You do realize the FCC has a LOT to say in what a local is allowed to do when it comes to "improving their broadcast equipment", right? A station can't increase power, put up a new antenna, move the antenna higher, etc without the blessing of the FCC.
And do you want to cover 95% of land mass or 95% of viewers?
While I'd prefer land are, I'd settle for population first.
They goal being for the station to do a better job of reaching those in the DMA.
Oh, and none of this 30ft high outdoor antennacrap either. Attic, eve, roof mount. No excuse for so many in the DMA to have to go to great lengths to receive the signal that's dedicated to them.
Where I grew up, the FCC's own maps (based on a 30ft high antenna) show no signal for the NBC and CBS stations I watched as a child in the analog days. FOX and 2 PBS stations are "weak" now. But back in the 80s they were all usually clear with a good antenna at the roof peak (Under $100 total)
So per the FCC I'd only get ABC and one PBS stations there now with a more expensive antenna setup than we used in the 80s.
I'm aware the FCC plays a role in expanding coverage as do many other things (like access to space for an antenna). But, I doubt the FCC would give them much difficulty over installing low power repeaters to cover some areas (like those in a shadow)