Which samsung reciever is Best Buy selling for $400.... Want to check it out but dont see on web page. Thanks!

Today I'm just hoping that KDVR fixes their lip sync problem before they go high def Fall of 2004.

Don

Have not been on this forum much and ramdomly checked out the Cheyenne station KGWN (5) to find that they had started broaccasting in HDTV. So I tried to enter it in my Sony HD -200. By tuning to the station I got no results. Adding Cheyenne to my zip code as additional stations did not bring it up on my guide. So I tried to add it manually - Wow. It checked for the station on antenna, cable, and then HD and locked in. This with my attic antenna pointed toward Denver. So now I have my first HDTV station OTA. (Now if fox goes HDTV by the end of the year - it will be even better.)

Reggie

Great news -- I just spoke to Jim Hollinger (chief engineer? of KDVR). He was not aware of the Fox 720p announcement, but said that all their equipment is ready for 720p. Apparently, that's how they were broadcasting back in '99 before Fox set the 480p standard for their stations. So as soon as corporate Fox starts sending him 720p content, all he needs to do is "push a button" to start passing through native 720p.

So now the race is on -- will Fox or WB be the first station in Denver to be broadcasting (near enough to) full power HDTV?

Skyview,

I tried to post this before but the AVS server was down just when I pressed submit. Anyway, I think it was a Samsung 160. Call the Park Meadows store directly and ask. It was in the DirecTv area.

dr_mal,
Did you ask him about the lip-sync issues? Since they announced HD yesterday, I sent one more message to them asking why they could not fix their unwatchable (at least to me) lip-sync problem. They never never ever respond. You must be the only guy they even talk to!

I did not. I haven't had problems with their lip sync for quite some time (but I haven't really watched them much since 24 ended for the season).

BTW -- to reach Jim, I just called their main number and asked for Jim Hollinger (this was after asking for engineering, getting some guy not in engineering but who knew whom to ask for)

I also thought the lip-sync has been better on KDVR. The last few episodes of 24 a while back seemed OK. But I have seen the problem occasionally since then also.

And, Reggie, don't get too excited about KGWN Cheyenne--yet. They aren't doing any HDTV yet (though they do have a nice strong DTV signal) and what you have seen and heard on KDVR Fox is quite a bit better than what KGWN has managed to do so far. But they are working on it and hope to have HDTV "soon."

Mark

Mark - thanks - yeah I got to watch it yesterday for the first time and the station was having tons of audio problems. I guess KGWN website is misleading - since they promised HD but are not there yet, still the signal clarity is much better than I can get from channel 4 with my attic antenna

Reggie

Another question to all the experts here!!!

Watched HBO-HD last night and compared to normal non HD HBO the Star Trek movie.... although I admit that the HD version was somewhat sharper, it wasnt that much better, certainly not night and day by any means. Does this mean they are not utilizing full HD on HBO. Now HD-Net which had soccer, was a noticably better image....

Comments please!!!

Thanks.

Basically what you're witnessing there sky is the difference between video based and film based content. With sports, nature, travel type programming, all generally done on tape, the whole intent is to make you feel like you're actually in the setting for real. Of course HD really makes that possible.

With movies (and dramas and sitcoms for the most part) shot on film, the creators are trying to tell a story so they generally avoid the look of stark realism no matter what the resolution may be. Thats generally why the video based HD programming has the real "WOW it's like I'm in the front row" factor and with HD movies it's more subtle. Though certainly more advantageous anyway, revealing extra detail and such.

Course they could do movies the same way. But have you ever watched those "Making of such and such a movie" segments where somebody is videotaping a scene from a movie while it's being filmed? I dont know about you, but I'm always glad the final product doesnt look the way it looks in those segments. It looks rather phoney ot *too* real. I mean I'm pretty sure I know Mel Gibson isnt truly fighting in a war. ;)

Originally posted by dr_mal
So now the race is on -- will Fox or WB be the first station in Denver to be broadcasting (near enough to) full power HDTV?

Does anyone know the status of KWGN's DTV? I thought they were supposed to be on the air by now.

-Wabisabi

Last I talked to them (a week or two ago?) they are ready to broadcast HDTV. However, sCARE is suing them (along with several levels of JeffCo) over their county approval to broadcast DTV from their short tower. The FCC is currently refusing to grant them a license to broadcast until the court case is settled.

Thanks Deb! :rolleyes:

Skyview,
There have been quality issues lately on HBOHD and HDNet because D* is experimenting with sharing transponders and quality at times has suffered. Most of the issues have been raised when watching AOTC movie that you saw. You should check out several threads on the HDTV Programming Forum to see more detail about the problem. It appears to have been getting better lately. We hope by the time July 1 rolls around, they will have been able to optimize their HD channels and not suffer quality. We will see. I personally don't think that HDNet has the same WOW factor that it did a few months ago.

Originally posted by skyview
Another question to all the experts here!!!

Watched HBO-HD last night and compared to normal non HD HBO the Star Trek movie.... although I admit that the HD version was somewhat sharper, it wasnt that much better, certainly not night and day by any means. Does this mean they are not utilizing full HD on HBO. Now HD-Net which had soccer, was a noticably better image....

Comments please!!!

Thanks. I think Dan and Dennis hit the major points but I'll just add that even without the "wow" on some HBO movies I think the HD colors are better than non-HD colors (my set is ISF cal'd and there are some differences because the 480i and 1080i inputs are not cal'd exactly alike but I almost always prefer HD colors over SD colors) .

But, I notice the same thing when I watch a 480i source (either HBO or SHO) upconverted to 1080i in my STB when compared to true HD source (either HBO HD or SHO HD).

Thanks for comments on HBO!

Anyone know where 80-3 is coming from. It is PBS. Interestingly I cannot get 18-1. Thoughts! It is also the only one of the 5 I get that is getting some breakups, 4, 9, 31, 53 all solid..... If 80-3 is at same location as 4 and 9, not sure what gives. If not, where is 18-1???

80-3 is the same physical channel as 18-1. They're both the digital feed from Rocky Mountain PBS, emanating from the top of Republic Plaza. The PSIP info changes to 80-3 when they're sending programming direct from national PBS. They're looking into keeping the "virtual" channel 18-1, but they're waiting for some new equipment to be installed.

Thanks. Explains that mystery. Great images on PBS!!!! Very impressive.

Do they run less power? Getting some breakups on PBS not on any of the others.

KRMA was the first on top of Republic Plaza. At that time, they were told they had to cut their antenna in half and subsequently put out about half the ERP they were expecting (about 7-8kw). Then KCNC and KUSA put up antennas twice as big as the current KRMA antenna and were not required to cut them in half. So, KCNC and KUSA get about 14kw ERP out of their 1kw transmitter. Don't know why (or from whom) the requirement came about to shorten their antenna in the beginning, but now with the BCDC application approved, KRMA is concentrating on developing their tower site and will probably not follow-up on nor try to improve the RP set-up.

Once the horizontal tower is complete on Morrison, KRMA will move their 1kw transmitter off of RP and on to Morrison. They expect to experience a significantly greater ERP but haven't mentioned any figures yet. They will stay with the 1kw transmitter for an undetermined amount of time, perhaps until the analog shutoff. It is VERY expensive to pay for the electricity to run two high-power transmitters.

Originally posted by dr_mal
Great news -- I just spoke to Jim Hollinger (chief engineer? of KDVR). I thought it was Pete Bangas. :confused:

I've tried to compile station information, including contact information, on our web page. Click the Graphical Timeline in my sig, then click on the station call letters. The bottom half of the screen will show the station data. Pls review and PM or email (ronauger@direcway.com) me with corrections.

That's why I put the question mark after -- I wasn't sure what his exact title is. When I phoned and asked for engineering so I could ask about the 720p transition, the guy I got through to told me Jim Hollinger was the guy to ask for.

You guys are going to love this...we're going to have a new name for the CARE folks that I'll share just as soon as it's unveiled on Tueday at the hearings...stay tuned...or better yet, come to the hearings and hear for yourself. :D This one is really, really good...

Is there anyone in the Lakewood area near the intersection of Kipling & Morrison that have had success receiving the Denver NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX HD digital channels. If so what type of antenna did you use and specifically what direction did you orient the antenna? I'm going to have to use a attic antenna so information of that type of installation would be greatly appreciated.

Originally posted by smauldin
I'm going to have to use a attic antenna so information of that type of installation would be greatly appreciated.

I'm curious, why are you going to place the antenna in the attic? Put it up on the roof, where it belongs.

Originally posted by smauldin
Is there anyone in the Lakewood area near the intersection of Kipling & Morrison that have had success receiving the Denver NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX HD digital channels. If so what type of antenna did you use and specifically what direction did you orient the antenna? I'm going to have to use a attic antenna so information of that type of installation would be greatly appreciated.

See my sig about antennas...

Hi smauldin, and welcome to the thread! Point your antenna towards downtown, and you should be able to get the channels, unless you are below the ridge down there, and then it's hit or miss.

The sCARE folks were outin force on Saturday collecting petition signatures. Of course, they weren't explaining anything to the people they were flagging down about a reduction in number of towers, just that they are in danger.


OOOOAAAHHH!!!

Jeff

Oh good, we can all look forward to Deb rolling out her petition like a red carpet down the aisle of the BCC hearing room on Tuesday. I wonder if they really think that stunt can be effective when they pull it at every hearing?

Last call: If you're planning on attending the hearing tomorrow and testifying, and have not sent your name, address and phone # to Pete yet, please send it to me. We'll get you signed in on the list tomorrow morning so you'll have a good chance of speaking earlier than later tomorrow night. The signup sheets will still be available at 6:30, but you'll be towards the end of the list and will probably have to be there until the BCC adjourns.

Today's the day!

No not that day. Not the (s)cary day in Jeffco. Not the D* HD day. The day that the Nuggets have waiting for by clearing cap for years now: NBA free agent day.

Fast forward to 2005 NBA finals game 7 in Pepsi Center broadcast in high definition on a certain toy transmitter located in south downtown.

Starting lineup for the 2005 world champion Denver Nuggets:

1) Jason Kidd (except his wife needs lots of TV face time. Adele, could you work weekends so that JK's wife could slide into the weekday anchor job?)

2) Kobe Bryant (not free agent til July 1, 2004)

3) Mello

4) Hilo

5) Zo Mourning

What do you think?

Don

Oh boy, Oh boy, Oh boy...here we go today. I had an experience with some of the sCARE folks on Saturday afternoon that I really can't wait to tell the BCC about if the right circumstances present themselves today... This could be really fun... :D

I'll try to post a couple of brief reports throughout the day (lunch & dinner breaks) and then more thoughts tomorrow.

hey, there is an article on the Rocky Mountain News about the meeting...


http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_2079403,00.html

A quick update on this morning’s hearing thus far up to the lunch break:

Lots of really good things, a couple of not so good things. KUSA is here covering the proceedings. Look for some of the 3d graphics tonight on the KUSA newscasts – they were provided at the KUSA’s reporters request this morning.

LCG did their presentation from about 9:20 to about 10:45 this morning, including questions from the BCC members. They were very impressed that LCG did their presentation in well under their 2 hour allotted time window. The presentation was really, really excellent.

Commissioner Hollaway was amazed that the stations could fit all of their equipment, including all of their news gathering equipment in a building 19000 sf in size, when the Morrison building had to be 14000 sf for channel 6 and the other lesser channels.

Commissioner Sheehan wanted to know about the other sites availabe – El Dorado, eastern plains, cable, satellite. Pete and Fred shot those down pretty well, and then Jim Hart’s testimony later on really shot them down.

County Attorney Tunhill wanted to know if the screened porch of the building was included in the 19000sf of building space – it is.

Commissioner Sheehan recalled that in the previous proposal, there was a conflict in the amount of space required to build the new tower and remove the existing towers. Guy wire conflicts. Problem doesn’t exist anymore due to the setbacks of this new tower, and the distance away from the existing towers it will be located.

Then Staff had their presentation. Same as at the planning commission hearings. Still harping about how the applicant hasn’t disproved Morrison and Squaw as potential sites. Everything else has been covered. They wanted time to review the “new” information that LCG presented this morning. There wasn’t anything new in it.

Jim Hart then testified. He really needs to learn how to speak to his audience. He went VERY technical, and it was well above the heads of the commissioners, and me as well. I had no idea about what some of the stuff he was talking about. The commissioners looked annoyed.

Here are some of the summary points that he did say, though that were very good:

The sun on a 95 degree sunny day will expose you to more harmful radiation than the new tower will.

Jim presented a lot of numbers. Commissioner Hollaway asked him if the numbers were meaningful – 14, 10, 3, 2, 4, 6 etc measured at different sites. He said that they weren’t – that they were very low, insignificant numbers. Commissioner Sheehan asked him at what level the numbers would become significant. His reply – when they hit 100, because that’s the standard.

Commissioner Sheehan – “God Forbid the numbers go up at Buffalo Bill’s Grave!” Laughter throughout the room.

Jim said that overall, RF levels will go down, even with adding the 5 additional stations (during analog and digital broadcasting at the same time).

He said that he didn’t know if interference would go up to the north, east and south, but that it would definitely go down to the west, and that LCG is going well above and beyond what is required with their interference remediation program.

Jim said that Lookout provides much better signal coverage area than Squaw would. That the squaw test was made with antennas 15’ and 30’ above the ground.

Commissioner Sheehan wants FCC documentation stating that the stations are required to match their existing coverage area as closely as possible.

Commissioner Sheehan did a really good job filtering out all of the technical jargon, and listed all of those points above as the summary to what he heard Jim Hart say. Way to go, Commissioner Sheehan!

Jim Hart said that Morrison might be able to accommodate the LCG stations from an RF perspective, but only if they kicked out all of the FM radio stations that will be there, and some of the other lesser TV stations.

After all of this, the commissioners really grilled Staff about what reasons they still have that the applicant hasn’t demonstrated that Morrison and Squaw aren’t viable sites. Staff couldn’t give a good answer. They seem to want a legal declaration from Clear Creek County that the LCG app wouldn’t work on Squaw. Problem is that the only way to get that is to apply for a permit in Clear Creek County and get rejected, just as they are trying to do here in Jeffco. Staff has currently put LCG in a no way out, no way to win situation with that statement, and that’s what I’m going to address tonight in my presentation to the commissioners.

That’s it for this morning. Gotta run back – starts again in about 20 minutes.

Thanks Mark

Reggie

Afternoon update:

Care Presentation...the unrolled their petition that stretched around the room, blinded everyone in the room with their "tower simulation" and pretty much made the entire beginning of their thing theatrical. Then it got so deep in there, even though I went with my chest waders on, I was afraid I was going to drown. So I left half way through to work on my own presentation for tonight.

Good luck with your presentation Mark

Reggie

Has anyone ever asked how many of the sCARE "people" have one of those pizza-pan dishes? (I'm a BUDhead myself). Then you need to ask how many of them know how much radiation is being beamed at them from the satellites used for the DBS reception. Plus all of the radiation from all of the other C and Ku band satellites. To top it off, it is microwave radiation, vs. the frequencies used for OTA.

Has that thread ever been thought of and if so, is there any meat to it?

That thought just popped into my head a little bit ago.

Interesting day at the Taj. I didn't get there until 6:30 pm (I was celebrating Canada Day at work), but from what I saw (and markdl says this happened all day) it seems that I may owe Commissioner Holloway an apology. She was asking intelligent questions of presenters, and, if I didn't know better, seemed to be leaning in favour of the application. Commissioner Sheehan was at his comic best (at least as far as comics within a local governmental hearing go) and did a really good job of keeping the reins on people.

And now -- it's official! We can *cough* start *cough* calling them SCARE now! They were all wearing yellow shirts that said "Super Community" on the back. I'm impressed that they think enough of us to make our unofficial acronym official *snif* I'm getting a little veklempt.

Ernie -- I LOVED your video. The SCARE folks snickered all the way through it, but that's to be expected. They also tried to interrupt markdl's testimony with catcalls before Sheehan shook his fist at them.

John(?) Medved (yes, that Medved) testified against the proposal -- he has several kids who live in their dream home that they built under the towers and he doesn't want them to get sick or something. Lots of SCARE-tactic testimony tonight. (cue music) dr_mal said "Don't go to Medved" (end music) Seriously, he was sitting beside me for part of the hearing tonight and he seemed like a nice guy and actually was willing to listen to me rebut some of his preconceptions. Didn't change his position though :(

As to some other opponents...there was a group of SCAREy people hanging around the model of Lookout Mtn. I sauntered up and started admiring it, they noticed my badge and asked why I wanted their children to be killed :rolleyes: I tried to reason with them, but Deb's done a good job. They were, however, surprised to hear that the towers would be staying up if the proposal is denied:

10 "But they're illegal non-conforming -- they have to come down!"
20 "no, actually they're LEGAL non-conforming, they can stay forever"
30 "but it's zoned residential"
40 "they're legal. They're staying unless this gets approved"
50 "but JeffCo says they have to go -- they're non conforming -- they're illegal"
60 GOTO 20

(sorry for the BASIC reference, non-programmers :) )

They were all shocked and awed when I told them they could just swap out equipment in their buildings, be broadcasting digital, and still be legal non-conforming.

OK, that's enough for today. I'll likely be back next Tuesday night (I have an HOA meeting out here I should be at that night)

Yeah, it was flying really deep last night. Unfortuantely, my presentation ran a little long (especially after getting interrupted that I wanted to kill their children, or something like that...you know - the sheriff deputies were there in attendence this evening...I wonder if anybody got arrested for child abuse?...). But anyway, here's the complete text of what I was *going* to say. What I actually said ended up being edited up a bit, but that's the way it goes I guess.
_________________________
Good Evening,
My name is Mark Lamutt. I live at 195 Yates Street in Denver. I am a registered professional engineer in the state of Colorado, and have been practicing engineering for the last 11 years. But I’m not here this evening to talk from an engineering standpoint. I am also an HDTV enthusiast. Several have testified about the amount of money they have spent to block the radiation from their houses. Over the last 2 years, I have spent in excess of $3000 trying desperately to pull in that radiation so that I can view the low power digital stations that are currently broadcasting from downtown Denver. This has resulted in a 48” Yagi antenna mounted on my roof, 22 feet above the ground, feeding the signal to my off the shelf high definition receivers.

I would like to address my comments to what your Staff has testified to today in regards to Squaw Mountain and Mount Morrison being viable alternative sites. First, Squaw Mountain.

My house is located at this red dot on the map that Mr. Santella testified to in his video tape. During the Squaw Mountain test last summer, I climbed up on my roof and using a compass, pointed my antenna directly at Squaw Mountain. I should say here that I cannot see Squaw Mountain from the top of my roof – it’s blocked by the foothills. I was unable to receive any signal at all on my HD receivers at any time during the test. These are standard, off the shelf receivers. I do not have a pre-amp installed on my antenna, and I do not have channel filters installed. If I were to install channel filters, I wouldn’t be able to receive any of the other channels that I regularly watch.

Mr. Jim Hart has testified that broadcast transmissions from Squaw Mountain will not be able to replicate the broadcast transmissions from Lookout Mountain. If you look at the FCC document 01-330, freely available on the FCC website, the FCC mandates stations to replicate coverage of their analog signal area with their digital signal area. (I went home this afternoon and looked it up, due to Mr. Hislop’s testimony to the contrary.)

Because of these issues, it should be obvious that Squaw Mountain is not a viable alternative site.

Now, on to Mount Morrison. Staff testified this morning that several broadcasters around the nation were contacted and asked their space requirements for their transmission equipment, and that the responses were in the range of 600 to 1500 square feet. My question for Staff is if they asked the broadcasters if those area requirements were for one transmitter or for two. According to the LCG graphic shown this morning, their space requirements of 2500 square feet are for two transmitters – both digital and analog. I suspect that the contacted stations fit one transmitter in their 600 to 1500 square feet of space.

Mr, Hart testified this morning that for the LCG stations to move to Mount Morrison, the 7 FM radio stations would have to relocate somewhere else. And it was also testified that the Spanish and the Catholic television stations would have to relocate. Where would they go? They were all part of the previous application, and to deny them access to the site where they were approved to locate would be an injustice. And, if those stations don’t relocate, then it’s obvious that there isn’t room at the Mount Morrison facility for the LCG stations.

Because of these issues, it’s clear that Mount Morrison is not a viable site for the Lake Cedar Group stations.

And, in closing, Ms. Carney’s presentation of her petition was very theatrical, wasn’t it? You should ask her how she obtained those signatures. I was leaving a grocery store when I was approached by an individual asking me to sign a petition. He told me that it was for this tower proposal, and that if I didn’t sign it, the radiation levels emanating from the new tower would be enough to, and I quote, “fry Denver like a microwave oven” unquote. I laughed at him and walked away, but if these scare tactics are the way that Ms. Carney was able to generate this many signatures, I would ask that the petition be thrown out and ignored because it’s obviously flawed.

Thank you for your time this evening, and if you have any questions, I’ll be happy to answer them.
_________________________

After I wrote it, I was able to get through it reading pretty fast in just over 3 minutes, but apparantly I ran a little longer than that last night... :)

I was only there for two hours last night, but was surprised and disappointed with all the SCARE tactics. I almost couldn't sign in because of all of the SCARE supporters pushing their no sheets. I think it was an hour before I even saw a yes button. I thought all of the SCARE commotion and noise in the hallway was a real distraction. The first thing I saw was someone from the Squaw group discrediting the signal strength map from this group. It kind of went down hill from there. I never knew there were 900 homeowners associations on Lookout Mountain!

Mark and his wife did a great job, despite being heckled by the "you're killing our babies" crowd. The video was great also.

After hearing some lady say she had driven all over Jeffco with her HDTV in her car and she could receive the low power stations wonderful everywhere in the county, and the petroleum engineer say that the diesel tank would blow up Lookout Mountain (remember it was diesel fuel that caused 911) I had enough. I hope the Commissioners can see through the BS, but I am not optimistic.

Ok, so more comments from the hearing yesterday.

Fred ended his introductory comments in the LCG presentation by saying that the care folks have abandoned the NIMBY approach and have moved into NOPE - Not On Planet Earth. So, as far as I'm concerned, the Scare folks are now the NOPEs. :D

They are doing a really good job getting the emotions worked up in the hearing room. Last night it was close to full, and most people had their kids there, so it was very loud with the kids running around and crying. Commissioner Sheehan had to interrupt speakers a couple of times to tell the parents to get the kids out of the aisles and away from the doors for fire code reasons.

So, how are the hearings proceeding...that one's pretty tough to call at this point. The morning and part of the afternoon was very positive. Commissioner Sheehan and Commissioner Hollaway were asking very good questions to several of the speakers that pretty much shot down the points they were trying to make.

We got mentioned (and blasted) in the Squaw Mountain presentation by the owners of the Squaw Mountain site. They said that most likely our results were a result of not knowing when the Squaw tests were being conducted, and that we have no documentation on when we attempted to pull in the signals. If any of you are sitting on the fence about testifying because you don't know what to say, THIS WOULD BE A GOOD TOPIC! All of our attempts to pull in the Squaw signals are well documented in this thread, probably starting somewhere between pages 130 and 200.

Commissioner Sheehan held up the stack of signup pages at the beginning of the public testimony phase last night, and there must have been 50 or 60 sheets at least in the stack. I was sitting in the 3rd row, and it looked at least an inch think. I wasn't able to stay all the way to the end yesterday, as after 12 hours of being there, my head was killing me. So, I don't know exactly when they scheduled the next hearing.

Like the way I worked SCARE into my testimony? :D That line at the end got a lot of very loud groans from the audience.

Shameless plea once again, especially for some of the newer lurkers that read, but don't post much: Please come out and tell the commissioners that you want the new tower built! You don't have to say anything more than that. There will be 400 or 500 NOPEs testifying against with 8 or 10 or maybe even 20 of us testifying for it. Every voice is needed!

I was there for about 3 hrs last night also.

But I'll post my observations later ... I feel I must go to the Parker pool this morning to wash off the bu!!sh!t that was flung around the hearing room and clense myself of the sinister radiation, since I was so close to the towers! :D

( or, they're BANANA - Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anyone!)

Well I showed up at 6:20 to do my bit and pushed my way through the SCARE people to sign up to speak. The bad news is that I did not get to speak... the LCG people were not allowed to sign up for us in the morning.

So, the next hearing is at 5 PM (I think) on July 8 to continue hearing from private citizens.

Most, but not all, of the citizens who spoke related health issues most likely caused by the radiation. One interesting guy was a prof from Mines who said that IR radiation affects some of his instruments and therefore would not allow accurate read outs. He showed a smooth curve (ie no IR radiation) and then a curve with widely variant points (ie with IR radiation). One gentlemen got up and gave a presentation spoofing this whole deal based on reality shows... like Survivor... Lookout mountain. Everybody applaued and laughed. When he was finished, the third commisioner (lady) said that was the funniest testimony she has heard in 12 years of government.

What amazed me about the evening was the continueal use of "facts" that are pulled out of their (fill in the blank)! For example, one guy said that the radiation would increase 30 times over today!! If true, that would truly be irresponsible of the stations.

Most of the SCARE people made blanket statements that the IR radiation WOULD increase even though Hart in the morning said it would not, even with additional transmitters on the tower. This issue is so confusing that the lawyer at the end of the meeting asked for actual facts to be presented at the July 8 meeting about radiation and where exactly it would go up and down.

It seems to me that LCG has not done an adequate job in explaining what will happen when everybody goes digital. They also haven't explained enough that all the other communities in the USA have transmitters on towers or mountains and have moved forward. For example, Mt. Wilson in LA has more towers and more RF than Denver and that community is working through the issues. I plan to talk about these points when I speak next week.

Finally, it seems to me that the stations do not need anywhere near their full licensed power when broadcasting digitally to cover the Denver area. Based on my experience receiving the current low power signals, I believe that a fairly low power transmitter (although more than currently used on the temporary transmitters) on this new tall tower on Lookout could do the job for coverage of the majority of the people in Denver. People further out from Denver are going to eventually get their DTV over cable or satellite anyway (or put up large YAGIs like we did). Do any of you agree with me on this?

So, why does LCG say they need all this power? They could easily say they are consolidating to one tower with absolutely much lower radiation on all open space land thereby making many more people comfortable with a win-win deal. That coupled with using technology of newer directional antennas and a firm commitment to mitigate interference problems for a LONG time could seal the deal. I have asked Pete about these points (including what other communities in the US like LA have done). He did not have answers! I hope he and his team can address these questions in some postive ways to further impress and educate both the commissioners and the people living near Lookout.

Originally posted by DennisMileHi
Finally, it seems to me that the stations do not need anywhere near their full licensed power when broadcasting digitally to cover the Denver area. Based on my experience receiving the current low power signals, I believe that a fairly low power transmitter (although more than currently used on the temporary transmitters) on this new tall tower on Lookout could do the job for coverage of the majority of the people in Denver. People further out from Denver are going to eventually get their DTV over cable or satellite anyway (or put up large YAGIs like we did). Do any of you agree with me on this?


The broadcasting market they serve extends well beyond the Denver area. They need to cover that market. The geographic area the Denver stations attempt to cover is quite large. I hate the fact that currently I must subscribe to cable or satellite to get a reasonable picture for the local analog channels. DTV should _remove_ the cable/satellite requirement, but only if I can get the signal with a reasonable antenna setup.

So, no, I don't like the idea of reduced power/coverage, which I think would only complicate DTV reception and make the transition take much longer.

Mark

Originally posted by mbuchana
The broadcasting market they serve extends well beyond the Denver area. They need to cover that market. The geographic area the Denver stations attempt to cover is quite large. I hate the fact that currently I must subscribe to cable or satellite to get a reasonable picture for the local analog channels. DTV should _remove_ the cable/satellite requirement, but only if I can get the signal with a reasonable antenna setup.

So, no, I don't like the idea of reduced power/coverage, which I think would only complicate DTV reception and make the transition take much longer.

Mark

It is interesting that KRMA says they will need only 80kW to cover the market from Mount Morrison. I guess the extra 920kW that LCG is requesting will cover it better than good enough.

-Wabisabi

Mark:

I agree with you in that whatever the market is that they cover today they need to cover just as well or better with digital.

My point is only that it could be very likely they could do that with somewhat less power for digital than they now use to allow that market to get a reasonable analog signal. As we all know, with digital, it is there and perfect or not. Icontinue to be amazed at what a good picture we can get from the Republic building with very, very low power transmitters. A market coverage question then is at what distance from Denver is the current analog signal plagued with too much ghosting or interference of some sort.

I don't think anyone knows for sure and I am guessing that digital will be much more effecient at delivering a superb picture a long way out.

I hope KRMA is right, but even they are only planning the 80kW in the short term.

Right now, from my location, I must have a carefully positioned outdoor antenna to get KDVR without dropouts. And bad weather can make things really dicey. Although power isn't the only factor, I am somewhat worried about what I'll get from KRMA-DT with their reduced-power setup.

Mark

Hi guys!
Wish I could have been there to see the NOPEs circus!

Also, note that digital reception is different, you can't watch a too-low power, digital signal. The audio/video breakups are way too distracting. With Analog, if it's snowy, but you can still watch it and understand the audio. That's why they need the full power to acceptably cover the area.

And I agree, we need another "Enthusist from our group to get up there and set the record straight about not receiving the Squaw test. If a Yea/Nay is riding on the Squaw issue, we need to make a very clear point!

Ernie, your video was really, really great! Unfortunately, they have the brightness set way to high on their video projector so the map got washed out a little bit, but the presentation went over very well I think, bringing out the snickering and catcalls from the NOPEs.

Course, I then followed it and got called the babykiller by the NOPEs - that was the point that Commissioner Sheehan interrupted and told the NOPEs to get some class... :)

Was that Sheehan telling them to get some class? I thought it was you. Great stuff.

I almost forgot my favourite moment from last night...a guy got up and told the commissioners that if they should vote Yes, he and others in the room would remember that come election time. Sheehan: "Thank you for the sentiment, however all three of us are term-limited and can't run again" LOL Shows just how much that guy follows JeffCo politics.

Don't forget about all the people (including the oncologist) that said if the tower was approved, they would move out of JeffCo. I was waiting for Comm. Sheehan to say something like 'if enough of you felt that way, we wouldn't have this problem.'

After Squaw's testimony, insisting that their tests were done fairly and scientifically, "not like the AVS groups data", and that there is no such thing as shadowing, LCG will need to attack the unsuitability of Squaw as their primary front. All other sCARE ploys and points are shacky at best, irrelevant at worst. I heard several testify about interference examples concerning hearing a radio station over a turned off TV or walkman. And how does that relate to the TV broadcasters signal? :confused:

However, what the opponents lack in accuracy and relevance, they make up for in numbers and emotion. I think we've got ourselves a real horserace here! I'm hoping the commissioners rely on their wisdom over public sentiment.

Thanks for the updates and testimony folks.

Originally posted by Geof
Thanks for the updates and testimony folks.

What he said! Ditto for me too. Thanks for your efforts guys. Great job.

I am amazed and more than a little jealous of the tenacity and positive attitiude you guys show even in the face of larger forces, ignorance, and arrogance.

You are fighting the good fight for the rest of us.

All we can say is "Thanks". And of course "Sic 'em!"

It's very difficult to keep the postive attitude going when faced with the outright lies and misconceptions that the NOPEs are putting out. Deb and Al have the residents up there so afraid for their lives that they are just about to the point of being willing to do anything or say anything to get this shot down.

Saying that, I believe that the commissioners are on top of the situation enough to see through the scare tactics. Especially Commissioner Hollaway, who I was really surprised to see ask the tough questions that the NOPEs don't want asked.

With all of that said, though, I think that Squaw Mountain is going to be a real problem. The testimony given by the owners of the Squaw site was very compelling, and trashed us as a group pretty badly. We desperately need members of this group to testify as to our findings during the Squaw test last summer. Members that both could get the signal, and those that couldn't. The commissioners need to hear from us that yes, we did in fact know when the tests were happening because we were talking about it on a daily, and usually an hourly basis. The people farther east that could get the signal need to testify that they told those of us to the west when they were getting the signal, and the people to the west need to testify that they tried to receive the signal when the people to the east told them it was on. That's the only way we are going to be able to discredit the Squaw Mountain folks, and frankly, that's the only way that the commissioners can be convinced that Squaw Mountain is NOT a viable alternative site.

The Squaw Mountain people very clearly said that there was NO SHADOW PROBLEM from Squaw. WE HAVE TO BE THE ONES TO TELL THEM THAT THERE IS A SHADOW PROBLEM!!! We proved that there is, but the commissioners have to hear it from us.

Please, come out and tell them.

I agree with Mark. Come on guys! One meeting might make the whole difference.

Let's bring the proof, like some time dated posts on the forum that state when the test was going on and responses that show we could not receive it. That'll prove that the DOPES and Squaw reps are wrong.

Isn't the fact that many viewers would be faced with re-orienting their antenna in multiple directions relevant here?

That is, even if you don't have a shadowing problem, the use of Squaw would require viewers to point toward Lookout/Morrison for some channels, and to Squaw for others. Since KRMA/KWGN/KDVR digital are going to be on Lookout/Morrison, along with nearly all of the current analog channels, it seems like that is an important factor the commissioners should consider when deciding if Squaw is a suitable alternative site.

Mark

I've got Proof!!!!!

Here's the link to my post on page 121 Dated 09/5/2003

Squaw Test Post (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=1327534#post1327534)

It's followed by a post from DP1 that says they are indeed 'On-the-Air'.

Here's another couple with proof following:
Squaw Test 2 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=1329348#post1329348)

Just print these out and present it to the commissioners. I'm sure there are more if you guys dig. I have to run.

Eat that Al, Deb, Squaw!

What does the Squaw group say about our Channel 12 Analog map? I'm pretty sure people who got at "Red Dot" on that tried when channel 12 was actually on the air :).

Thanks Guys for all your info. I was unavailable on the 1st and will be in CA on the 8th, so I can't come out, but I'm following with baited breath.

Greg

I have a question about the FCC licensed power for analog and digital television stations. It would be great to know more about this before I go to the hearings next Tuesday. It seems to me both sides on this argument are basing RF radiation on "facts" that are not clear, at least to me.

All the full power licenses for the new digital UHF stations are for 1,000 kw. The current analog VHF power amounts are from 100 kw (KRMA, KCNC, KWGN) to 316 (KUSA, KMGH), and for UHF they are 5,000 kw (KTVD, KDVR).

I was surprised by the huge difference in licensed power from VHF to UHF. Anybody know why this is? Also, the current temporary power on the UHF digital channels vary from 1.91 kw (KMGH), 11 kw (KUSA, KCNC) to 223 kw(KDVR).

Looking at other cities, it appears everybody gets 1,000 kw for a full power digital license. Why is that the amount given everywhere when the current analog amounts vary so widely? The biggest surprise is that KCNC has only 100 kw on the tallest tower, while KUSA and KMGH have over three times that much power.

Can anybody enlighten me on the logic for all of this? Thanks!

Dennis,
Hopefully Geof will chime in on the power requirements as it relates to freq. I think it goes up as you get higher in frequency (higher channel numbers) I'm sure there are many other factors besides freq that goes into the stations decision as to what power they need a license for. It may not even be the same as the ERP they operate at, they probably have some operational wiggle room.

I have heard several times from several station engineers that they are not exactly sure what power level will be "full" power for their DTV channel. I think most stations have licensed for 1Mw for DTV but will probably need less than that to cover their same viewership as analog. (and also probably less than their current analog power)

Ernie,
thanks for the homework on the Squaw coverage posts; I'll try to find some more and submit it in my testimony on the 8th (or 22nd).

I think I also heard that there aren't any available frequencies in Denver for repeaters. Not sure about that though.

Ron,

Go get em'! This should finally shut the Squaw folks up. I remember after the Morrision hearings that I presented the 'Shadow' problem, the woman from Squaw gave me a rash of sh*t about it not really being a problem (Sure, her job depends on selling that site)

Also, I would love to hear what the Genesee/Riva Chase and other HOA's have to say when they want to put another ugly tower right next to their $1,000,000 homes.
I remember the battle when they wanted to put a cell tower in Genesee. It was worse that the LCGII Hearings!

I work for a rural electric co-op and we have are constantly having problems with consumers (stating health risks, etc.) who object to our construction of new facilities. We HAVE to construct transmission lines and substations to supply electricity to our rapidly growing territory (we serve ten counties, inluding Douglas). EVERY TIME we attempt to build facilities, everyone within sight sues us!

Some of the best info debunking EMF health risks was broadcast on Frontline ("Currents of Fear", 6/13/95). Though that may seem like old news, it shows that these issues have been studied for DECADES, and still no verifiable health links have EVER been proven. I have the video and would be happy provide a copy to anyone who would like to give it to the commissioners (if you think it would be usefull). More details of the program content can be found here: http://ntskeptics.org/1995/1995september/september1995.htm.
And here is a link to the Frontline site: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/programs/categories/info/1319.html.

The most current (pardon the pun) debunking article I have seen is "No Link Seen Between Power Lines, Cancer" (The Associated Press, 6/25/03). Here's a link to the study: http://epi.grants.cancer.gov/LIBCSP/

One point you might mention at the meeting: If you are concerned about the health risks of living near the tower, you might want to know that you are in far greater danger from your electric blanket, your toaster oven, or even your can opener (and don't get me started on the danger of being out in the sun!).

Many thanks to those who are making the effort to testify!

Richard

Two of those links don't work; I'll try again:

ntskeptics.org/1995/1995september/september1995.htm

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/programs/categories/info/1319.html

I'm having a very frustrating time trying to receive WUSADT (9-1) in the Kipling & Morrison area. I believe I have the antenna pointed correctly at the downtown area because the local digital signal on WUSADT's 'physical channel 16' is consistently above 70 on the strength meter. But when I select the virtual channel 9-1, the DirecTV title bar indicates an ABC digital station outside of the Denver area.

I was able to get WUSADT (9-1) yesterday by adding a local 2 zip code in the Dish Setup Installation menu which my Hughes E86 documentation says will list additional stations in the guide. I used a downtown Denver zip code (80203). That allowed me to watch WUSADT's digital signal (9-1) until I selected a DirecTV station from the guide. At that point a message appeared saying "acquiring guide data" which destroyed the WUSADT (9-1) entry from the program guide.

I'm using a diplexer to combine the satellite and OTA antenna which is being fed into the 'satellite in' position and the local cable (Comcast) into the 'in from antenna' in position.

I called DirecTV to report a programming guide problem, but they were of no help. I don't know whether this has anything to do with the recent change of our cable from AT&T to Comcast - I can't imagine it would. But since I can consistently receive a strong signal from WUSADT's physical channel 16, I don't understand why I'm unable to retain the 9-1 programming guide entry. Has anyone else had this type of problem?

Here's one more good article from QuackWatch:
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/emf.html

Rstith -- thanks for the links. Doing a little digging, I found the WHO's Fact Sheet N183 (http://www.who.int/inf-fs/en/fact183.html) which discusses the effects of RF on humans.
WHO Fact Sheet N183
from the current scientific literature, there is no convincing evidence that exposure to RF shortens the life span of humans, induces or promotes cancer.

The statement in support of Squaw that "there's no such thing as shadowing" really has me confused in that no scientific proof of that statement was asked for. If I place a 3 watt nightlight on one bedroom wall, the floor on the other side of the bed is dark. The remedies would be to exchange the 3W bulb with a 200W bulb. The light then comes from reflecting surfaces (total reliance on reflections may cause frequent breakups/dropouts on DTV). Another way of minimizing the shadow would be to move the nightlight to the ceiling. Do they really want an extremely tall tower on Squaw or 1,000 kw? What if both are needed? I can't believe the 'magic' they expect that ignores the laws of physics, nor the fact that they can't prove any of their assertions of RF danger - all being left unchallenged. A true 'court' would not allow such garbage. I suppose that's what opens the door for lawsuits afterwards. Ok, rant mode off - is there an address for email or snailmail for those of us who are unable to attend - and would letters/emails be welcome?

Mark,
Send your letters to both:

JeffCo Commissioners (commish@co.jefferson.co.us)

Lake Cedar Group JeffCo Case Worker:
Susan Wood (swood@co.jefferson.co.us)

Do it soon, the next meeting is Tuesday.

Originally posted by Mgibsoj
The statement in support of Squaw that "there's no such thing as shadowing" really has me confused in that no scientific proof of that statement was asked for.

Actually, the quote was closer to "there is no problem with shadowing", meaning their tests showed reception in the shadowed areas.

-Wabisabi

Originally posted by mrvideo
Why? If you wait too long, Hollywood will have completely bought out Congress and the current (though limited) HD STB tuners will no longer have firewire in/out.

I recently obtained the Samsung SIR T165 STB and the JVC HM DH30000U D-VHS deck. I am large HD displayless, using the Samsung SyncMaster 171MP for my computer monitor and HD monitor.


Yeah, I was going to go that route, but from following the SIRT165 thread, it appears there are clock problems with the SIRT165 and it appears fairly beta. I'm waiting for the Dish or Tivo HD PVRs - a much nicer solution with instant access, no tape transport problems, longer recording time, and also cheaper than the 2 previous products combined. I'm also financially strapped right now (it's the economy again, stupid! :( ).

From the LCG2/station demos a few weeks ago, I came to the following conclusions and wonder if someone wants to present them at the next meeting:

1. If LCG2 is denied, the existing towers will stay indefinitely as their permits specify, and whatever current local radiation and interference problems will continue as before on Lookout Mountain.

2. If LCG2 is accepted, local radiation and interference levels will be reduced by the new directional antenna replacing 4? existing antennas. There will then be 3 fewer antenna eyesores on the landscape.

SCARE folks, which do you prefer: #1 - existing situation radiation and interference, or #2 - less radiation and interference?

3. If Sqaw Mountain is used instead of Lookout Mountain for the antennas, those living close to the foothills (that's mostly Jefferson Co. residents) will not have HDTV reception since the foothills block the signal from the more distant Sqaw Mountain.

Point #3 should be of special interest to Jefferson Co. residents, the very community the commissioners represent.

Originally posted by markdl
A quick update on this morning’s hearing thus far up to the lunch break:

Then Staff had their presentation. Same as at the planning commission hearings. Still harping about how the applicant hasn’t disproved Morrison and Squaw as potential sites. Everything else has been covered. They wanted time to review the “new” information that LCG presented this morning. There wasn’t anything new in it.

Jim Hart then testified. He really needs to learn how to speak to his audience. He went VERY technical, and it was well above the heads of the commissioners, and me as well. I had no idea about what some of the stuff he was talking about. The commissioners looked annoyed.


Who is/are Staff?

Who is Jim Hart? LCG2 person?

Timeshifter,
(S)Care has the entire comunity 'Brainwashed' into thinking that if this application does not get passed, ALL the towers will amazingly just be taken down & dissappear. I think Ron or someone spoke with some residents at the last meeting and they kept insisting the existing towers are illegal and will all come down. She really has them bamboozled!

I wish we had the manpower for one of us to get up there and use the 3 minutes to just set the record straight on what will or will not happen. (If they would believe it)

HDTimeShifter,
Your three points are accurate and have been made and will be made again, at least one more time during my testimony.

Staff is the jefferson county planning staff that does the leg work on applications (wabisabi, go ahead and correct me) for the planning commission to recommend to the Board of County Commisioners that they should either approve or deny the application.

Ernie,
I hope to set the record straight in an as effective way I can with my 3 minutes of fame.

Originally posted by santellavision
Timeshifter,
(S)Care has the entire comunity 'Brainwashed' into thinking that if this application does not get passed, ALL the towers will amazingly just be taken down & dissappear. I think Ron or someone spoke with some residents at the last meeting and they kept insisting the existing towers are illegal and will all come down. She really has them bamboozled!

I wish we had the manpower for one of us to get up there and use the 3 minutes to just set the record straight on what will or will not happen. (If they would believe it)

Someone needs to just say, "the existing antennas are legal by permit and can remain forever. Do you want to pass LCG2 to remove antennas and reduce radiation, or do you want to fail LCG2 and keep the status quo radiation? Those are your 2 choices."

I sent an Email to the Commissioners Saturday.

1) Didn't want to dwell a lot on radiation, but they did make a special note to let us know that smoking has indeed been declared as hazardous. I questioned just how concerned is anyone about their health who still smokes and testifies against the proposal based on health hazards from radiation. I also mentioned the affects of ultraviolet rays.

2) I did not get to check out the Squaw Mountain test wasn't aware it was on, but it seems obvious there will be problems on the west side.

3)I stated that the LCG2 proposal on the table was the best option for all concerned. Reason is we know what we are getting. Should this get turned down the game changes, what is proposed go's out the door and we are probably going to get stuck with something much worse.

Guys,
I really want to complement you on the effort you are putting into all of this for the LCG. If you need to discuss Squaw, just tell everyone to go home and turn on channel 12 to see how good the coverage is.

As for me, this will be a busy week for me as I will spend most of the evenings visiting some long lost "Dead" relatives at Red Rocks beginning tonight. Sorry I will be unavailable on Tuesday too.
;)

Thanks for the email addresses santellivision - emails sent. Here's the body:

Acceptance of the proposal will improve the Lookout landscape by reducing the number of towers. At the same time, the RF energy is controlled to a lower level by taking advantages of technical advances over the past 50 years and also allows residents to keep pace with technical advances in digital television. Approval of the LCG proposal would be a win-win situation, It would be most unfortunate for Denver to be noted nationally as the only city to be unable to cope with the transition to digital television as mandated by the FCC - that would be a lose-lose situation, and I have no doubt of that. The use of Squaw Mountain, as documented tests using digital television receivers show, yields unacceptable reception conditions for some, and at the same time will require a large number of other viewers to install antenna rotators just to receive Denver's stations. This would not be a step in the right direction.

I also have a concern with the disservice that CARE is doing to your residents. Their actions have undoubtedly and unduly caused panic, not dissimilar to shouting "Fire" in a theater without a fire being present. Those people inside will not first look for the fire, they will panic and run, hence the laws against it. Shouting "Radiation" to the community has the same effect when there is no evidence, either scientific or medical, that the levels proposed will be of any consequence. The residents will not first research the need for concern, they will just become frightened. In fact, the evidence exists that there is no cause for concern. Yet, they shout "Radiation" to your public. Not only do they prey on the public's fear for their benefit, they also mock our legal system's ability to remedy their tactics against our society.

I ask that you do the right thing - approve the LCG proposal to improve the tower situation on Lookout and allow all residents in and around Denver to join with the rest of our country in the transition to digital television. It is simply wrong to go against the grain of our country. We can and should become part of our nation of cities that now serve their entire community with digital television.

It sure would be nice if we could get the sCAREd group to come to there senses. We all know of the advantages and why this proposal should be approved. Not going into details we already know them.
It appears obvious they cannot get the fact that RF energy levels will be going down not up by 9 times as they claim. Plus the fact those towers are never going away and this may mean that they may never see this RF energy reduction. Guess they are willing to take a risk I would want no part of.
There is no doubt about it we would love to see them change there position which isn't going to happen. So we must convince the commissioner's this is the right thing to do. Accept the current proposal.
You know what you are getting. I am sure what would happen later will be much worse and there will be no recourse.
Hopefully they are having a town meeting at this time which includes reading this forum and realize this is a good thing.

I don't think they're arguing that RF is going up 9 times. I think they're arguing that the watts emitted will go up 9 times. They commissioners have already asked the LCG reps to address this: a) is it true? b) if so, is it necessary? So they should have a good answer for the commissioners on Tuesday night.

sCAREd -- I like that. It better represents the mentality of the people who are there screaming and ranting about their kids safety (again, I call on the JeffCo sheriff to arrest ANY parent on child abuse charges who is convinced that the radiation on Lookout is going to give their kids leukemia who doesn't move off the mountain immediately)

Moderators Note: Sorry for the off topic comments, which have been removed.

Originally posted by Ken H
Moderators Note: Sorry for the off topic comments, which have been removed.

Ken, Thanks for the help.

HDTimeshifter - Jim Hart is the president of Hartech, which is the engineering consultant hired by Jefferson County for the RF concerns.

I received an email from Broadcasting & Cable magazine this morning. They are working on a story about the Denver situation and wanted to know how the hearings are proceeding and my thoughts on them. I've already sent them my initial thoughts and will continue to do so as the hearings progress.

A couple of emails from Pete over the last few days to pass along as well. First, from last Wednesday after the first day of hearings:


Greetings,

I want to thank Mark and his wife, Dennis, David, Phil, and Ron for coming out yesterday. If I missed anyone, my thanks to you too. It was a long day but positive. Mark did a great job. I loved the line about how he’s been struggling the last several years to pull that RF they are so afraid of into his house so he can watch HD.

I read the postings on the hearings and they certainly summarize the meeting well – as much as you can summarize 13 hours. At this point, I feel even more strongly than I did before hand that our biggest issue, perhaps our lone issue, will be Squaw Mountain. We’ve spent much of the last 24 hours already working on our rebuttal.

I’d greatly appreciate speakers on our behalf at the upcoming meeting(s.) The next meeting is Tuesday, July 8, at 5:00 pm. As Mark noted, we can’t sign people up. If you did attend last night and signed yourself up, you do not need to do so again. If not, you’ll have to sign up. Speakers are first come; first served. We have obtained a copy of the sign up lists. After reviewing it, we’ll have a better idea tomorrow the likelihood of the meeting wrapping up on the 8th vs being continued to another day. I’ll shoot out another email then.


And then, another email that I received yesterday from Pete:


Friends,

Following up on my earlier email regarding Tuesday’s hearing. A huge majority of the people on the list chose not to speak. There are only 86 persons on the list signed up to speak so if you come Tuesday, it is likely that you’ll be able to sign up and speak that evening. Thanks for support. As I’ll be in town next week, you can reach me on my cell: XXX-XXX-XXXX


If you want Pete's number, PM or email me and I'll get it to you. The 86 number is surprising. Commissioner Sheehan held up a stack of signup sheets that was at least and inch thick, if not thicker. Each sheet had 10 to 15 lines on it. We can still get this thing passed if we band together and stand up to the scare tactics and Squaw tactics! Tell the commissioners that Squaw won't work!

Let's see... 86 speakers times 4 minutes (3 mins allowed, plus 30 seconds over time limit rambling, plus 30 seconds to get the next speaker ready) equals 344 minutes. Thats more than 5 and a half hours. If we say half won't show up, and twenty new speakers sign up, then we have four and a quarter hours (roughly). And don't forget that Mt. Morrison and at least one HOA have asked for time at ten minutes each.

I have a feeling that this will not be over until at least one more hearing.

-Wabisabi

I agree, wabisabi. No to mention the LCG and Staff rebuttals. There's no way this thing will end tomorrow night. Hopefully the 3rd hearing will be sooner rather than later. I really got the feeling the commissioners want this thing over with ASAP.

I think part of the problem is that todays society is to focused on the present and will worry about the future when it gets here.
So how can we convince the commissioners ( they are the final decision makers) that this is the best solution for the opposition. The present is not near as important as long term(future). We all know that if this is proposal is not approved those towers are not going to disappear from lookout or what the RF levels might be.
Two things need to be accomplished. 1) Convince the commissioners ( something we can't) over the long term this is the best solution for the sCAREd group. 2) Convince them Squaw Mountain is unacceptable.

Maybe after this is approved CARE will stand for:
Commissioners
Are
Radiation
Educated

I'm not sure if they'll read it but I sent the commisioners and Ms. Wood an email. I'm a Jefferson County resident and will try to attend tomorrow. Does just being there have an impact or do I need to testify? And if so, is it too late to sign up?
Thanks,
Jason

jcardona,
Speaking will definately have more impact. You may be able to arrive at 6PM and sign-up and speak that evening. A JeffCo resident in favor of the application is seldom seen speaking up. Don't worry -- the rest of us AVS will protect you while you're at the podium!

Lawood,
Great FLA (four-letter-acronym) and welcome

Ron, and Jason, and anyone else - I believe the hearing tomorrow is scheduled to start at 5pm, not 6.

It'd be really great if you spoke Jason. Doesn't have to be long winded (in fact better if it's not) or eloquent. But it helps balance the number of speakers against the application a little bit in the commissioners minds.

I don't get off of work until 5:30. Do I have to be there at exactly 5:00 in order to speak? If I sign up when I arrive, will I be the last speaker? I'm not sure if I can work for 10 hours and then go to the meeting for another 5 hrs. The wife would kill me.

I'm just wondering if LCG2 is important to the member TV stations, why they haven't used their commercial time to air the issue to the viewers and why the proposal is good for HDTV? At the very least, they could produce an editorial.

Sorry, I can't make the meeting. I've been sick as a dog with a nasty cold and can barely speak now. I'll just have to stay home and continue watching analog TV...

At about 5:45 am, 9 News did a story on the hearings today. They interviewed Deb Carney at the JeffCo. Center, who made the following remarks:
1. New tower will mean more radiation and interference.
2. Lookout Mountain has been zoned residential for 50 years.
3. Questioned better aethestics - new tower is much bigger - it requires all sorts of guide wires to hold it up.
4. Alternate locations are available.

They then interviewed the LCG attorney, who only said, "we belive our proposal is sound".

Any minute now, after 6:30 am, there should be a more extensive interview with the LCG attorney. Hopefully he will rebuke Ms. Carney's points.

Maybe one of you guys should e-mail or call 9 News to get an interview and express your thoughts as "Joe Q. viewer".

I just saw the followup story on 9 News with interview with Fred Nielson, attorney for LCG. He made the following points:
1. Digital antenna is mandated by FCC.
2. We are the only market other than NYC without DTV.
3. New tower consolidates 3 (or 4?) towers and as a result will have less radiation and interference.
4. Local jurisdiction will have enforcement control - something most other markets don't have.

Re-interview with Deb Carney had her again falsely say more radiation.

At the 2 recent LCG meetings, I missed out on why the new tower will be designed with guide wires. Is it because it is a smaller structure that doesn't support itself?


Jason, I think a Jeffco resident's words will be paid more attention to by the commissioners than outsiders. Maybe if you sign up at 5 pm and estimate that you won't be speaking for a few hours, you could go home, and when it gets near your timeslot, an LCG supporter could page or call you to come back? Just a thought. Isn't technology marvelous? :)

Jason - honestly with 86 people in front of you already signed up to speak, and with more signing up to speak tonight, I doubt you'd get to speak before the very end tonight, if at all. And the problem with the way the signup sheets work is you get about 6 minutes notice before it's your turn at the podium. I'd suggest swinging by to sign up at least, and then playing the odds. It's certainly possible that you'd be near the top of the list for the next hearing date, whenever that will be. Also, the way it works at these hearings, once all of the signed up people testify, the commissioners will ask everyone in the audience if there's anyone else who wants to testify that hasn't signed up. Usually there are a few. After that, public testimony is closed. Honestly, I don't see it getting that far tonight, but I've been wrong before. :)

We've been asking the stations for a long time now why they aren't promoting the proposal on air. The reason is always the same - this is a political battle that they have a persoanl stake in, and as such feel that if they use their very public influence to push the agenda, it'd be looked on very disfavorably by the commissioners.

And the guy wires - from a structural standpoint, any tower or tall, thin structure even remotely close to this height requires guy wires for support, otherwise the wind loads and snow loads would cause failure. The way around this would be to make the base of the tower much wider, but then it starts getting pretty ugly to look at. The NOPEs are claiming that the tower will require 3" diameter cables to hold it up, while the current KCNC tower (the tall one) uses 5/8" diameter cables. I haven't seen the tower plans, but I seriously doubt, speaking from an engineering perspective, that the new tower would require cables much larger than what is up there already.

Current tower sCAREd argument: the tower's aren't safe -- they'll fall on our homes with such puny guy wires holding them!

New tower sCAREd argument: OK, so the new tower won't fall on our homes -- but those guy wires are too thick, now the tower's ugly!

:rolleyes:

The county attorney did ask LCG to confirm at tonight's hearing the thickness of the guy wires for the proposed tower and whether the thickness proposed was structurally necessary.

I can't believe all of this over a 300' guyed tower......

There are taller cell sites here...

TV towers are from 600-1500ft.....
With 3/4" to 1"+ guy wires..

Markdl,
I probably will stop by after work (5:30). When is the cut-off time to register to speak. You are probably right that the likelihood of me speaking tonight is slim. It seems that everytime there is a hearing, I have to work. By the way, what floor is the meeting held and where do all the AVS'ers sit?
Thanks,
Jason

William - Here is the tower I want to see them put on Lookout:

http://hawkins.pair.com/star_tower.html

This is in a residential area in Cincinnati.

I will be at the hearing tonight. :)

Originally posted by William Smith
I can't believe all of this over a 300' guyed tower...... The proposed tower is 730' above ground level, not 300'.

jcardona,
I don't think there is a cutoff time to sign up to speak until public testimony id closed. It's in hearing room one, 1st floor. Just come in the front door and go left -- you'll be able to hear it. The AVS don't sit anywhere special. You might be able to pick us out, as the ones other people are frowning upon.

Okay I must have been thinking about another site in the Denver area..

Still seems silly...

Personal observation is that if CARE wants the towers down that bad there is an easy solution... BUY the stations...

Jason, you can sign up to speak at any time during the proceeding until the public testimony phase is closed. Signup sheets will be on the tower outside the hearing room. I'll be sitting toward the left side, wearing a burgandy polo shirt, wearing a VOTE YES FOR THE TOWER button (if I can find it). :)

Hey Jason -- I look quite a bit like the guy to the left with a donut in his face. Except I won't have a donut tonight. I'm wearing a tan, short-sleeved shirt and blue jeans. I will be wearing my "Yes! I support tower consolidation" button.

I'll probably be late as well, but there doesn't seem to be much danger of me missing my time to speak.

County commissioners to hear testimony on TV high definition tower
from http://www.9news.com/storyfull.asp?id=16231


they have a link to the video from this morning...

I'll try and make it tonight too!

-John

Thanks for the link, pookers. I thought that was an excellent piece that they did. It's a shame that it wasn't done on the 5pm or the 10pm newscasts.

The 3D video animation that was shown is part of the LCG application presentation - it shows the current conditions, and then what Lookout Mountain will look like with the 4 towers replaced by the new tower.

Good interview Fred!

I wish I could be there! Good Luck Guys! Can't wait to read the details.

I was able to attend for a short period of time (6:00 - 6:45). This is my first meeting. I couldn't believe the crap the NOPES talk about. The more they talk, the more they contradict themselves.

One older gentleman said that he has lived on Lookout Mtn. since 1953. He tried to start a business copying tapes so he could earn money to send his son to college. His business failed because of the interference he was experiencing to his equipment. He stated that he called Public Service and they sent engineers to evaluate his situation. Their results, the power lines were causing the interference!! And what does this have to do with the towers?

I also liked the woman who was talking when I got there about how children are more susceptible to RF because the wavelength of HDTV penetrates their bodies better because of their height!!!

It was so apparent that the speakers were not well educated regarding the proposal they are fighting. I just hope that the chairmen can sift through all of this **** and make an educated, non-emotional decision.

Jason

Originally posted by JMartinko
Ken, Thanks for the help. My pleasure. I would have acted earlier, but no one let me know action was needed. An AVS PM can do wonders, in these matters.

Hey guys, I was going to post some thought tonight, but my car wouldn't start after the meeting (hmm...CARE sabotage? :)) After several attempts to start it, including getting a boost from Scott (with LCG), we ended up giving up (we don't know cars) and he gave me a lift all the way back here.

I guess I'll be back at JeffCo tomorrow morning to get my car towed/repaired/whatever.

(Al, I'm joking [somewhat] about CARE sabotage, although I did notice that nobody from CARE stopped to help me :( It was left to the cold, heartless SOBs from LCG to help me out)

Originally posted by Phil T
William - Here is the tower I want to see them put on Lookout:

http://hawkins.pair.com/star_tower.html

This is in a residential area in Cincinnati.


Heh, heh! We could turn it into the Lookout Tower - major tourist attraction for Denver, kind of like Paris! :rolleyes:

I take it the meeting was not complete and there will be a part 3 for more testimony? Anybody know the schedule for when the commissioners will make the actual vote?

Hey guys, I was going to post some thought tonight, but my car wouldn't start after the meetingI bet it was due to 'Interference' from the towers. Oh, wait... that interference only makes wheelchairs fly off the mountain. ;)

Take a look at Jim's WLW page... I have visited the 500,000 watt "amplifier" and the 1928 Western Electric 50 Kw "exciter" Audio amplifier stages were over a a megawatt of audio power (hook that to your home theater!)..


and the 700 ft plus Blaw-Knox Tower...

First things first. There were 11 people last night that testified in favor of the tower (including dr_mal, Ron Auger, and DennisMileHi). Guys, please post the text of your testimony - it was all really excellent. There were roughly 80 or so that testified against the tower. The hearing was continued to Tuesday July 22nd at 9:00AM There are 37 more people that signed up last night that they didn't get to speak before 10:00, so assuming that there aren't 300 more people that sign up to speak on the 22nd, that's the date the decision should happen.

Random observations from last night first: Every time a supporter of the application spoke, they were met with catcalls and interruptions from the NOPEs. Very rude. I believe it was after Dennis testified, Commissioner Sheehan joked that Dennis would need the help of the 3 Jeffco deputies in attendence to get out of the building alive. I certainly understand that feeling! There were several women that testified for the tower that I haven't met. Don't know if they read this thread or not, but if you do, thanks for the testimony! And, very interestingly, for just about every NOPE testimony (80 speakers basically repeated the same 3 points over and over and over again), Commissioner Holloway and Commissioner Lawrence appeared very bored, and even sleeping at times. I can't say I can blame them either - there's only so many times you can hear the same thing without starting to tune it out. And, Don Rooney from KWGN sent a letter that Susan Wood presented to the commissioners that stated he had very grave concerns about KCNC moving to Squaw and completely obliterating his signal from Lookout.

Two really big kickers that were total surprises to us last night. First, 3 residents of Squaw Mountain testifed. The first one basically said Hey we don't want the tower! How can the Lookout Mountain residents possibly justify causing all of the health problems that they seem to care so much about to the residents that live on Squaw Mountain. She also said that the Squaw Mountain owners DO NOT have approval and zoning to put the towers on Squaw Mountain like they claimed to in their testimony, and that the residents would unanimously fight towers going up there to the Clear Creek County BCC. The second speaker talked about all of the lightning strikes and power outages they suffer on Squaw Mountain, and how the Squaw transmitter site isn’t on a dedicated power grid, so power outages would occur frequently. The third speaker testified to the really bad road conditions leading up to the Squaw transmitter site, and how it can take days for the county to clear the snow off the roads, how it can take fire trucks more than an hour to travel the 9 miles they would have to to get to the site, and how the switchbacks on the road would make it impossible for vehicles larger than a firetruck to get to the site. All in all, extremely compelling testimony from them as to why Squaw Mountain isn’t a viable transmitter site. Those 3 may have sealed the deal against Squaw!

The second really big kicker was testimony from the owner of the Mt. Morrison Site. His was individual testimony that was separate from the official Mt. Morrison testimony earlier in the evening, but he was allowed more than 10 minutes to speak because Commissioner Lawrence wanted to hear everything he had to say. And he said a mouthful. He made it very clear that he wants to get the stations on the air digitally ASAP, both in his testimony and in the conversation that David and I had with him after the proceedings. He supports the application, but testified to the commissioners that he would give the LCG stations whatever it took to get them on the air, including hosting their digital transmitters RENT FREE for 2 or 3 years. He said that he would give them each 2500sf of building space if that’s what they really need, and that it makes no sense whatsoever for KTVD to leave Mt. Morrison. They could be on the air “tomorrow” from their current tower just by adding the transmitter and the equipment to their building. KTVD has a lease on Mt. Morrison until 2007 anyways. He did testify that he was uncomfortable having all of the major stations broadcasting from the same location, and that the ideal solution would be to have some of them broadcasting from Mt. Morrison and some from Lookout. All in all, it was very subtly powerful testimony in a country lawyer style that the commissioners paid very close attention to. And I don’t know if it helped or hurt LCG’s case. It was pretty hard for me to tell.

Other than those points, the rest of the testimony was more of the same. Lots of people talking about how their neighbors have died from cancer. One guy brought a tin that he said had his dog’s ashes in it because the radiation killed his dog. Etc. Etc. Etc. All more of the same.

Yeah, what markdl said :)

Couple of other notes:

3 people testified that they were considering starting families, but are now afraid of what the radiation will do to their pregnancies and children. I think the real tragedy here is that Deb's games are causing people to be living in fear like that. No matter her agenda, that's inexcusable. Then again, one of the ladies who was in tears about her decision whether to start a family or not was laughing and high-fiving the CARE folks on her way back to her seat (with her back turned to the commissioners), so who knows.

The Morrison guy Mark talked about was none other than Leo Bradley. He's the guy that owns the land the new Morrison tower's going on. He owns the land on Table Mountain -- remember when he wanted to put the Nike building up there? I found it very interesting that he's willing to host 4, 7, and 9's digital transmitters for free. He's a businessman. He's not in the business of doing things for free. Either he's genuinely concerned about helping them meet the FCC deadline, or he's got something up his sleeve -- some way to make money off of this. Of course, in private discussion with him after the meeting, he insisted he'd take their digitals for free for now, and then when they shut off their analogs, they'd be free to use their existing towers on Lookout to broadcast digital. I talked to Pete, Scott, and Fred about his offer, and they're all a little wary to say the least. Like Mark, I'm not sure what this does to the proposal's chances of passing.

Squaw - apparently the Squaw folks are licensed for 3 RADIO towers -- not TV. They've been claiming all along they could put up TV towers, but they don't have the permits to do that. The local residents from Squaw that made the trip out made it clear they'd fight a brand-new tower farm on Squaw for the same reasons CARE is fighting the Lookout situation. The difference of course being that this proposal HELPS Lookout Mountain in every conceivable way.

Also, Al Hislop stopped by on the way out of the hearings and greeted me by my "dr_mal" nickname. So we know he's still reading here. Funny thing -- he had on a "Tower Proposal NO" badge and a "YES - I support Tower Consolidation" button. He told us (with a big smile on his face) that the radiation must be making him schizophrenic. :) Thanks for keeping your sense of humour about this Al. It's refreshing to see someone who's not blindly histerical.

Mark -- minor correction, as an individual, Leo was given 3 minutes of time, not 10, but Lawrence wouldn't let him be cut off by Sheehan (who was doing a good job of reminding people when their 3 minutes were up) because she wanted to hear his full testimony. It was after the 3 minute time frame that he dropped the "free DTV rent for 4, 7, and 9" bomb.

Final thought: Scott from LCG was nice enough to give me a lift home last night (I'm waiting for the rental car company to come get me so I can get the car into a mechanic today) and we had a nice long chat (long way from JeffCo to Brighton) about the proposal. I don't think it would be appropriate to post what we talked about, but it was an interesting chat.

I don't think it would be appropriate to post what we talked about, but it was an interesting chat.


oh come on, now tell us a few bits and pieces, it's not like it's a secret!

Yeah, what markdl and dr_mal said:)

[my testimony]
I asked the board if it would be permitted to address two questions to the people assembled in the hearing room. Comm. Sheehan seemed to be taken off guard and at first said no, I had to address the board - then said I could ask him and he would ask the audience.

"First question: Who here is opposed to this application?"

Comm Sheehan repeated to the crowd who showed an enthusiastic majority of hands. [I didn't notice if the LCG folks were cringing at this point].

"As expected, let's just say many, many hands were raised. Second question: Who would like to keep Lookout Mtn exactly the way it is now, with the same number of towers and RF levels?"

Comm Sheehan repeated the question. Two hands were raised. One person shouted "you mean as opposed to the supertower? Yes!" Comm. Sheehan just repeated the question exactly as I posed it.

"I saw two hands. I submit to the Commissioners that I posed the same question twice, just worded differently. The questions should've received the same number of hands." [At this point there were many groans, hoots, and generally uncomfortable sounds to hear coming from behind me] I then just stated that if denied, the broadcasters would put their DTV transmitter elsewhere, temporarily, like dowtown. And when analog is shut off, they would broadcast DTV from Lookout from the same existing towers and antennas. "Don't miss this opportunity, the only one you have, to improve the situation on Lookout.

At 10PM while walking out, the man that shouted during my testimony, said to me "I hope you can sleep well tonight". I was taken by surprise and didn't have anything witty to say, and frankly, just wanted to get out of there and go home [Sorry dr_mal, I didn't know you were stuck!] One observation I was struck with: I noticed a recurring theme in the NOPE testimonies. Very often people said 'I've lived in the area for 2 years / 10 years / 6 months and have RECENTLY been talking to people and have gotten very angry over the situation.' Some said they never gave the towers a second thought until they "talked to people" and were now afraid for their lives. CARE has done a good job of turning ambivalence into frenzied hysteria. I think this board has seen it so much, they recognize it for what it is. Whatever the boards decision is, and I still think its a real crapshoot, I feel comfortable that they are doing the best job they can weighing the facts. I believe they recognize that sentiment has its place in these proceedings and shouldn't be totally ignored, but that is not the place to base decisions.

Originally posted by dr_mal

Mark -- minor correction, as an individual, Leo was given 3 minutes of time, not 10, but Lawrence wouldn't let him be cut off by Sheehan (who was doing a good job of reminding people when their 3 minutes were up) because she wanted to hear his full testimony. It was after the 3 minute time frame that he dropped the "free DTV rent for 4, 7, and 9" bomb.


Yeah, what David said. :) That's what I was trying to get across...just didn't quite make it out that way.

Yeah, what (see above) said. :D

It was great seeing all of you there last night even though we were way out numbered!

It was good to see the Squaw folks show up and state their case.

It does look like Leo has something up his sleeve (probably in the best interest of Leo).

The LCG rebuttal should be interesting (If we ever get there).

:) Yeah! What Mark and David and Ron said:

Mark suggested that we post the text of our presentation to the LCG hearings. Well, I didn’t have a detailed prepared text as I prefer to speak directly to the commissioners without just reading a prepared “speech.” That said, I did want to relate my experiences and feelings about the situation to them. Here are some of the points I made.

I stated that I was on the board of my HOA representing a community of 377 homes in unincorporated Arapahoe County. I was not speaking for our HOA, other than to let them know that many people in our neighborhood would like to be able to receive digital TV signals now without a lot of effort.

I pointed out that ALL the other major communities in the US have faced the issue of the TV transition to digital, resolved it and are moving on. Early last year, when I personally started to look into receiving a HD DTV signal, I told them that I thought I would be able to point a simple antenna towards Lookout and get digital signals. Obviously, I have now learned what the actual situation is. And, after looking into the history and the current LCG proposal, I explained that I believed it was an excellent win-win solution with much better visual appeal and that there would, in fact, be lower RF radiation when the conversion to digital was complete.

I also said that even though there was no convincing evidence that RF radiation caused human abnormalities, I believed that the amount of power to transmit a digital signal to the entire Denver market area could be far less than the total FCC licensed digital power of 1,000 kw. I mentioned that KRMA was going to begin their transmissions with a low power digital signal. My belief that digital TV will be more efficient was based on my experience receiving a superb picture from the very low power temporary transmitters now being used. I also went on to say that if convincing evidence is found a few years from now proving that high RF radiation could cause some health problems, obviously government and people here as well as around the country would take steps to lower power to mitigate any real problems. Nevertheless, I believe this would be a very unlikely event and the commissioners should not hold up approving the LCG tower proposal now, based on unsubstantiated and unproven health evidence.

Lastly, I said I used to live in the Los Angeles area and that there were many more transmitters and RF radiation there on Mt. Wilson than on our Lookout. Despite that, the LA community has worked together to resolve any issues and have plans for their digital TV conversion. Since Denver is the only major community without a plan, I asked the commissioners to approve the LCG proposal and move on. The NOPE people apparently didn’t like anything I said. And, as Mark stated, when I finished, Commissioner Sheehan did jokingly suggest I would need the Sheriff to escort me safely out of the building.

Another common thread with the NOPE people was that the commissioners should listen to their constituents, 97% of which are against the proposal. While the commissioners are term limited, I think it somewhat likely they may be swayed by the number of people in JeffCo that testified against the "SuperTower" even if it was based on emotion. One guy even threatened that the commissioners would be "career limited" in the future if they approved the LCG proposal.

At the final hearing on the 22nd, I think it is very important that LCG answer the open questions and inaccuracies with a factual, honest and caring rebuttal without showing arrogance. It IS really sad that the Lookout residents have been targeted by sCARE and are now so afraid of their health being ruined with RF radiation. I hope, for their sake, the ongoing CSU health study might finally put the RF issue to rest.

Originally posted by RonAuger
At 10PM while walking out, the man that shouted during my testimony, said to me "I hope you can sleep well tonight".
Interesting your testimony consisted of nothing but facts. Doesn't it always happen get caught with no comeback. Maybe better off anyway.
By the way Ron I should be testifying The 22nd. If there is anything you would like me to say regarding this just give the words to say.

Nothing to being branded a babykiller like I was last week during my testimony... :rolleyes: Anyway, the deputies are there to keep us safe from the angry mob! :D

Lawood, talk about what you're comfortable talking about. It'll come across much more real and important to the commissioners if you speak what you are passionate about, than if someone else writes a script for you. Tell them that you want 1 tower up on Lookout rather than 4, that you want to be able to watch HD without a monstrous antenna on your roof, that you don't believe the health hazards exist, that if they do exist, the FCC will change the standards when it's been proven, or anything else that you want to talk about. It just needs to be to the point and real. That's what gets the commissioners attention. Thanks for coming out! I'll be there as well...been there since the beginning - not going to miss the end of this one! Hopefully we'll be partying in the streets by 2 or 3 on the 22nd! :D

Originally posted by markdl
Lawood, talk about what you're comfortable talking about.
Mark. I already have my testimony ready to go and it contains what you are asking for. I just wanted to know if I should include a short blurb. Any response is probably better left unsaid. After all it wouldn't be very professional to act like them anyway.

Oh yeah, one more cool thing (in addition to what Mark, me, Ron, Dennis, ah, forget it :))

There was one guy that got up to speak. We didn't catch his name. He said he was there to support the tower since it would provide HDTV. He said he represents about 1.5 million people in the metro area who want HDTV. He asked the rhetorical question "Why aren't those people here? Because they don't know what they're missing"

That was great.

Just noticed that the Comcast web site has some HDTV info.

http://www.comcastcolorado.com/ComcastColorado/high_def_tv.html



Steve

dr_mal,

Did they ever call me to testify last night after I left?
Thanks,
Jason

Jason, I don't remember your name being called. Did you sign up just last night? Regardless, you can testify on 7/22 if you can take the time off during the day.

Has no one noticed that KDVR-DT is off the air? (or have I missed a post a ways back?)

Ron,

I did sign up yesterday. I'm hoping that I can get the time off 7/22. I usually have to work Tuesdays. What time is the hearing? After hearing all of the NOPES crap, I'm excited about testifying

It starts at 9AM and will go until everyone is heard, and LCG gets rebuttal time too. Not sure if the BCC will make a decision that day or not. Probably safer for them if they did it as a press release instead of live.

Originally posted by RonAuger
Jason, I don't remember your name being called. Did you sign up just last night? Regardless, you can testify on 7/22 if you can take the time off during the day.
Jason -- you weren't called. They did start calling people who signed up last night, but didn't get to your name. You should be fairly early on the 22nd if you want to take maybe a half-day off or something.

Originally posted by RonAuger
Has no one noticed that KDVR-DT is off the air? (or have I missed a post a ways back?)
What with it being rerun season, I haven't been checking local OTA too much lately. I did notice KDVR off the air about a month ago (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2287912#post2287912), but their station engineer seemed to think they'd be back on shortly. More equipment problems that they were having to resolve with the vendor IIRC.

If this plays out like the Morrison hearings, on the 22nd, we'll finish public testimony, LCG will have a chance to rebut, staff and Jim Hart will have their final input, Squaw will ask to rebut LCG's rebuttal and be told they can't, CARE will ask to rebut LCG's rebuttal (oh wait, they were already told they couldn't, never mind) and then the commissioners will have a bunch of questions they want answered before they vote. They'll continue the hearings for another month or so, at which time LCG will have an opportunity to answer all their questions. Then they'll vote. Of course, this could play out differently. Just offering some perspective.

I may have missed it, but what does NOPE stand for? This is a new group or faction that previously I've only been aware of CARE.

In an aside, what aspect ratio does the Sci-Fi cable channel show movies in? It's not 14:9, more like 20:9, since when I zoom on my widescreen, there is still space above and below.

It's back, not sure when it went off, i think a few days back, but it's back, I watch my losing POWERBALL numbers come up. Looks like I have to stick around at work. Wait a minute, I still can't get a signal on KMGH-DT are they on the air?

Continuing....
KUSA-DT needs to sync up their commercials and the show they are sending out. One minute it's in 4:3, then it's back to widescreen. And the sound..Yikes!one minute I can hear LAW& ORDER, next minute the sound goes out!

Originally posted by HDTimeShifter
I may have missed it, but what does NOPE stand for
It's our description of the CARE group. Not just NIMBYs (not in my back yard) but NOPEs (not on planet earth). Also BANANAs (build absolutely nothing anywhere near anybody).

David, for some reason I don't think that the commissioners will continue the case after the 22nd. The LCG guys were ready for rebuttal on Tuesday night, and they'll be ready to answer the commissioners' questions on the 22nd. My impression is that the BCC wants to get this case done and over with NOW, rather than drag it out any longer. And I can't think of a better time for them to announce approval of the application than in the middle of a work day when most of the NOPEs aren't there. It'd have to be easier on them than announcing it at 10:30 at night to a packed room of detractors. But, that's just my opinion.

Originally posted by dr_mal


Squaw - apparently the Squaw folks are licensed for 3 RADIO towers -- not TV. They've been claiming all along they could put up TV towers, but they don't have the permits to do that. The local residents from Squaw that made the trip out made it clear they'd fight a brand-new tower farm on Squaw for the same reasons CARE is fighting the Lookout situation. The difference of course being that this proposal HELPS Lookout Mountain in every conceivable way.



Please note that just because a citizen who lives near a tower site states a "fact" about the zoning of the site, it doesn't mean that the "fact" is true. To find out what the zoning allows, you would need to either read the zoning restrictions for yourself, (and try to interpret them) , or talk to the government agency that regulates the site (Clear Creek County).

On an unrelated note, did anyone pick up the handouts that the case manger handed out to the BCC? It had the letter from Don Rooney, as well as three other documents.

-Wabisabi

HDTimeShifter, I don't watch the Sci-Fi channel since it is not HD, but it may be that they show movies in their original aspect ratio in a letterbox on a 4:3 screen. When you zoom to fill your widescreen, a movie that is actually 2.35:1 will still have bars on the top and bottom on a 16:9 widescreen. This would be exactly how a 2.35:1 DVD should look on your screen. The Programming Forum has had a ton of discussions about screen formatting. If Sci-Fi is really sending an OAR (Original Aspect Ratio) picture on a 4:3 screen, I say good for them and they probably would be a good HD channel whenever.

On KDVR, I still cannot watch it due to their lip sync problem so I could care less whether they are on the air or not. I met their engineer at the LCG hearings on the 1st and asked about the lip sync. He said it is a "corporate issue" and they are "aware of it" and would not comment further other than to say he personally cannot stand to watch TV with sync issues either!

On the Jeffco decision, I would think they would take a couple of days to let everything sink in and discuss it amongst themselves in private before announcing a decision, probably as a press release. Either way, with such a politically charged decision, they certainly know they cannot really win overall and make everybody happy. Let's hope they consider facts more than emotion in their deliberations.

Originally posted by wabisabi
Please note that just because a citizen who lives near a tower site states a "fact" about the zoning of the site, it doesn't mean that the "fact" is true. To find out what the zoning allows, you would need to either read the zoning restrictions for yourself, (and try to interpret them) , or talk to the government agency that regulates the site (Clear Creek County).


Very true. If we listened to the "facts" that the CARE folks were spewing, the tower would've grown from 730 to 930 feet, the guy wires expanded to 5" diameters, the new analog transmitters would actually emit MORE RF than 50-year old transmitters, the existing towers on Lookout are illegal, etc, etc.

Now how can we find out for sure? Anybody have any contacts in Clear Creek County?

Originally posted by wabisabi
On an unrelated note, did anyone pick up the handouts that the case manger handed out to the BCC? It had the letter from Don Rooney, as well as three other documents.


I meant to, but in my haste to find Leo Bradley and talk to him about his testimony, I forgot :( Anybody here pick them up and care to scan them in and post them?

Finally, I was able to take my car in to the dealer yesterday, and we conclusively ruled out CARE sabotage as the source of my car troubles :) It was a fun theory while it lasted :D

Originally posted by markdl
David, for some reason I don't think that the commissioners will continue the case after the 22nd. The LCG guys were ready for rebuttal on Tuesday night, and they'll be ready to answer the commissioners' questions on the 22nd. My impression is that the BCC wants to get this case done and over with NOW, rather than drag it out any longer. And I can't think of a better time for them to announce approval of the application than in the middle of a work day when most of the NOPEs aren't there. It'd have to be easier on them than announcing it at 10:30 at night to a packed room of detractors. But, that's just my opinion.

You know, I kind of hope it goes down that way. But with Morrison, even after the well-prepared rebuttal by BCDC/PIC, the commissioners (and the county attorney, who had some really good nitpicks in the details) had some more questions and wanted to spend some more time in private deliberating. So I'm not optimistic. They could always continue it to 9am on yet another work day and announce their decision then. I'll try to stay positive and hope for a decision on the 22nd, though :)

Originally posted by DennisMileHi
On the Jeffco decision, I would think they would take a couple of days to let everything sink in and discuss it amongst themselves in private before announcing a decision, probably as a press release. Either way, with such a politically charged decision, they certainly know they cannot really win overall and make everybody happy. Let's hope they consider facts more than emotion in their deliberations.
Morrison had quite similar emotional charges, but they announced their decision (if not had the actual vote -- I wasn't physically present the last day) in public.

I agree -- if they consider facts only and don't get weighed down by emotion, there's only one possible outcome. That's a pretty big if, though. As staunchly pro-consolidation, pro-HDTV as I am, after a few hours of sob stories, it can be emotionally draining.

Here's the text of my testimony:

I don’t really have anything new to say, so I’ll keep it brief. I support the Lake Cedar Group application, not only because it’ll bring Denver into the 21st century with HDTV transmissions, but also because it’ll reduce the number of towers on Lookout Mountain. I have worked in Jefferson County, just a 5 minute drive from this building, for the last 7+ years. I have to look at those ugly towers every single day. Some of the opponents seem to be under the impression that if this proposal is denied, all the towers will suddenly disappear. That’s simply not the case. Even if the stations are forced to use Squaw for their digital signals for the next few years, as soon as they can shut off their analog transmissions, the same old towers with the same old transmitters will be used to broadcast digital television for the foreseeable future. I say we move forward, reduce the number of towers, reduce the RF emissions by letting the stations use newer, more efficient transmitters, increase the quality of television service to the greater Denver area, and stop being the laughing-stock of the country.


After I concluded, Commissioner Sheehan said he wanted to clarify that it wasn't the BCC holding up the digital transition. I guess that means he's ready to approve this application :D :D :D

Originally posted by markdl

The second really big kicker was testimony from the owner of the Mt. Morrison Site. His was individual testimony that was separate from the official Mt. Morrison testimony earlier in the evening, but he was allowed more than 10 minutes to speak because Commissioner Lawrence wanted to hear everything he had to say. And he said a mouthful. He made it very clear that he wants to get the stations on the air digitally ASAP, both in his testimony and in the conversation that David and I had with him after the proceedings. He supports the application, but testified to the commissioners that he would give the LCG stations whatever it took to get them on the air, including hosting their digital transmitters RENT FREE for 2 or 3 years. He said that he would give them each 2500sf of building space if that’s what they really need, and that it makes no sense whatsoever for KTVD to leave Mt. Morrison. They could be on the air “tomorrow” from their current tower just by adding the transmitter and the equipment to their building. KTVD has a lease on Mt. Morrison until 2007 anyways. He did testify that he was uncomfortable having all of the major stations broadcasting from the same location, and that the ideal solution would be to have some of them broadcasting from Mt. Morrison and some from Lookout. All in all, it was very subtly powerful testimony in a country lawyer style that the commissioners paid very close attention to. And I don’t know if it helped or hurt LCG’s case. It was pretty hard for me to tell.


Originally posted by dr_mal

I agree -- if they consider facts only and don't get weighed down by emotion, there's only one possible outcome.


Well, I think staff was recommending denial based on Alternative sites, and Mt. Morrison basically said "we can handle them, and give them as much space as they say they need." Based on these 'facts', how can there be an approval of LCG II?

Originally posted by HDTimeShifter
In an aside, what aspect ratio does the Sci-Fi cable channel show movies in? It's not 14:9, more like 20:9, since when I zoom on my widescreen, there is still space above and below. Dennis,

Movies come in a suprising number of aspect ratios, initiated when studios thought they had to compete with burgeoning popularity of TV in the late 50's. I'm sure you've seen the term OAR (Original Aspect Ratio) referring to how it was originally aired or projected in a cinema. Sometimes the original filmstock has a different (than OAR) aspect ratio and it was "matted" when it was shown. Just to show you the dizzying array of ratios used, look at this table:

aspect.....aka...........................common names
ratio........................................[brand names]
-------------------------------------------------
1.33..........4:3...........................Std. TV
1.66.........................................[VistaVision]
1.78.........16:9..........................HDTV
1.85.........................................Std. Cinema Widescreen [all]
2.00..........2:1...........................[SuperScope]
2.22.........................................[Todd-AO, Super Panavision 70]
2.35.........................................CinemaScope Widescreen [all]
2.40.........................................[CinemaScope]
2.55
2.65.........................................[Cinerama]
2.76.........................................[Ultra Panavision 70]

A nice Flash description of pan&scan and letterboxing can be found at
http://www.ryanwright.com/ht/oar.shtml

A nice primer on aspect ratios is at http://www.cinemasource.com/articles/aspect_ratios.pdf

And in case you were wondering what anamorphic means, it comes from Greek and roughly means "reshape". In the movie industry, it's used to describe a "controlled distortion" which squeezes only one dimension or aspect of an image. To view it properly, it needs to be undistorted or de-anamorphized. This was done by a lens on the movie theater projector and is now done by the stretch mode on your widescreen TV. (that's the same stretch mode that distorts SD 4:3 TV material)

Class dismissed.

Morrison will only have room for 1 transmitter for each of the stations, not both digital AND analog which they will need until about... 2020 to get the percentage of digital views over 60 some-odd percent.

Mt. Morrison testified that they could handle both the analog and digital equipment, but that it made no sense to move the analog from a business point of view.

-Wabisabi

Originally posted by wabisabi
Well, I think staff was recommending denial based on Alternative sites, and Mt. Morrison basically said "we can handle them, and give them as much space as they say they need." Based on these 'facts', how can there be an approval of LCG II? Because the commissioners realize even if alternative sites exist and they deny the application, that alone does not require the stations to move off of Lookout and take their towers down. They can and will (and have said as much) leave analog on Lookout, go elsewhere for digital during the transition, and broadcast digital from Lookout once analog goes away using existing towers and antennas. Denying the app would mean NO improvements on Lookout. Besides, do you think the commissioners really want to suggest Morrison (which is still in JeffCo) and start all over again, sCARE and everything!?

wabisabi, do you know how long the stations have been "legal non-conforming"? To my knowledge, there is nothing that can stop them from continuing to be "legal non-conforming" for decades to come.

Not to mention that moving to Mt. Morrison makes no sense from a business perspective to the stations. Why move to a site where they will eventually have to pay whatever rent Mr. Bradley decides to charge them to stay there? At that point, they would be totally screwed because they would have no place to go. It would make much more sense to them to stay on Lookout, swap out the equipment in the buildings and start broadcasting digital from the existing towers when the changover happens. I.e. no change on Lookout at all. Same number of towers as now.

The commissioners know this. And, aren't they mandated by county codes to do away with as much of the legal non-conforming sites as possible? Approve the application, and the site becomes legal and conforming.

What would make absolutely the most sense if LCGII is denied is to cut a deal with Leo Bradley to use space at Mt. Morrison for the digital transmitters now until the transition, and then overnight move the digital back to Lookout. Especially if Leo gives them the space for no charge like he testified to.

That would be a win-win for the stations and HDTV enthusiasts but the county and the residents of Lookout would be the losers.

Approve LCGII and that's a WIN-WIN-WIN-WIN - stations, us, the county and local residents all win (even though they claim that they wouldn't).

I'm new to this thread but wanted to include my two cents on the subject. Don't forget that Leo Bradley is the same person who wanted to put Nike on top of South Table Mountain, and if my memory serves me right, that went over just about as well with Jeffco as the Hindenburg's last mooring. The commisioners are not going to take everything he says as gospel though there may be some room to negotiate.

When I talked to Mr. Bradley after the hearing ended, he said his only motivation was to get the locals on the air so they can meet their federal mandate. I'd like to believe that's true, but I find it hard to believe a businessman like himself is looking out for other businesses best interests. At least he was upfront about trying to keep UPN20 on the Morrison site. Maybe that's his motivation -- let all the stations do their digital thing from Morrison, and at least maybe KTVD'll change their mind and end up with analog and digital on his site. He didn't seem to care at all that the stations would end up (long term) with only their digital signals on their own towers on Lookout. Maybe he's just trying to keep KTVD's business.

In the end, I don't really care if the stations are on their own land or paying rent to Bradley to be on Morrison. As long as we get some OTA HDTV. In my own HDTV-focused personal sense, I'd like the stations to take Bradley up on his offer. It wouldn't require rezoning -- Morrison's already approved. They'd just have to wait for his tower to finish getting built. It might get them on the air quicker. But the generous, caring side of me would like to get HDTV on the air as well as making Lookout look nicer in the process. That's just the kind of nice guy I am :)

What's the limits of the Morrison site? I've read some posts a while back that they didn't have room for KRMA, KUSA, KMGH, KCNC, KTVD & some other small independents etc. to all transmit from there, and that was just using digital. What about both digital & analog. (Plus, KWGN may still need to go somewhere too)

Wabisabi, are you sure there is enough inside space for all those transmitters (digital & analog) and enough space outside for that many antennas? Even multiplexed on their array?

It's my understanding that Morrison has 14000 sq ft of building space (sized according to the amount of room on their towers) with more than enough room to house all of the transmitters and antenna (both analog and digital). Mr Bradley is a very shrewed businessman and isn't going to do anything that doesn't benefit him financially in the end.

Originally posted by santellavision
What's the limits of the Morrison site? I've read some posts a while back that they didn't have room for KRMA, KUSA, KMGH, KCNC, KTVD & some other small independents etc. to all transmit from there, and that was just using digital. What about both digital & analog. (Plus, KWGN may still need to go somewhere too)

Wabisabi, are you sure there is enough inside space for all those transmitters (digital & analog) and enough space outside for that many antennas? Even multiplexed on their array?

Jay Jacobsmeyer, their RF Engineer has developed plans to accommodate all the analog and digital stations, but would prefer to not have to deal with the analog. The key to this is that in addition to the new tower, they still have the existing channel 20 tower on the mountain.

Their ODP (for the new tower) allows 5 antenna mounting points, not 5 antennas. So, if they stack antennas they will have plenty of room for antennas.

Having said that, I am not an engineer, so I cannot confirm that what they are proposing will work.

-Wabisabi

[darnit Wabisabi, you posted while I was composing my response :)]

Per the LCG folks (so you understand the bias of the info), Morrison doesn't have enough space for all their analog AND digital AND ENG, etc.

The way Bradley's framing his offer is to not take their analog, ENG, or anything else. Just their digital. It appears to me that there's enough room on Morrison to do that. The Morrison folks told me after the hearing that even though the number of transmitters they can have is limited, they can mulitplex more than one digital transmission off each transmitter ("Jay Jacobsmeyer's got it all figured out"). Their analog and ENG equipment would all stay on Lookout (ie, no improvement on Lookout).

The other argument I've heard from LCG folks is that while a single transmitter is fine for the smaller, independent stations based on Morrison, the big 3 require backups for each transmitter, and that's where Morrison falls short on space.

I know you can combine DTV signals into the same antenna but I don't know of ANY manufactures who have said they can combine multiple DTV signals in the same transmitter... NEC had a demo "Booster station" at NAB a few years ago that was running 3 DTV signals through it (all side by side) but there was no data to show if the signals were FCC compliant as far as the required channel mask... Originally Acrodyne (now Ai) showed running a DTV and analog in the same transmitter but there were problems.....

William

Perhaps I'm not being quite technical enough.

My understanding is that with one thingie mounted to the outside of the tower, they can broadcast multiple DTV signals. Maybe I should've been saying antenna instead of transmitter. Does the transmitter live inside the building?

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I say we move forward, reduce the number of towers, reduce the RF emissions by letting the stations use newer, more efficient transmitters, increase the quality of television service to the greater Denver area, and stop being the laughing-stock of the country.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't know if LCG or anybody else pointed this out, but someone should point out that the new antenna will be directional so as to direct the radiation towards Denver instead of omnidirectional like the existing antennas.

Yes, the transmitter is inside the building the antenna is on the tower...

The directional antenna was covered well by LCG in their presentation, and attacked fiercely by the NOPEs.

Yesterday, I was at the Irish Festival in Jeffco with a friend of mine and he told me he saw my name in an article about the digital towers in the Lakewood Sentinel Newspaper. I checked this morning and, sure enough, there it was! Check out the link to see how 'unbiased' the reporter is on the whole deal:

http://www.jeffconews.com/1editorialbody.lasso?-token.folder=2003-07-10&-token.story=45422.111215&-nothing

Here is the section about my testimony:

A small minority of speakers voiced support for the proposal. Most downplayed the threats, and argued for the tower as the best opportunity for new high-definition television in the Denver area.

Dennis Rich of Englewood said he is anxious for digital television, and the required broadcast signals would not emit harmful levels of radiation.

“It seems to me that the power the FCC is allocating to all digital stations is not that large,” Rich said.

The commissioners noted that Rich was clearly in the minority opinion among the crowd.

“I think we’ll need to get the sheriff’s office to provide you an escort out of here,” joked Commission Chairman Rick Sheehan.


The quote was paraphrased as I did not exactly say that. I still worry that the large number of speakers against the LCG tower will have a large influence on the commissioners. If you can take a little time on the 22nd to share your views, it just might help offset the health risk emotions.

Yup, that article was about as fair and unbiased as my reports here :D

The author (who by the way, chose not to put his/her name on the article) reported that all the health problems people have are because of the radiation emitted by the towers. Well, that's what people were saying, but there's still no proof.

Perhaps I should tell you some stories. These are all true.

I had two dogs that were my childhood companions both die under mysterious circumstances. Neither one was old enough to die.

My little sister was the 3rd child of my parents. My brother and I were both born healthy, but my sister's left leg was slightly shorter than her right leg. The doctors were confused; they'd never seen anything like it. Needless to say, there's nothing like this in my family. Over the first 15 years of her life, she underwent 15 separate surgeries to try to have this problem corrected. By the time she was 16, her left foot looked quite shriveled and her leg was significantly shorter. Every time my parents wanted to buy her a pair of shoes, they had to buy two pairs because of the size difference of her feet. At 16, her leg was amputated below the knee.

But all this happened in a remote area of British Columbia. There weren't any high-power transmission lines or TV or radio towers to blame.

I chose not to tell these stories in front of the county commissioners. I think there's been enough melodrama. But the point I want to make is this: sometimes bad things just happen. It's our human nature to want to find someone or something to blame. In the case of people living on Lookout, the towers are a convenient target, even though there's no scientific evidence that the radiation coming from those towers is causing this grief in these people. Even if the CSU study on Lookout residents shows people in that area have more sob stories than other parts of Denver, are the towers to blame? What about the makeup of the rock out there? I thought I read somewhere (can't believe everything you read though) that the rocks in the Denver foothills are slightly radioactive. What if it's conclusively proven that the rocks are to blame for these maladies? What then?

By the way, my sister is fine now. She only has to buy one pair of shoes because her prosthetic foot is the same size as her right foot. She's had four healthy babies -- all since moving to Vancouver which actually has some TV and radio stations broadcasting into the area. If anything, having her "bum" leg cut off has helped her to be even more active, since she's not slowed down by a limp anymore. Sometimes, even in the darkest moments of our lives, good can come out of it.

dr mal.... Not to make fun of your family issues, I think we all have had about all the X-Files we need, the situation in Denver has me at wits end, it's sad you guys don't have OTA HDTV over issues which may or may not be of issue? I can say, I'm glad I stopped smoking (though the last time through, old airport, I was pissed to have to go out into a snow storm to smoke), actually wished I never did, I could have had (a direct view) HDTV much sooner! Well you get the idea, and hope for all of you this is worked out, as the OTA is killer right now, who knows about the future. BTW: can you get it (any HD) on cable and or D* / E* there? Take care.....

Mikey:

Thanks for your interest in following our tale. No, there is currently no HD on Cable. Comcast recently took over from AT&T which was a joke and most neighborhoods aren't wired to get HD or broadband internet. They do say they are going to be upgrading to allow HD in the future, whenever that might be. Of course, we can get the same HD from satellite as anybody, just not any local HD.

Dennis.... Sad, here, Houston, we have all the OTA networks now, and not to rub your nose in it, not at all, it's sad that this has been a issue there for so long. This is IMHO, as I'm sure you guys would enjoy Everwood.

Take care..... later....

I'm still not sure if I'll have the time from work to testify on July, 22. In case I don't, I wanted to bring up some issues here in case anybody is planning on speaking. There were some initial studies that came out 1-2 yrs ago that cell phone use may increase the risk for brain cancer. I've seen a lot of NOPE's using cell phones!! Must not be too worried about their health.
Also, I found some cancer rate information compiled by the State for all cancers in the state and by county. Colorado's cancer rate is less than the national avg. Jefferson County's cancer rates are decreasing!!!! Even though these people are being exposed to the "killer" radiation as well as flat out aging.
I have some more things but these are the biggest issues with me.
http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/pp/cccr/cccrreports.asp
Jason

Dennis, interesting that they quoted you, but no mention of the opposition from the the Squaw Mountain folks who testified. :(

Jason, I might be able to make it on the 22nd so I took a look at the study. I didn't see anything specific to brain cancer so I'm not sure if it's of use. I think the cell phone debate would just cloud the issue.

gc5674,
The cell phone reference would just be used to illustrate the fact that the NOPES are hippocrites when it comes to cancer causing radiation. If they were that concerned about their health, why use cell phones, or smoke, or barbecue (nitrosamines) for that matter.
I didn't see anything about brain cancer. Even if it doesn't mention brain cancer, the trend shows a decrease in cancers. I've heard testimony that the towers caused cancer in areas other than the brain. Just presenting a study that is conducted and analyzed by the State may hold more credibility than some of the NOPES's studies. I'm just looking for the overall "shock" value that cancer rates in Jefferson Cty are decreasing! We've heard about studies that may show an increased risk. Let's present FACTS about cancer rates in the county that will be "affected" most.
Jason

Hi all,
I've been in the backwater country of Canada fishing and have just started catching up on the last week of posts (whew!). Once again thanks for the reports guys.

As to the cancer thing everyone needs to understand that (IMO) SCARE is not really concerned about it. What they want are the towers off the mountain and they'll stoop to any and all means to achieve that result. Getting the towers kicked off Lookout would increase their property values tremendously and give Carney (et-al) even bigger heads in the process. They argue with innuendo and mis-truths and stir up the populace with emotionally charged crap (like RF causes a lack of sleep). These folks would sell their mother(s) to get their way and will continue to use cell phones and ignore the facts of physics. You cannot argue with them rationally.......

Geof,
Exactly. The main argument SCARE is making is health risks/cancer. If we have hard evidence from the state that the people in Jefferson Cty aren't showing an increase in cancer then we can attack their main defence with the state's own data. I know their only motivation is property value. I'm not trying to argue with SCARE, I'm just trying to help the commisioners see through SCARE's ****. You can't argue that the cancer rates of Jefferson Cty are going down, according to the lates state study.

BTW, with the heat tonight I am getting the strongest signal readings I have ever had on my 6000 and 6ft antenna pointed downtown.

KMGH-DT 60-63
KUSA- DT Low 90's
KCNC-DT 88-90
KDVR-DT 63-70

For those farther out, it may be a good time to check for a signal.

Unfortunately, my work is going to keep me from attending the meeting on the 22nd. I am signed up to testify. I can show up after 5:00 P.M., but by then the fireworks may be over.

I guess I'm confused here. If the NOPES motive is property values, why would Jeffco even think about putting another tower on Lookout? Doesn't an increase in property values = more tax revenue to the county? What's in it for Jeffco to change the zoning and approve the proposal?

Also for the cancer data, while it shows a decrease overall in some types it doesn't show specific locations within the county. Cancer clusters can make good data look bad.

If their concern is with property values, 1 tower replacing 4 should increase values.

I suspect that cancer rates in JeffCo have decreased since Rocky Flats shut down, but we don't need to mention that. ;)

Originally posted by gc5674
I guess I'm confused here. If the NOPES motive is property values, why would Jeffco even think about putting another tower on Lookout? Doesn't an increase in property values = more tax revenue to the county? What's in it for Jeffco to change the zoning and approve the proposal?


A couple of comments:
1) SCARE has publicly stated that they want ALL (not some - ALL) towers off of Lookout.

2) Tower Owners pay property taxes even on legal non-conforming property. Obviously businesses on legally zoned property pay taxes. Taxes will be collected on LCG2 if and when it is ever built.

Personally I think any county that governs land use based solely (or heavily) on taxable income would be very shortsighted.......

3) According to the notes of the meetings from David and company SCARE has portrayed (or at least allow the perception to perpetuate) that voting NO against this proposal will result in the elimination of the "Legal non-Conforming" towers. Truth is those "Legal non-conforming" towers can stay there until hell freezes over but I'd be willing to wager that most of the SCAREd folks believe they will go away if this application is denied. They really do not clearly understand that they can keep what they have (basically forever) or get something all together better with the passage of this proposal. Hopefully the BCC understands this.

Ron's testimony with the "two questions asking the same thing, just worded differently" proves that theory, Geof. If anybody missed it, he (through Commissioner Sheehan) asked for a show of hands:

1) who are opposed to this proposal (nearly everyone puts up their hand)
2) who want the current Lookout situation to stay the same (1 person put up his hand)

That (to me at least) was a clear testimonial to the ignorance and delusion of people opposing this application. The show of hands should've been identical, as the two questions were in fact asking the same thing. Kudos, Ron.

I think everyone here needs to realize what the CARE strategy is. Although they never state it outright, I am pretty well convinced what it is.

CARE would definitely like to keep the status quo. As long as the zoning remains "legal non-conforming", they can keep any changes the stations want to make tied up (including DTV). The tower situation can not change for the better of the community, but it also can not change for anything the stations want to accomplish (radar, infrastructure improvements, etc.) CARE is HOPING that keeping the stations in a non-conforming status will make the stations WANT to leave Lookout Mtn. To allow this application to approve, even after considering the "carrot" of some tower consolidation, is to relinquish any means of leverage they ever had. This is doubly attractive to Deb since nothing ever changes and she gets to stay in power, leader of the angry mob (does Deb Carney have a carreer other than CARE?).

For JeffCo to approve the application would be to admit that the towers and the broadcasters can stay forever and the community has no leverage and no hope of ever seeing the towers gone. That's going to be a difficult thing to say to their constituents, even though the application has armed them with some compelling reasoning.

CARE's strategy may ultimately prevail. I don't ever remember the stations asserting too strongly what they would do in the event of application denial. We have pushed for an answer all along, but the stations have been reticent to say anything about a plan "B". I've testified that the stations could do DTV elsewhere in the transition period, and do DTV from Lookout once analog is shut off. But I'm not fully convinced that is what they will do. The stations have been very tight-lipped, even when asked directly at their open house, if they could do DTV from Lookout with no tower or antenna changes. They may not be 100% sure or perhaps have a plan "B" they don't want to divulge .. or both.

Originally posted by RonAuger
<snip>This is doubly attractive to Deb since nothing ever changes and she gets to stay in power, leader of the angry mob (does Deb Carney have a carreer other than CARE?).
<snip>


Deb apparently has a career with Carney Law (http://www.carneylaw.net). It appears she's still interested in being the "good lawyer", fighting "evil corporations" for the small guy. Every page on carneylaw.net has a link to CARE, FWIW.

According to this page (http://www.carneylaw.net/deb.html), she won a $13 million dollar verdict for a client in 1984. Figure typical lawyer fees of 30%, and that's $3.9 million dollars in her pocket in 1984 dollars. I don't know about anyone else, but that would allow me to not have to work anymore.

Thanks for the links, dr-mal.
From that page concerning the $13 million verdict

"Two years ago, she returned to the same courtroom against the same polluter and won an addition award of over $1 against General Host Corporation. "

Make that $13,000,001.00! :D
(perhaps the CARE saga has atrophied her skills in recent years)

Ron, LCG spent about 15 minutes of their presentation talking about Plan B. Marv spoke about changing out the equipment in the buildings and flipping the switch from analog to digital, broadcasting from exactly the same antennas that are on the current towers now. The LCG lawyer then spoke about how this was absolutely allowed under the current zoning laws - they aren't allowed to change out antennas on the towers, but all equipment in the buildings is fair game and not covered under the zoning restrictions. So, they made their case that nothing will change if the application gets denied.

Oh, and btw, the county attourney indicated agreement that they could swap out building equipment under current zoning.

Originally posted by RonAuger
CARE would definitely like to keep the status quo. As long as the zoning remains "legal non-conforming", they can keep any changes the stations want to make tied up (including DTV). The tower situation can not change for the better of the community, but it also can not change for anything the stations want to accomplish (radar, infrastructure improvements, etc.) CARE is HOPING that keeping the stations in a non-conforming status will make the stations WANT to leave Lookout Mtn. To allow this application to approve, even after considering the "carrot" of some tower consolidation, is to relinquish any means of leverage they ever had. This is doubly attractive to Deb since nothing ever changes and she gets to stay in power, leader of the angry mob (does Deb Carney have a carreer other than CARE?). Well I agree with the status quo part but I very much believe that they believe that eventually the towers will go away (when analog goes away) because digital will be done somewhere else. You can bet your bottom dollar they will fight tooth and nail against using the existing analog facilities for digital - witness the "same service" argument. I do agree that having the tower approved would burst their bubble because that would mean towers could stay there forever and their property values would not double or triple overnight. The fact is the proposal is the best thing that could happen (for Lookout Mtn residents as well as all Front Range residents) but that would mean defeat for power crazed people who are not interested in informing the public but are using them to their own advantage. It's too bad the locals cannot see thru that facade because I find it repulsive, disgusting, immoral, and unethical.

Can we get copies of all Ms. Carney's testimoney that was 'Under-Oath' to the commissioners? I'm sure we can find some un-truths she's told to both the Commissioners and the Planning board that was again... 'Under Oath'. Lawyers are held to a much higher standard reguarding the truth.

We can take that to the Colorado Bar and if not get her disbarred, maybe at least get her supended for a while.

wabisabi, do you know where we can get that?

How can LCG swap out digital for analog on the existing towers if analog can't be removed until 2006 or 80% of the market has access to digital? Even if it's allowed under the current zoning on Lookout, the FCC isn't goint to let analog disappear overnight.

gc5674: the swap on Lookout would happen when they're ready to turn off their analog transmitters for good. Their digitals could be located elsewhere until then, but come the actual transition, they'll be right back on Lookout with the same situation as now.

dr_mal: Thanks. So, if I understand Mr. Bradley's offer at Mt. Morrison, LCG would locate there rent-free until analog is recalled by the FCC and then move back to Lookout. Sounds as if Mr. Bradley is gambling that they would stay put considering the cost of additional antenna and transmitters required to move back to Lookout since they probably couldn't just move them overnight. From what I understand of LCG's requirement to prove there is no alternate site available, I would have to say that LCG is very interested in competing with Mt Morrison vs moving there and paying Mr. Bradley for the next 50+ years.

FYI these same stations also said they had no off-air viewers and had agreed to supply cable/sat with decoders to support analog cable.....

Originally posted by santellavision
Can we get copies of all Ms. Carney's testimoney that was 'Under-Oath' to the commissioners? I'm sure we can find some un-truths she's told to both the Commissioners and the Planning board that was again... 'Under Oath'. Lawyers are held to a much higher standard reguarding the truth.

We can take that to the Colorado Bar and if not get her disbarred, maybe at least get her supended for a while.

For unlawful Carney knowledge? :eek: :D ;) :rolleyes:

With the exception of that last 'joke' (and I use the term loosely), I greatly appreciate all of the focused effort you all have been putting forth. I am extremely busy building an addition on the back of my house when I'm not on the road. Finished the framing yesterday, hopefully will be complete in about 2 more weeks. Looking forward somewhat optimistically now to the JeffCo decision due to your hard work, way to go!

On another note, this MOVIE (http://www.impawards.com/2003/jetlag.html) just HAS to be great, I couldn't have thought of a better title myself! :D

On the Media Visions Journal web site, it mentioned that one option is for LCG to "build a 2,000-foot tower on the prairie like the Sioux Falls tower in the Dakotas". What is the likelyhood of this being a viable option? While someone has stated that reducing four towers down to one on Lookout would improve property values, putting me in the shadow of a 2000-foot tower isn't going to suddenly make my house more valuable and have people coming out of the woodwork to buy it. Yes, it's NIMBY, but my house is my biggest investment as I'm sure it is to just about everyone.

That site must be misinformed. LCG has stated that due to FAA regulations, they can't build a big tower near DIA. That rules out the eastern plains.

Got my vacation day approved for next Tuesday. Looks like I'll get to spend it at JeffCo -- woo hoo! (not sure if I'm being sarcastic there or not)

At least we HOPE for woo hoo!

Not sure if I will make it. I would like to see the LCG response, but I am not sure I can take 37+ more emotional tear rendering tales of woe. I wonder what time LCG might actually be on to present.

Looks like I will also be able to attend next week too. Let's get together.
----------------
The other problem with a tower anywhere on the eastern plains is the bad multi-path problem with the foothills acting like a huge reflector back at Denver.

I'm planning on being there as well. Definitely get together! :)

Anybody heard from KWGN's Don Rooney on their status?
It's been a while and I would have thought that (S)Care's frivilous lawsuit would have been long thrown-out by now.
-----------
I just checked, it's been 9 months since (S)Care filed!

Good Question Ernie. I've been wondering that same thing myself. It also makes me wonder how long Mt. Morrison will be held up. Not to mention how KMGH can believe they will be broadcasting from Lookout "shortly".

Anyway, it sure seems like a long time since I told my wife "KWGN will be broadcasting DTV in a couple of weeks" (apparently, I'm as unreasonably optimistic as KMGH) :)

KWGN - still awaiting FCC authorization. They've got all their studio equipment in place, they're timeshifting the WB HD content as if they were on the air (I for one am glad they're practicing with their equipment before they hit the air - it gives me more confidence that they'll know what they're doing once they do get the FCC authorization), just waiting for the FCC greenlight. The CARE lawsuit could be what's holding up the FCC, but that hasn't been proven as the sole cause of the delay. They mentioned possible issues with the Table Mountain quiet zone as a factor as well. The point is: they're ready, they've got the county approval, the FCC is what's holding them up now.

KRMA - CARE lawsuit against the Morrison tower has been dismissed as "baseless"! CARE didn't put up the $$$ for an injunction, so they are still on schedule for the 12-18 month window from approval (7-13 months from now). Of course, adverse weather could push that date out.

KDVR - still ready to push their button to switch to 720p as soon as the network starts feeding them the signal. The guy I talked to in engineering thought that might happen around the end of the year.

Did the KDVR engineering guy say anything about their lip sync being fixed when they flip the switch? I won't watch them in HD either if their lip sync isn'f fixed.

I will try to be at the meeting next Tuesday by mid morning.

Hey everyone,

I just sent a note to chairman Powell (http://www.fcc.gov/commissioners/powell/mkp_email.html) asking him to grant KWGN-DT authorization as soon as possible.

Powell keeps saying how he wants the DTV transition to move more quickly; I find it ironic that the FCC is what's in the way of KWGN-DT.

Thanks for the link, Dave. I also just sent a message, although I doubt it will be read anytime soon.

That's OK Geof .. KCNC will be broadcasting full power along with the other stations this spring :D

I guess "this spring" now means 2004 .. or realistically 2005!

BTW, I sent my comments also.

Originally posted by RonAuger
That's OK Geof .. KCNC will be broadcasting full power along with the other stations this spring :D

I guess "this spring" now means 2004 .. or realistically 2005!

BTW, I sent my comments also. Well if the KWGN signal does indeed wipe out the KCNC signal everyone will be asking themselves what they've gained versus what they've lost. And yes, 2005 is a realistic date (assuming LCG2 is approved) so it's possible to not have KCNC-DT for 1.5 years when KWGN comes online.

The FCC may be doing us a favor....(something to think about).....

Originally posted by Geof
The FCC may be doing us a favor....(something to think about).....

I guess that depends on where you live!

-- Mark (getting a zero on KCNC-DT in Ft. Collins...)

P.S. I still wonder what is going to happen with the KTVD translator on 35 and the PAX translator on 17 up here.

P.P.S. Lately, I can actually see the signal strength meter bounce a little on 16 & 18. No lock of course, so it gets a little boring watching the meter after awhile...

Originally posted by mbuchana
P.S. I still wonder what is going to happen with the KTVD translator on 35 and the PAX translator on 17 up here.


17?!? Is anything on 17?!? (sorry guys, but you know somebody had to do it :D)

I've done another round of editing. Please let me know using an AVS Private Message, or the 'Report this post to a moderator' link at the bottom of every topic, if further help is needed.

I just sent in some more quick letters to the Commissioners and Susan Wood reminding them that there aren't just anti-tower citizens, but many supporters too. Can't hurt to send in some more reminders... we sure know that they are!!!

JeffCo LCGII Case Worker - Susan Wood (swood@co.jefferson.co.us)

JeffCo Commissioners (commish@co.jefferson.co.us)

will I be able to watch football games this year on CBS? if I get that antenna? I really dont want to buy season tickets to games so I was wondering if the broncos games would be broadcast.

Interesting how the FCC (http://www.fcc.gov/mb/video/files/dtvonair.html) only considers KDVR-DT as "on-air".

Originally posted by RonAuger
Interesting how the FCC (http://www.fcc.gov/mb/video/files/dtvonair.html) only considers KDVR-DT as "on-air".
At the bottom of the page it says the following, which would explain why we're not seeing anybody else:

NOTE: THERE ARE A NUMBER OF OTHER DTV STATIONS ON THE AIR PERIODICALLY UNDER EXPERIMENTAL OR SPECIAL TEMPORARY AUTHORITIES (STA’S) WITH LESS THAN FULLY AUTHORIZED FACILITIES.

But, KDVR is not outputting at full power (1/2? 1/3?)
What about KDEN-DT29 & KWHD-DT46?
They are also operating at low power.
Is every station (except KDVR) in Denver under a STA?

Originally posted by santellavision
Is every station (except KDVR) in Denver under a STA? Yes, I believe so. KDVR does not need a Special Temporary Authority (STA) because they have permanent facilities. They are putting about about 1/3 of their allowed power but I was told that was to keep interference down and because digital is more efficient than first believed.

I found out a couple of weeks ago that the FCC full power DTV license is for 1,000 kw. I think KDVR is operating on their STA of 223 kw, which is the highest of any. KCNC and KUSA are 11 kw and KMGH is only 1.91 kw. And I still think the stations will not need the full 1,000 kw to serve the entire Denver Metro market. We will see... someday.

Originally posted by u-ray
will I be able to watch football games this year on CBS? if I get that antenna? I really dont want to buy season tickets to games so I was wondering if the broncos games would be broadcast. Every Bronco's game since the mid-70's has been broadcast locally (regardless of where the game is played). Whether you'll be able to receive KCNC-DT and whether or not their games will be broadcast in HD is not really answerable. If you really want to receive KCNC-DT you probably can and I suspect all but a few Bronco games will be shown (just) in plain ole NTSC (depending on how well they're playing).

KDEN & KWHD are STA and are only using temporary facilities??? I bet they have exactly 0 viewers on their Digital channels! Where are they going to put their permanent antennas as well as KRMT-DT40, KCEC-DT51 & KTFD-DT15? Morrison? Lookout?

2) Kobe Bryant (not free agent til July 1, 2004)

Oops, I'm gonna stop making predictions, be it basketball or LCG II. Good luck next week to all of the LCGII supporters.

Don

Did anyone else notice the Comcast ad today that says HDTV is coming in August? Find out more at www.comcastcolorado.com (http://www.comcastcolorado.com)

Some of the details are: STB will be provided by Comcast (for rent, I guess); HBO, Showtime & some local channels; no recording devices.

That and a special offer to get cable and internet for less than $60/mo for 16 months if you switch from satellite or Qwest Choice TV. I'd be tempted if they had an integrated TiVo or other PVR device. Can't give up my DirecTiVo. No way.

I love the fact they they promote no equipment to buy, But... Notice the huge disclamer. I'm not sure of the price, but the rental of their HD Converter box will cost a ton!

Actually, Ernie, I thought I'd read in some other threads that cablecos are typically charging about $5/month to rent an HD converter box. At that price, if they carry KMGH-DT and KCNC-DT (if they do get overpowered by KWGN-DT), it might be worth it for me. I'm sure as heck not going to buy another HD box at $500. (at least not until the HDTV/DirecTV/TiVo boxes come out :))

I called Comcast last week when I got their postcard in the mail and the friendly CSR said "Oh, we don't get our HDTV training until next week. Check the website"

You're right, I did a search on Comcast and they are only charging under $10. to subscribers for the rental. It did seem to vary by market. I did remember reading a while back that they were charging much more for the box.

Wow, this thread (not counting the 2 other continuations) is almost at 5000 posts! I can't wait for the day when we can all just enjoy our DTV and never have to say (S)Care again... wait that might be Tuesday!!!!! ;)

Originally posted by dr_mal
I'm sure as heck not going to buy another HD box at $500. (at least not until the HDTV/DirecTV/TiVo boxes come out :))

I'm a bit envious of the newer STB's with better reception, etc. but I'm saving all my pennies for that HD-DirecTiVo. I'm sure Comcast will have better/more HD locals than I can get OTA, but I wouldn't watch them without time-shifting anyways. Well, except for the Superbowl and other special events like that. Hmmm, maybe Denver will see people sign up for Comcast the week before and take advantage of their satisfaction guarantee the week after the Superbowl, like some electronics shops see Big-screen TV's come in right after the weekend.

I read something worth mentioning, and couldn't find it already posted here...I apologize if it's a duplicate.

One of the industry trade pubs, DealerScope, is a free monthly mag highlighting retail CE efforts. In the current issue (July 2003, page 12, Industry Headline News) they have a news bit entitled HDTV 'Updates' on the way. Here is what is says (I couldn't find this posted online at the dealerscope website or the CE.org websites):

Begin

The Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) will bring its popular "HDTV Update" program to six new markets this fall. The breakfast meetings, said CEA, "provide a national perspective of where the analog-to-DTV transition is heading. Significantly, the unique program brings together local cable operators and broadcasters with retailers and other local DTV leaders to discuss collaboration to achieve greater consumer awareness of the best of DTV - high-definition television."

Meetings are open to anyone in the retail, broadcast, cable and content or programming industries who is involved in the HDTV transition. Meetings will be held in Denver, CO (Sept. 16), St. Louis, MO (Sept. 17), Orlando, FL (Sept. 30), Cleveland, OH (Oct. 1), San Diego, CA (Oct. 15), and Sacremento, CA (Oct. 16). Once this wave of meetings is complete, the program will have visited each of the top 24 DTV broadcast markets in the past year.

End

I immediately thought that many on this forum would be interested. The article did not state where or what time. If I can find out, I will post here...if someone else finds out first, can you post here too?

Jota

Originally posted by santellavision
Wow, this thread (not counting the 2 other continuations) is almost at 5000 posts! I can't wait for the day when we can all just enjoy our DTV and never have to say (S)Care again... wait that might be Tuesday!!!!! ;) Actually this is the 4th thread in the saga. The first was simply named Denver HDTV Tower and stared by Mark B. The Part 1, 2, and 3 threads were started by D. Bott because he closed the previous thread and started the continuing threads - not that any of this drivel really matters ;)

Now I am not really trying to rain on anyones parade but I suspect Tuesday will not be the end of this. They (BCC) may make a decision (but it would not surprise me if that got tabled) and if they vote in favor there will likely be the predictable SCARE lawsuit. Perhaps it is just the skeptic in me that refuses to believe that true progress will start on Tuesday......

I'd be very tempted to pick up Comcast HD when they offer it. I am finally joining the 21st century and getting broadband Internet on Tuesday (thru Comcast). After years of nothing better than 28.8 I am ready to make the jump to warp speed. As to the Comcast HD package, it will come down to price and what they're offering. If it's just HBO and SHO HD and the locals I'll pass (you couldn't pay me to watch KMGH until their is a management change at the station - except for Bronco games of course).

IF the hearings end on Tuesday
and IF the commissioners actually vote
and IF they approve

I'm not sure exactly how much sCARE could get in the way. I know they'll file lawsuits, but without the $$$ for an injunctive lawsuit (witness Spike Lee's sudden turnaround in the whole Spike TV situation), the tower will be allowed to proceed. Case in point: the Morrison tower. They filed a lawsuit, but work continued. The suit has now been thrown out of court and the Morrison folks aren't at all behind because of it.

And as to KMGH - the last two shows I was watching on ABC (haven't started watching any new series on ABC since I went HD) were the Drew Carey Show and Whose Line, both of which were cancelled, so I guess my need for KMGH-DT is pretty much nonexistent now. Of course, I'll still heckle them for their <bad Arnold impression>puny little girly-man transmitter </bad Arnold impression> :)

Actually, both Drew Carey and Whose Line already have a whole new season filmed and ready to go whenever ABC calls on them to be on the schedule. They aren't on the Fall schedule right now, but will be when something fails.

For KMGH, I watch Alias in HD and will definitely watch each week's Monday Night Football game this fall, which is funny because the last time I watched every MNF game was when they were in HD a few years back.


Jeff

Originally posted by dr_mal
IF the hearings end on Tuesday
and IF the commissioners actually vote
and IF they approve Lot's of IF's to be sure.

The SCARE lawsuit may go nowhere but since the tower is in their backyard they may try harder (ie, be willing/able to spend more money on it). Time will tell but I cannot fathom Carney and company walking away without more fight. Regardless, the skeptic in me is looking at those IF's as one long shot. I have this nagging feeling that they approved Morrison so they wouldn't take as much heat when/IF Lookout is denied. I hope I'm wrong.

Originally posted by dr_mal
... I'm not sure exactly how much sCARE could get in the way. I know they'll file lawsuits, but without the $$$ for an injunctive lawsuit ... the tower will be allowed to proceed. Case in point: the Morrison tower. ... :) They're saving their money for this one :)

Maybe... but in court, LCG can show just how 'frivilous' and 'baseless' their past lawsuits have been. Not that they haven't in past, But every day, they're looking more and more like an incompetent idiots.

I sure hope PIC/BCDC was awarded court costs from that waste of my tax dollars.

Good luck to all that are able to attend tomorrow. Sorry I won't be able to make it.

BTW, as Dan (DP-1) reported some time ago, I was able to get a lock on channel 30 (KGWN Cheyenne) this morning between 6:30 - 7:00.

It maps to channel 05-01 on my 6000. I got a lower 60's signal ( better then KMGH) and could watch their morning news, including a band from Chugwater, this morning. :D

Does anyone know why you can get them in the A.M. and not at night? Are they playing with their transmitter, or is it just the atmosphere?

Anyway, if you are south of town with an antenna pointing towards republic you may want to give it a try.

I'll be there tomorrow. Sorry you won't be able to make it Phil. Ernie, David, Dennis, Anyone else going to make it out? I'll be there a little before 9.

I'll be there. I'll shoot for 9, but there's a strong probability of me being late (9:30 maybe).

Originally posted by santellavision
I just sent in some more quick letters to the Commissioners and Susan Wood reminding them that there aren't just anti-tower citizens, but many supporters too. Can't hurt to send in some more reminders... we sure know that they are!!!

JeffCo LCGII Case Worker - Susan Wood (swood@co.jefferson.co.us)

JeffCo Commissioners (commish@co.jefferson.co.us) Okay, I broke down and just sent this to the email addresses noted in Ernie's post:Please consider my comments below (I've also attached Word Document):


July 21, 2003

Subject: Lake Cedar Group Lookout Tower Antenna Proposal

Dear Commissioner,

While I do not support all stations included in the Lake Cedar Group I do support their proposal, which is currently on your agenda.

I ask that you review the facts of the proposal and base your decision based on those facts. I ask this because there is a lot of emotional and non-factual hyperbole presented by certain parties opposed to the tower proposal. I find it very sad that scare tactics akin to yelling “fire” in a crowded theater have been employed to help rally opposition against this proposal. I note just one example of many: I have personally read flyers from the CARE Organization cautioning residents that an inability to sleep may be caused by excessive RF levels - a supposition that is so utterly ridiculous that it can only serve to alarm and frighten (not inform) Lookout Mountain area residents. I urge the Commissioners to consider under what pretenses (factual or fictional) opposition signatures were collected when evaluating local resident reactions.

The proposal benefits have been well documented so I will not repeat them in this note. Suffice it to say though that I look forward to the day when several towers are replaced by one and when several old (and quite frankly ugly) buildings are removed from the mountain (from my Front Range vantage a reduction of towers will be quite noticeable and very appealing).

I would like to address one key point with regards to Squaw Mountain. I cannot obtain ANY signals from Squaw. My TV will automatically lock onto Colorado Springs stations and even a Cheyenne station but totally skips over Channel 12 (whose transmitter is on Squaw Mountain). Contrary to what you may have heard shadowing does occur - no amount of “magic hand-waving” or proclaiming it as “no- problem” can overcome the laws of physics. I live in the Roxborough Park area of Douglas County (about a mile from the Jeffo/Douglas border) and have perfect reception from both the Lookout and Morrison sites (even better than cable), yet I receive absolutely nothing from Squaw. This will undoubtedly hold true for many Jefferson County residents as well. Shadowing? You bet (it’s exactly analogous to the mountains blocking the sun and casting shadows)!

Finally I note that I understand some of the animosity towards the Lake Cedar Group stations. I understand that they have not always been “top shelf” citizens or acted as role models for corporate behavior. That said, I believe they are willing to enter in a legally binding agreement with Jefferson County to resolve interference and over-limit RF level issues. This should surely ensure their accountability and is clearly in the best interests of Jefferson County.

Thank you for your time,

Sincerely,
After being on vacation for 2+ weeks and having to be home for awhile tomorrow (Comcast installs my cable modem tomorrow) and the Dentist on Wed I cannot take time off to attend.

I will be there by mid morning.

Geof,

I read your correspondence with great interest. Thanks for sending it in. I think it will help a great deal. I have also sent emails recently along with the snail mail letters written in the past. I am currently moving into the neighborhood directly below the towers ( I can see them from my deck ) and I can tell you that property values are not low at all :) .

Jeff

Today is the big day!

Updates? We need updates!! :D

Just got back home from the morning session (Had to walk the dog) nothing really to report. Same old story.
Lost's of negative testimony. A few 'yes' people.

One note was a lady who lives on Squaw just below the X-mitter site, who was a real tear-jerker. She spoke of a couple of neighbors who have cancer, and the dog and her husband who also might have a brain tumor.

Not good. The commissioners were paying attention.
Not to belittle her story, but no proof that it's the squaw site and not mine-tainted well water.

Originally posted by santellavision
Just got back home from the morning session (Had to walk the dog) nothing really to report. Same old story.
Lost's of negative testimony. A few 'yes' people.

One note was a lady who lives on Squaw just below the X-mitter site, who was a real tear-jerker. She spoke of a couple of neighbors who have cancer, and the dog and her husband who also might have a brain tumor.

Not good. The commissioners were paying attention.
Not to belittle her story, but no proof that it's the squaw site and not mine-tainted well water. So even if there is even the remotest possibility that RF is linked to this (which I do not believe) it's okay for the SCARE folks to push Squaw as an acceptable site because of why?

Jeff,
Not sure my email will help but it certainly can't hurt. It does sound like the naysayers far outnumber the good guys tho....(if this gets defeated I will lay a lot of blame on KMGH as I firmly believe they are a big reason for less than stellar support of this application).

Originally posted by Phil T
Updates? We need updates!! :D dr_mal, Ernie, Mark,
Don't any of you guys have a laptop with a wireless NIC so you can post reports as the show unfolds? Maybe we can suggest another tower built on Lookout so the Taj can have wireless internet access :)

Ernie

My bet is that her husband and dog were on the cell phone all the time.

Reggie

It's been almost 8 hrs since the meeting started!! What are the chances we'll have a decision today? Usually someone is able to send an update during the lunch break. It's silent around here.

This just in...

LCG II approved by a 3-0 vote.


-Wabisabi

Hoorah!

-John

:D :D :D :D :D

Now, let's get constructing! ;)

I just saw where LCGII was approved. What incredible timing. Amazingly, there is finally definitive proof that long term exposure to low levels of non-iodizing radiation causes irreversible brain damage. It should be appearing in the next issue of The Journal of American Cerebral Medicine. Here is the article:

Helsinki, Finland

Medical researchers, after numerous case studies over the last ten years looking into the effects of long term exposure to low levels of non-ionizing radiation, have finally discovered irrefutable evidence of the heath risks in the one place they never thought to look before - a Denver, Colorado HDTV discussion group.

The researchers, whose previous study data showed statistically significant clusters of cancer and leukemia in populations living near radio and TV transmission towers were intrigued about their discovery and were looking forward to additional findings from the study group. "Brain damage clusters are an exciting find" said one researcher. "We've always known that excessive exposure to television caused brain damage, now we have proof".

It wasn't until the researchers read the 240+ pages of posts on the Denver HDTV Tower thread, that they unanimously concluded that excessive exposure to HDTV and analog television signals by the members significantly impaired their ability to think and reason clearly. "We are not certain of the level of damage" said one noted scientist, "but it's obvious by their hatefull comments, they have lost site of reality and concern for humanity".

Many of the posts by the members include photos of their extensive video and audio installations. "This infatuation with electronics down to the Monster cables that interconnect them", said one researcher "is conclusive of severe brain damage". "Looking at the furniture they are using to watch high definition re-runs of Mayberry RFD" noted another researcher, "leads me to believe that they are investing disproportionately large amounts of their time and income on their compulsive habit - much like an alcoholic or chronic gambler". All of the researchers agreed that the suspicious stains found on most of the furniture in the photographs tied to the various posts lead them to conclude that the forum members were watching excessive amounts of non-family oriented material and that most members would "not only be severely brain damaged but would probably go blind" in the near future.

The most damaging and conclusive evidence of the effects of non-ionizing radiation on the group was one member's hope and excitement of watching Denver's professional basketball team on his high definition television. "For those who know the sport and especially for those who are familiar with Denver's team" noted one scientist, "getting stimulated by watching a third rate sports product and a fourth rate team in high definition is all the evidence we needed".

Researchers also noted that in public testimony, AVS Forum members further displayed the crippling effects of their over-exposure by spouting incoherent and baseless facts at the Jeffco commissioners who were obviously amused by their attempts at public speaking. "Over the last 2 years", blubbered Mark Le Mutt, the self-annointed leader of the affected group, "I have spent in excess of $3000 trying desperately to pull in that radiation so that I can view the low power digital stations that are currently broadcasting from downtown Denver". It was obvious to all present, that Mark's severe brain damage may be the worse among all members and that he had progressed to the point where personal hygiene and exercise were no longer part of his daily regiment. "With his infatuation so firmly focussed, Mark is probably unaware that Denver is second only to San Diego in the number of days of sunshine per year" commented one scientist. "Perhaps these poor people, and especially Mark, should move to Seattle or Portland to live out their miserable lives since they would then be able to justify the inordinate number of hours spent indoors". Other forum members who failed to appear and provide testimony gave similarly lame excuses, all of which roughly translated into "I'm a couch potato".

In a vain attempt for self-satisfaction, the HDTV forum members have made numerous attacks on the people who actually reside in Jefferson County, Colorado and who live normal active lives with spouses and children. Experts have characterized the childish name calling which includes "NOPES", "SCARE" and "BANANAS" as a condition known as cerebralmysitosia or in layman's terms, excessive ignorance. This is punctuated by the fact that the majority of the group closely follows and truly believes in the misinformation spewed by the most recent tower applicant who has been airing a campaign riddled with lies.

While the results of this study are conclusive, the researchers will continue to monitor the forum in hopes of finding a cure for their condition. "Additional brain damage in brain damaged people is not a pretty site", commented one scientist. "While they will probably never be a contributing member of society, I can at least work to teach them about outside activities such as walking, hiking and with a little luck, bicycling".

Sven Jorgenson

Originally posted by wabisabi
This just in...

LCG II approved by a 3-0 vote.


-Wabisabi In-freakin-credible!!! :D

Wabisabi, why no grin or shriek?

Just heard the news on Channel 9 (yes, I was watching it). Great Birthday present for me, I guess I will have an extra drink tonight at the celebration, and just for old times sake, "Shame on you KMGH" for not supporting the viewers of Colorado and then getting a free ride from the good will established by KCNC.
:D :D :D :D :D

By the way, thanks to all of you who spoke and contributed to the effort at the hearings.

Funny GC.....I agree with the brain damage part -someone had to be brain damaged to dream all that up:)

Congrats and thanks to all who worked to get this done. Many thanks to Pete and KCNC and Mark and David and Ron.

Excellent job guys! Just friggen excellent.

It must have been my email that convinced them (just kidding) :D

The whopping 3-0 approval (I would think) makes it all the more difficult for SCARE to get this overturned. This has to be a devastating blow to Carney and company.

Finally Denver can move on.

Carney-who????

Unbelievable!!!!! 3-0!!!!

I thought Holloway would never vote Yes. She went first and after that, I knew it was in the bag!

I'm, so excited, I can hardly type. More to come...

:D :D :D :D :D

WOW ! A big thanks to the forum members who hung in there!

I can't wait to see the reports from Mark and the others!

:D :D :D :D :D

This has been an amazing day for me:

1) I was informed that a contract I signed (when I was back home on vacation) for a vacant lot in NY was signed by the seller.

2) I finally get High Speed Internet after waiting for forever (the wait has been even longer than the tower approval).

3) LCG2 is APPROVED (someone pinch me this must be wrong).

4) Nikon released some spiffy new gear for me to spend money on.

Again, many many thanks to those that worked hard on this (especially Mark).

PS: Happy B'day jm (you old fart) ;) (from an even older old fart)

It is a mute point now but for those who were not there to hear my testimony I will post it.

I am here to express my support for the LCG2 proposal. My reasons without going into a lot detail.
1) State of the art technology that is more effective in transmitting a signal. Significant is Directional Transmission. The level of power needed is based on distance from the tower. Low power (kilowatts) close to tower and increased to reach areas off in the distance.
2) Reduction in towers.
3) Better overall building layout and design.
4) Better overall appearance on Lookout Mountain.
5) Best location for transmitting a signal that will reach people all along the Front Range.
6) Keeps the digital signal coming from the same location as analog.

As for radiation causing health problems I don?t know but fewer kilowatts for close to tower transmitting will result in lower levels of radiation.

I know there is attempt to get the towers removed from Lookout Mountain and some think this will happen if the towers are moved to an alternate site. However it is my understanding these existing towers even though non conforming are legal by permit and can remain forever.

I would like to say a few words for my wife.
My wife has a respiratory condition, COPD and Emphysema for those who don?t know COPD stands for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. These conditions keeps her from physical activities or even enjoying activities / entertainment away from home. She also has Lupus a condition that prevents her from being in the sun. I know some people will question whether or not TV is entertainment, but for my wife it is her entertainment and she wants digital TV.

By approving this proposal we know what will be status quo today, tomorrow, next week, next month, next year and many years into the future. However if the proposal is not approved do we know? One thing we do know under current zoning laws they could swap out the building equipment and continue to use the towers/antennas that already exist on Lookout Mountain.

In closing I only have three words. APPROVE THIS PROPOSAL.

Just couldn't resist.
Now that this is approved CARE really stands for:

Commissioners
Are
Radiation
Educated

Fantastic!

We've had a ridiculously long delay in getting this done (not necessarily just due to JeffCo), but I must admit that JeffCo did end up with a better proposal with LCG2 vs. LCG1. And the commissioners seemed to agree 3-0!

Thanks to everyone who testified and/or wrote letters & e-mail.

Mark

Sweet!!!

How soon will they start on the construction??? I hope they don't take their sweet time with this new tower or we could be back in a holding pattern for years.

Dan

I would have loved to hear the reaction from the CARE/NIMBY/NOPE when the decision was read. Priceless. So, what was the reaction?