On Jan 1, 3:00*am, radioguy wrote:
Palmdale claims the reduction to antenna lengths being no more than
one inch above the roofline is because doing so reduces interference
to consumer electronics that IS caused by ham radio stations.

So I was thinking, what would happen if Palmdale got their way???

And realized it would probably be this:

Besides just the increased interference that would result from the
lower antenna heights,

it is my understanding that antennas one inch or less are only
efficient at 900 mhz or higher, so

hams would have to start transmitting their ham radio activities on
bands like the 900 mhz, 2.4 ghz, and 5.8 ghz bands which would really
increase the "interference" to consumer electronics "caused by ham
radios".

After all, that's also where most of todays's cordless phones are,
along with baby monitors and surveillance cameras.

Consumers would not be able to use their cordless phones to make calls
because when they pick them up to make a phone call, instead of
hearing a dial tone, all they would hear are regularly scheduled ham
nets going on, or hams talking (that one actually happened to me once
when I picked up our cordless phone to make a phone call), or other
undecipharable noises caused by ham radio operations, such as CW,
RTTY, SSTV, FSTV,digital, etcetera.

Then Palmdale would break into the hams' homes and arrest them for
violating Palmdale's law by causing "interference to consumer
electronics caused by ham radios".

Palmdale MUST be stopped.

BEFORE it is too late.

Well first off I don't think it's going to hold any water, because
it's too restrictive and government entities like Palmdale California
City Council has to use the less restrictive mean necessary substance
any government interest. Secondly RF interference is the jurisdiction
of the FCC and only the FCC. PALDALE can believe all they want, the
bottom line is it will not hold up in court.