Neighbors resist plans for 66-foot Boulder City radio tower

Greg Harman

Tuesday, May 23, 2000 | 11:26 a.m.

By most accounts the Golden Age of the amateur radio operator -- or "ham" for short -- has long expired.

The hobby has fallen victim to an aging membership, an influx of new technologies and, radio buffs insist, the misperceptions of the general public.

In the past, interference with telephone and television reception was often indulged in light of the public service ham operators played in community disaster assistance.

But in this Internet age of cellular phones and fiber optics cable, some Boulder City residents are unsure of how lenient they want to be with neighbor Dave Abbott.

Abbott's application to replace his 30-foot roof antenna with a 66-foot backyard radio tower met with the stiff resistance of several fellow Boulder City residents and was rejected by the city planning commission for "negative aesthetic impact" and undefined safety concerns.

But the ham camp is adamant: "He has the right to put the tower up and the city has no right to restrict it," insists Radio World owner and ham operator Dave Floyd.

At its May 9 meeting the City Council seemed to agree by finding the planning commission's denial inadequate.

Citing a 1984 U.S. Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals decision that found in favor of a radio ham at odds with his Illinois community, City Attorney Dave Olsen warned the council that if the rights of ham operators are "unreasonably restricted" the U.S. Federal Communications Commission will intercede.

"We are going to find ourselves preempted by federal regulations," Olsen said. "The city must make a reasonable effort to negotiate."

Guided by Olsen's recommendation, the council returned Abbott's request to the planning commission for another look. It will be taken up by the commission next month.

"The sum and substance and basis of all this is that the FCC thinks citizens should be encouraged into this type of hobby," Olsen said.

But Lynn and Anita Froistad are still working to keep their neighbor's antenna from growing.

"All life is compromise," Anita Froistad said. "We live in a town where there is no gambling, no liquor stores. They regiment the speed limit in front of schools and they have no control over something like this? It just doesn't make sense."

Until 1982 Boulder City code allowed ham radio buffs to raise antennas as high as 75 feet without a permit. Then the city began requiring a conditional use permit to reach those heights.

Abbott is the first to seek the conditional use permit since the law was changed 18 years ago.

Some residents fear that if Abbott's request is granted the estimated 80 other Boulder City ham operators will raise their antennas as well.

But at a cost of almost $5,000, Abbott doesn't see that happening.

"There's not going to be a proliferation. Maybe it will be a proliferation of one."

Raising his antenna by 30 feet will also reduce potential radio frequency interference by 75 percent, Abbott said. Possibly good news for the Froistads, who discovered their neighbors talking over their television the week after they moved into their Boulder City home.

Though they freely admit interference happens, hams are unyielding when it comes to assigning fault.

"It's not the fault of the hams sending the signal. It's the lazy manufacturers," said Floyd.

Roy Poindexter heard a duplicate assertion when he confronted his neighbor over nightly telephone and television interference occurring five years ago. Though the ham operator admitted he was calling his father in California during the regular hours of interference the fault, he insisted, was in the lack of radio frequency filters in Poindexter's television -- not in the ham radio signals.

"He said, 'I'm legal. It's your problem.' "

But ham operators question what they see as strict city codes regarding antennas.

"Whatever happened to individual freedom in this country?" asked Floyd, who would sell Abbott the necessary equipment for his new tower. "The city really screwed up when they went to this permitting process and started inviting public comments.

"Good heavens, you can't even walk out of your home unless your tie is on straight."

Abbott candidly admits he wouldn't want a 70-foot tower next to his home. "But, hey, if the ordinance says I can have it, I'm going to go for it."

Olsen said that communities may draw up covenants, codes and restrictions (CC&Rs) by unanimous vote that would restrict newcomers from erecting towers.

"It's alway possible for a neighborhood to organize into a housing association and set up CC&Rs that everyone agrees to," Olsen said.

The FCC is working to preempt any local or neighborhood zoning that restricts communications use. Olsen suggests that the FCC is having a hard time admitting that ham operators are obsolete.

"It's kind of hard to say, 'We don't need you anymore so we're not going to protect you.' "

A petition by the American Radio Relay League to do away with all municipal codes that restrict ham radio use was denied by the federal government in November 1999.

"This man is trying to do it the expensive, well-engineered, correct way and they're throwing rocks at him," Floyd said. "We didn't want to live in communist Russia. We think we live in the Great Republic of the USA."

"(Froistad) doesn't want a 70-foot tower and I don't either," Abbott said, a smile crossing his face. "I only applied for 66 feet."