Health fears have delayed a new police radio system after landowners refused to allow masts on their property.
Sussex Police said there had been delays in winning planning permission for many of the masts required for the faster and more secure Airwave system.
About 87 masts are needed in Brighton and Hove, East and West Sussex.
Airwave O2, the company building the system, said about three-quarters of the masts had been installed so far.
The Airwave system, which uses radio technology called Tetra, had been expected to start operating in Brighton and Hove in March and in the rest of Sussex later.
A Sussex Police spokeswoman said: "There have been delays in planning acquisitions. We are optimistic a solution will be found and the service can go ahead at an early opportunity."
Influential landowners in West Sussex have said they will not allow the Tetra masts to be put up on their land because of possible health risks.
Planners at Arun District Council have lifted a moratorium on considering planning applications for the masts but will insist Airwave O2 sticks to tough new guidelines.
The company will have to consult with local people and specify why alternative sites have not been selected.
Planners will take public anxiety into account when they make decisions.
Airwave O2 spokeswoman Sue Moore said the radio system should still start operating during the early part of 2004.
She said: "Delivering to Sussex Police is our priority at the moment. The only way forward is to work with the planning authorities and the police to find a solution to deliver the service."
Campaigners are concerned because Tetra masts emit pulsing radio waves at much lower frequencies than conventional mobile phone masts, which they say could harm human health.
The Cowdray estate, Goodwood estate, Angmering Park estate, and the Duke of Norfolk's estate, between them covering about 40,000 acres, have all said Tetra masts cannot be erected on their land.
Robert Windle, of 16,000-acre Cowdray estate, around Midhurst, said: "It is because of the unknown factor of how dangerous they are to public health.
"It is thought they are far more dangerous to public health than conventional masts and phones.
"Apart from anything else, we want to reassure our neighbours we don't have any, and we don't contemplate having any."
Monday December 08, 2003
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article