There’s something quietly powerful about a small town refusing to back down. Sitka, Alaska, with a population just over 8,000, recently became the center of a legal showdown that might’ve flown under the radar for most people. For those of us who care deeply about environmental toxins, EMF exposure, and holistic living, this was a win worth studying.

What happened wasn’t just a zoning dispute. It was a community defending its health, its land, and its right to say no to infrastructure it neither asked for nor needed. A 120-foot cell tower was slated to go up in a peaceful hillside neighborhood, within 150 feet of people’s homes. But thanks to tireless local activism, legal backing from the Children’s Health Defense’s Stop 5G initiative, and a lot of common sense, the tower didn’t get off the ground.

And that’s just the beginning of the story.

A Tower That Never Belonged

The tower was proposed by Tidal Network, a telecom project operated by the Central Council of the Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska. On paper, the goal was to “connect Southeast Alaska.” In practice, the plan felt invasive and poorly justified to the locals of Sitka.

The site they chose wasn’t some remote, industrial patch of land. It was tucked within a quiet, residential neighborhood. A steep slope, surrounded by old-growth forest, with homes that had been carefully spaced to preserve the natural landscape. No streetlights, no power lines, no visible utilities. Just ocean views and spruce trees. The kind of place people move to when they want to stay connected to nature, not blanketed by wireless radiation.

Sitka already had wireless service through GCI, which offered affordable broadband and mobile plans. There was no urgent connectivity crisis. What residents saw instead was a company sidestepping zoning laws and pushing infrastructure where it didn’t belong.

Sitka for Safe Tech: From Outcry to Organizing

When news of the tower spread, local residents sprang into action. They formed a group called Sitka for Safe Tech, which quickly became the organizing hub for community opposition. The group began researching health risks, analyzing local zoning codes, and seeking legal advice.

That’s when they connected with Children’s Health Defense’s Stop 5G initiative—a program created to provide legal, scientific, and strategic support to communities resisting poorly planned wireless infrastructure. CHD helped Sitka residents elevate their case, file legal briefs, and challenge the tower using evidence and legal precedent.

This partnership turned what might have been a quiet zoning board squabble into a legitimate case study in regulatory resistance.

Legal Battle: How a Small Town Beat the Tower

Tidal Network applied for a zoning variance, an exception to the town’s rule that limits structures in residential zones to 35 feet. They wanted to build a tower almost four times that height. But they didn’t offer any meaningful technical justification for why the tower needed to be that tall. No signal gap analysis. No review of lower-impact alternatives.

In April 2025, Sitka’s Planning Commission rejected the variance. The company appealed. But because several members of Sitka’s Assembly had to recuse themselves due to conflicts of interest, the case was handed over to the Alaska Office of Administrative Hearings.

Administrative Law Judge Max Garner reviewed the case, including briefs filed by CHD on behalf of the residents. On October 1, 2025, he issued a ruling that affirmed the Planning Commission’s denial.

In his 22-page decision, Judge Garner noted that Tidal Network had failed to explore alternative sites, failed to show a technical need, and failed to demonstrate that federal preemption under the Telecommunications Act applied. The community’s voice, which was consistently and unanimously opposed to the towers, was heard and respected.

CHD’s Role and the Broader Movement

The Stop 5G initiative is part of CHD’s broader mission to safeguard public health in the face of expanding wireless infrastructure. Their involvement in Sitka didn’t just offer legal muscle. It also helped validate and elevate the community’s health concerns—including the potential impacts of EMF radiation on children, fertility, sleep, and nervous system function.

Miriam Eckenfels, director of CHD’s EMR & Wireless Program, said it best: “The ruling underscored the power of local communities to protect themselves and proved that federal overreach is not a blank check to ignore health, environment, and zoning standards.”

Since the Sitka win, CHD has cited this case in ongoing battles in Nevada and Washington, where similar towers are being proposed near schools and homes. Sitka’s resistance is fast becoming a playbook for others.

The Environmental and Health Stakes

This case wasn’t just about zoning. It was about where and how we draw the line between technology and community wellbeing. The proposed tower site sat in a known landslide-prone area, which locals argued could be destabilized by heavy construction.

More importantly, it raised once again the concerns around chronic EMF exposure from close-proximity wireless infrastructure. While the industry continues to claim safety, independent science increasingly shows otherwise.

Documented Health Effects of Wireless EMF Exposure

• Blood-brain barrier disruption, increasing brain vulnerability to toxins 

• Central nervous system dysregulation, including anxiety and brain fog 

• Decreased heart-rate variability (HRV), a sign of chronic stress 

• Mitochondrial and cellular stress through calcium channel disruption 

• Infertility and hormone disruption in both men and women 

• DNA strand breaks and increased oxidative stress

• Increased risk to children due to thinner skulls and faster cell turnover 

• Suppressed melatonin production and disrupted sleep cycles