• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

KSCO(AM), Santa Cruz, CA Whoops

kfbkfb said:
In at least one case, an AM daytimer is allowed to operate and program their FM translator(s) 24/7, since the FMs are allowed to operate 24/7 with the (controlling) AM on during only during the day, IMHO an AM station should be allowed to operate only during profitable hours (reading RD.com, it seems that time is in the morning).
Click to expand...
All translators for daytime AMs are allowed to operate 24/7 if they wish to.

Otherwise, the FCC will not allow an allocation to under utilize its frequency. So running just a few hours a day is not allowed.
kfbkfb said:
It would likely require a rules change by the FCC, but, AFAIK, the FCC cares about keeping interference low by specifying technical parameters, if an AM station wants to be OTA for ~2hrs/day, I'd say let them.
Click to expand...
Operating limited hours will not allow other stations to operate. It is of no benefit to the community and deprives them of a greater schedule. Nobody is going to spend the money to get rulemaking proposed for this as nobody wants it.
 
Gregg. said:
It is puzzling to me why KSCO admitted it did this for the last 30 years! If you want to go to lower power at night and lose your extra towers, the FCC likely will say yes. No need to admit your past sins.

With three FM translators, it has no need to run anything more than a few watts at night. But what Washington-based law firm or engineering firm allowed KSCO to admit it's been doing this without authorization, when the FCC never knew?
Click to expand...
Well, it's not just a past sin, it's a current one. The more I think about it, the note to me reads like a CYA letter from a newly-hired Chief Engineer who doesn't want trouble from the FCC..

Thirty years puts us right back to the time Michael Zwerling bought KSCO, using a chunk of his mom and dad's money. Both were involved in the station, his dad until his death in 1998 and his mom, who had a daily conservative political commentary segment, until her death in 2017.

So, the Zwerlings buy a legally-operating radio station and within the first year, one or all of them come up with this harebrained work-around to the required nighttime directional pattern.

Everything I've heard is that Zwerling's a bit of a character. The CE probably went around and around with him about being in compliance with the license, likely arguing that they needed to go back to directional ASAP and the best he could get him to agree to was a Hail Mary letter to the FCC to see if they'd buy off on continuing with the illegal operation instead.
 
michael hagerty said:
Well, it's not just a past sin, it's a current one. The more I think about it, the note to me reads like a CYA letter from a newly-hired Chief Engineer who doesn't want trouble from the FCC..
Click to expand...
Frequency1 said:
<...>
Accordingly, the KSCO(AM) request for STA to operate non-directionally at night at 1 kilowatt of power is DENIED. Station KSCO(AM) must terminate its unauthorized non-directional operation at night IMMEDIATELY and may either resume operating with its licensed directional nighttime facilities or file a 301 application to modify its nighttime operation.
Click to expand...
The easy money is on the fact that the "licensed directional nighttime facilities" are non-functional. After sitting for ~30 years inoperative, it's hard to tell what level of effort would be needed to bring into compliance.

Which leaves option two from the FCC - new application for reduced power.

Meanwhile, since they are non-compliant during night-time hours, theoretically, shouldn't they be off-air (AM at least) during those hours?

What's your bet they're NOT off-air??
 
kwthom said:
The easy money is on the fact that the "licensed directional nighttime facilities" are non-functional. After sitting for ~30 years inoperative, it's hard to tell what level of effort would be needed to bring into compliance.

Which leaves option two from the FCC - new application for reduced power.

Meanwhile, since they are non-compliant during night-time hours, theoretically, shouldn't they be off-air (AM at least) during those hours?

What's your bet they're NOT off-air??
Click to expand...
I'm half-temped to drive down to Santa Cruz just to find out (hell, I'm always half-tempted to drive down to Santa Cruz).

If they're not obeying an order to "terminate its unauthorized non-directional operation at night IMMEDIATELY", then I gotta think license revocation is a possibility.
 
kfbkfb said:
Maybe KSCO could - to coin a new term - become a morningtimer (only broadcast an omni signal on AM from 7AM to 9:10AM, transmitter off at other times [9:10 to include a top of the hour national newscast, local news and an automated reminder to tune to one of the FM translators]).


Kirk Bayne
Click to expand...

you come up with some of the wildest ideas ive seen on a message board in a long time

and i dont mean that in a good way

i want some of whatever youre smoking.
 
AFAIK, the idea is to get radio listeners to listen to an AMs FM translator(s), so limiting the time (only mornings, for example) an AM is OTA would reduce the AM operating cost and could be a help to move listeners over to FM.

(ideas issue - what can I say - at some point >100 years ago, someone thought/said - hey, lets try broadcasting voices and music in addition to Morse Code with these newfangled Marconi wireless devices - and here we are)


Kirk Bayne
 
Last edited:
michael hagerty said:
I'm half-temped to drive down to Santa Cruz just to find out (hell, I'm always half-tempted to drive down to Santa Cruz).

If they're not obeying an order to "terminate its unauthorized non-directional operation at night IMMEDIATELY", then I gotta think license revocation is a possibility.
Click to expand...
Maybe a simple search on-line for satellite photos, just to see if the directional array still stands.

I mean, I'd *hope* that they're still standing, but c'mon, could be something *very* obvious.

EDIT: Physically located in Corcoran Lagoon - look @ 36.961895, -121.981905 in Google Maps satellite view.
 
Last edited:
kwthom said:
Maybe a simple search on-line for satellite photos, just to see if the directional array still stands.

I mean, I'd *hope* that they're still standing, but c'mon, could be something *very* obvious.

EDIT: Physically located in Corcoran Lagoon - look @ 36.961895, -121.981905 in Google Maps satellite view.
Click to expand...
Oh, yeah—the sticks are there. I get to Santa Cruz a couple of times a year.
 
I knew about this 2 years ago... im friends with a San Francisco engineer who told me 2 years ago that this had been going on for decades.

Yikes!
 
kfbkfb said:
Maybe KSCO could - to coin a new term - become a morningtimer (only broadcast an omni signal on AM from 7AM to 9:10AM, transmitter off at other times [9:10 to include a top of the hour national newscast, local news and an automated reminder to tune to one of the FM translators]).


Kirk Bayne
Click to expand...
No, they can't do that. There are minimum operating requirements.
 
SomeRadioGuy said:
I knew about this 2 years ago... im friends with a San Francisco engineer who told me 2 years ago that this had been going on for decades.

Yikes!
Click to expand...
The physical plant stands, as I noted above when you look at the satellite photo of the facility. I'm just wondering if the location is what kept management ~30 years ago from dealing with the problem. After all, from what I can tell, that facility was installed circa 1961.

If KRLD isn't complaining about the interference that KSCO has been spewing for ~30 years...why should anyone else (a rhetorical questions, folks...) care about what they have proposed?
 
kwthom said:
The physical plant stands, as I noted above when you look at the satellite photo of the facility. I'm just wondering if the location is what kept management ~30 years ago from dealing with the problem. After all, from what I can tell, that facility was installed circa 1961.

If KRLD isn't complaining about the interference that KSCO has been spewing for ~30 years...why should anyone else (a rhetorical questions, folks...) care about what they have proposed?
Click to expand...
Well, as long as the FCC wants to be the FCC, they can't very well look at a 30-year violation, say "Hmm, cool." and move along. So, on precedent alone, the FCC needs to tell them to stop it (and they have).

If---big IF---a group of owners wanted to lobby the FCC and say "AM non-interference rules are outdated and we should be allowed to come up with our own solutions to reasonable restrictions that don't cost us an arm and a leg the way multiple towers and the land for them do", then fine. Maybe the FCC would listen.
 
  • Full Title: Zwerling Broadcasting System, Ltd, KSCO(AM), Santa Cruz, California
  • Document Type(s): Notice of Apparent Liability For Forfeiture, Memorandum Opinion and Order
  • Bureau(s): Media


Description:
Issued NAL in the amount of $20,000 to Zwerling Broadcasting System, Ltd, for unauthorized operation of KSCO(AM)
www.fcc.gov

Zwerling Broadcasting System, Ltd

Issued NAL in the amount of $20,000 to Zwerling Broadcasting System, Ltd, for unauthorized operation of KSCO(AM)
www.fcc.gov www.fcc.gov
 
Frequency1 said:
  • Full Title: Zwerling Broadcasting System, Ltd, KSCO(AM), Santa Cruz, California
  • Document Type(s): Notice of Apparent Liability For Forfeiture, Memorandum Opinion and Order
  • Bureau(s): Media


Description:
Issued NAL in the amount of $20,000 to Zwerling Broadcasting System, Ltd, for unauthorized operation of KSCO(AM)
www.fcc.gov

Zwerling Broadcasting System, Ltd

Issued NAL in the amount of $20,000 to Zwerling Broadcasting System, Ltd, for unauthorized operation of KSCO(AM)
www.fcc.gov www.fcc.gov
Click to expand...
That's getting off easy---not even a grand a year.
 
Frequency1 said:
  • Full Title: Zwerling Broadcasting System, Ltd, KSCO(AM), Santa Cruz, California
  • Document Type(s): Notice of Apparent Liability For Forfeiture, Memorandum Opinion and Order
  • Bureau(s): Media


Description:
Issued NAL in the amount of $20,000 to Zwerling Broadcasting System, Ltd, for unauthorized operation of KSCO(AM)
www.fcc.gov

Zwerling Broadcasting System, Ltd

Issued NAL in the amount of $20,000 to Zwerling Broadcasting System, Ltd, for unauthorized operation of KSCO(AM)
www.fcc.gov www.fcc.gov
Click to expand...
Ditto "Is that all?"
 
Tough to get blood out of a rock, I'd suppose.

Wondering if the Grim Reaper brought the NAL to the owner personally. ☠️
 
www.santacruzwaves.com

Santa Cruz’s KSCO Radio operating at loss, looks to audience for aid - Santa Cruz Waves

By Nicholas Ibarra, Santa Cruz Sentinel SANTA CRUZ >> KSCO Radio is losing more than $40,000 each month and the nearly 70-year-old station broadcasting across the Monterey Bay is turning to its listeners for support. “KSCO has been my primary philanthropic project for over two decades...
www.santacruzwaves.com www.santacruzwaves.com
^^^
KSCO Radio is losing more than $40,000 each month (2017 article)


Kirk Bayne
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom