Your Community. Your Home Value.
Their Profit.
Peer-reviewed research shows property values drop 2-9% or more near cell towers. A documented phenomenon that we can prove.
Your Home Is Worth Less Now
This isn't speculation. Peer-reviewed studies, federal agencies, and realtors across the country confirm that cell towers reduce property values — sometimes dramatically.
94%
of surveyed home buyers say they would pay less or avoid a property near a cell tower
NISLAPP Survey
2–9%+
decline in property values reported by peer-reviewed research, with appraiser estimates as high as 20%
Sander & Polacheck, 2009
79%
say they would never purchase or rent a property within a few blocks of a cell tower
REALTOR Magazine
The Federal Government Already Knows
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) classifies cell towers as "Hazards and Nuisances." FHA appraisers are required to flag nearby towers as potential deficiencies, comment on their impact on marketability, and verify the home isn't within the tower's engineered fall distance.
The California Association of Realtors' Property Sellers Questionnaire lists cell towers alongside other "neighborhood noise, nuisance or other problems."
"In my opinion from extensive experience I will tell you the cell tower will negatively effect the price of the property between 15%–30%. Not only that but close to 90% of my clients would refuse to consider looking at or buying the property."
— Licensed Realtor, Birmingham, MI
If They Can Do It Here, They Can Do It Anywhere
This tower was built without local approval or community input. If that stands, it sets the precedent for the next one — and the one after that. Your street could be next.
You Drive Past It Every Day
Routes 11, 57, Electronics Parkway, the Thruway — thousands of residents commute right through this corridor daily. A 184-foot industrial structure changes the character of the area for everyone.
It's an Eyesore — Period
184 feet of steel monopole towering over a residential neighborhood isn't just a safety concern. It's visual blight that degrades the community's character and quality of life.
It's About Accountability
A private company used state land to bypass local government entirely. If residents don't push back, it tells every telecom company that Salina is open for business — no questions asked.
The State Land Loophole
Under normal circumstances, any company wanting to build a 184-foot commercial structure in a residential area would need to go through local zoning approval, environmental impact reviews, and mandatory neighbor notification.
Phoenix Tower International is finding a way around all of it. They secured a lease on land owned by the New York State Thruway Authority (NYSTA) . Because the land is state-owned, it falls outside the jurisdiction of Onondaga County and the Town of Salina— completely bypassing local government authority.
No Local Zoning Review
State-owned land is exempt from local zoning ordinances. The Town of Salina had no authority to approve or deny the build.
No Neighbor Notification
There is no public hearing, no mailed notice, no opportunity for residents to weigh in. Residents are discovering a tower going up in their yards.
No Transparent Environmental Review
No environmental impact assessment has been shared with the public. If one exists, it was never disclosed to the community it would affect.
No Local Tax Revenue
Because the tower sits on state land, the local municipality sees zero tax revenue from this massive commercial operation in their community.
The Monroe Balancing Test
In 1988, the New York Court of Appeals established a nine-factor legal test in Matter of County of Monroe v. City of Rochester to determine whether a government entity can bypass local zoning laws. It replaced the old "governmental vs. proprietary" distinction with a balancing act that weighs the public interest of a project against its impact on the local community.
This is the legal mechanism NYSTA and Phoenix Tower International are using right now. They argue that because NYSTA is a state entity, the Monroe test applies — and that telecom infrastructure serves the "public good" enough to override your community's rights.
The 9 Factors — Applied to This Tower
Nature and scope of the instrumentality
NYSTA is acting as a commercial landlord — collecting lease revenue from a private telecom company. That's not a governmental function, it's a real estate deal. Managing toll roads is NYSTA's mission, not running a cell tower portfolio.
Encroaching activities vs. principal activities
Leasing land to a private telecom company is not NYSTA's principal activity. Managing the Thruway is.
Whether there is a public interest in the project
T-Mobile, AT&T, and Verizon already provide full 5G Ultra Wideband coverage across Liverpool — verified on their own coverage maps. There is no coverage gap. This tower adds commercial capacity for carrier revenue, not public service.
Whether the facility is essential
Multiple carriers already provide coverage in Liverpool. This tower is not filling a coverage gap — it's adding commercial capacity.
Whether alternative locations exist
No public evidence that NYSTA or PTI evaluated alternative sites, considered co-location on existing structures, or explored less impactful locations. The burden of proof is on them — and they've produced nothing.
Impact on the surrounding community
2-9%+ property value decline, no environmental review, eagles at risk, aviation hazard, dead vultures at the site, visual blight — devastating and documented.
Whether the entity tried to comply with local zoning
No. They did not approach Salina, did not seek a variance, held no public hearing. Complete bypass from day one.
Whether the entity offered mitigating conditions
No lights, no community benefit agreement, no tax sharing, no notification, no mitigation of any kind was ever offered.
Whether the site is a greenfield or already developed
Thruway corridor is arguably developed — but this is not on the highway itself. It's next to homes.
6 of 9
Factors clearly favor our community
3 of 9
Contested — and we're building the evidence
What This Means for You
The Monroe test is not a law that automatically grants immunity. It's a balancing act — and the court weighs documented community opposition as direct evidence under Factor 6.
Every petition signature, every public comment, every documented concern strengthens the argument that this tower's community impact outweighs whatever "public interest" NYSTA claims.
Your signature isn't symbolic. It's legal ammunition.
Ask Yourself
The Rules Themselves Are Unjust.
Their Rules vs. Your Rules.
Their Rules
184-foot tower. Zero local approval.
Your Rules
You need a permit to build a 6-foot fence.
Now You Know. Now Do Something.
Sign the petition, call your representatives, and show up to the next Town Board meeting. They ignored us once—make sure they can't do it again.
Take Action Now
We're Not Alone
Communities across New York State and the country have been fighting back for years against towers just like this one.
In the News — This Is Happening Everywhere
Join your neighbors. Make your voice heard.