By CHRISTOPHER KROMER Tribune Chronicle

BLOOMFIELD — For years now, Verizon Wireless has been asking ‘‘can you hear me now?’’ For residents in the northern Trumbull County, the answer might finally be ‘‘yes.’’

After years of serving as a notorious cell phone ‘‘dead spot’’— an area in which a cell phone signal was difficult or impossible to obtain — Bloomfield soon may host the construction of a new cell phone tower.

For resident Carrie Baugher, who agreed to enter into a proposed lease agreement with Verizon Wireless to allow a portion of her residential land to be used as the site of the cell phone tower, the decision was based largely on the financial benefits.

‘‘I am working two jobs, and unfortunately, anything that I can do to add to my income, I will do,’’ said Baugher, who serves as clerk for the Bloomfield Trustees. Although Baugher did not disclose the amount of money she would receive in the lease agreement, the Trumbull County Building Department lists the estimated valuation of the tower at $250,000.

Although Baugher cites financial gain as one of the primary benefits of the lease, she says this is not the first time the project has been slated to move forward.

‘‘A Verizon representative came by a few years ago and asked if we’d be interested, and after we said yes, it got caught up in a lot of red tape,’’ said Baugher. ‘‘It fell through because it was within sight of a historical building.’’

Baugher said she received a call this spring asking if she would be interested in agreeing to the construction of a shorter tower, one that would not run afoul of state historical building guidelines. So far, however, Baugher says information has been scarce.

‘‘I haven’t seen anything other than people sticking stakes on my property,’’ said Baugher. ‘‘They affirm that it’s still in the process.’’

While Baugher was somewhat enticed by the financial benefits of the proposed tower, she said that health concerns did enter into her mind.

‘‘I thought about it,’’ said Baugher. ‘‘And I wasn’t sure if I wanted this big metal pole near my house.’’

A hotly debated topic since the inception of cellular phone service, the health effects associated with cell phone tower sites are still contested. While conventional wisdom holds that low-radiation radio frequency towers do not pose significant health risks, many agree that more research needs to be done.

In the past year, high-profile battles between local authorities and cellular phone carriers — mostly regarding the health and aesthetic effects of placing towers in residential areas and near schools — have been popping up all over the country.

Dave Houglan, a Verizon manager of system performance in RF Design in northern Ohio, said health concerns are largely based on lack of knowledge.

‘‘It’s been proven and gone to court many times that towers don’t pose health threats,’’ said Houglan. ‘‘If there were real health concerns, wouldn’t you see more users coming forward with problems? If I thought it were dangerous, I would look for a new career.’’

Houglan balks at studies that point to possible health effects of living near a cell tower. A 2004 German government study, for example, found that those living within 1,300 feet of a tower were three times more likely to get cancer.

‘‘I’d like to see the proof,’’ said Houglan. ‘‘And not in some big scientific study, but the real-world proof.’’

Health concerns are not the only common obstacles faced by cell providers. According to Michael Dittoe, legislative aide for Ohio state Representative Diana M. Fessler, concerns over the aesthetic effects of cell phone towers in Fessler’s Dayton-area constituency led to the introduction of House Bill 174.

‘‘A little over a year ago, some of Rep. Fessler’s constituents had serious concerns about a tower being built in an area that was nearly entirely residential,’’ said Dittoe. ‘‘This one parcel of property was zoned light industrial nearly 50 years ago when the former owner operated a deli on that property. When that happens, cell phone companies are not subject to the normal regulations.’’

Dittoe points out that, although Fessler, a Republican, was thankful for the cell phone company’s response to her inquiries, she remained frustrated that this was able to happen. She then introduced the bill in April, which would require 45 days’ notice before the construction of a telecommunications tower to residents who live within 100 feet of the proposed site.The bill also calls for those who propose the building of the tower to make a reasonable attempt to ‘‘co-locate’’ their tower on existing towers.

Despite the positive feedback the bill has received, Dittoe says prospects of the bill continuing forward are uncertain. After being referred to the House Local and Municipal Government and Urban Revitalization Committee, the bill awaits a second reading.

‘‘That committee has a lot of bills,’’ said Dittoe. ‘‘It’s tough to say if and when it will be heard from again.’’

Laura Merritt, Verizon’s public relations manager for Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia, said the company tries to work with local authorities from the start to address any concerns.

‘‘We want to be a good neighbor,’’ said Merritt. ‘‘We really try to work with local officials right out of the gate. We are following whatever the zoning regulations might be.’’

In Bloomfield, however, it is widely agreed that zoning regulations are severely outdated.

‘‘Nothing came through the township,’’ said Baugher. ‘‘The regulations probably need to be upgraded. There is nothing on the books regarding cell towers.’’

‘‘Zoning is pretty vague here,’’ said Larry Koon, a member of the township’s zoning board. ‘‘The trustees will have to address that issue.’’

Koon expressed concern for the community-wide effects of certain zoning practices.

‘‘It’s a situation where they need to really look at situations that will be affecting our community, and I don’t see much interest in that,’’ said Koon.

While Koon said he was personally happy that a cell phone tower would strengthen phone signals, he added that greater issues remain.

‘‘I don’t see how (the tower) could have an effect on too many people, but I’d definitely like to see some kind of monitoring system to control circumstances from affecting our community and the people in it. It’s a benefit to our community, but the trustees should address zoning issues and start planning for circumstances that will affect our community.’’

ckromer@tribune-chronicle.com