale Road and Burton Lane in an otherwise residential area.

Tom Holiman with Vertical Bridge, a company enlisted by AT&T to find sites for communication towers, was tasked with explaining why AT&T wants to construct a tower.

Forty-four residents from the surrounding area attended the meeting, voicing objections to the tower ranging from health concerns, diminution of property values and unsightliness.

Holiman, from Baton Rouge, told the crowd the public is demanding more broadband coverage. Carriers can’t keep up with the demand, he said. The carriers, including AT&T, are working to provide what the public wants. AT&T doesn’t want to build new towers any more than anyone else, he said, but because of capacity issues, they need to do so to fully serve the public. He added that AT&T wants to construct towers on three or four new sites locally, not just this one.

“Sir, why put this in a residential area?” asked Burton Lane resident Frank LaFaso.

“In many cases, residential areas are where the greatest capacity issues are,” Holiman said.

Several residents said they were not having any issues.

“How can you build in a residential area? I have a handicapped son who has grand mal seizures. Blinking tower lights will set him off,” said one resident.

“This tower won’t have any blinking lights,” said Holiman. “It will be a monopod, similar to the one behind First Federal Bank on Sale Road.”

Addressing the health concern issue, Holiman said, “Health effects. Everyone is always concerned about that. The FCC (Federal Communications Commission) has had study after study after study about it. Long story short, it’s a non-issue,” he said.

“Then why,” asked another resident, “does a sign posted on the fence around a communication tower on Weaver Road say, ‘Caution beyond this point: Radio frequency fields at this site may exceed FCC rules for human exposure?’”

Several residents asked about the compensation the church would be getting by allowing the tower to be built.

The crowd was told that information was private, but Holiman added, “The church, yes, they’re going to benefit from this, but they’re good people. And all of you will benefit, too, from the improved service.”

“You signed an agreement with the church? Shouldn’t you have asked the community first? All of us should have the right to see this agreement,” said one woman. “It won’t affect the people of this church. They’re here for a couple of hours and then they go home. We live around here. It will affect us.”

Resident Joel Smith said, “I live across the street. I moved here because I thought it was beautiful. Then the hurricanes came and knocked down all our trees. This cell tower, if it is built, is going to knock us back 20 years. But the people at this church are reasonable. I’ve spoken with them. We need to appeal to them directly to please not do this.”

“Studies show 5G interferes with airplanes and they fly right over this place,” said Bill Bruning.

“We’ve lost so much as a community. We don’t need this,” said another resident.

“Why not build it at Prien Lake Park? That’s government-owned land,” said Will Houston.

“How can a church that is supposed to be for the community, how can they do this?” asked another.

“All your explanations are fine, but I don’t want to hear any more. We don’t want the tower,” said Lofaso to Holiman.

Jon Helmer, Lakewood Bible Fellowship operations director, spoke after Holiman.

“The church is not trying to hide anything from anyone. That’s why we opened up the church tonight, to find out how people felt. Unless you’re willing to tell us how you feel, we don’t know,” he said.

On Wednesday, Helmer said he was disappointed in the way some of the attendees conducted themselves at the meeting.

The proposal was to go before the Calcasieu Parish Planning and Zoning Board March 22. Helmer said Wednesday morning that the proposal has been pulled from the March 22 meeting docket.

It will be reintroduced at another time.