eHam.net - Amateur Radio (Ham Radio) Community

Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Speak Out
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net


QSL Managers
     

Ham Links
     



[Articles Home]  [Add Article]  

Government Tower Woes

Gerald Smith (W6TER) on June 10, 2000
View comments about this article!

Got Permit, No Covenants, No Problem - Think Again!

Dream location. That was the goal, a piece of land big enough for two towers and beverages.

I began my search near Albuquerque in the spring of 1999. It is tough to find a location without covenants and without undue government restriction. You also have to consider your family need in terms of size and style of house, not next to a motorcycle muffler research shop, etc.

I found the house in late May in the East Mountain section of Albuquerque. A five-acre piece, fenced, no trees and the closest neighbor was 400 feet away. The lot contained a 3,000 square foot, five-year-old house. It was just perfect.

I had the realtor and the title company run checks and, indeed, no covenants. Since the location is in an unincorporated area, I talked with officials of the Bernalillo Country Building Department. I even bought their zoning and building code. The officials said there was no restriction on ham towers, not even a height restriction. My reading of the zoning code confirmed their advice.

Still, I wanted another opinion about government restrictions. I asked an attorney to review the county code. He confirmed no restrictions.

I retained a professional engineer and had drawings made for two, 130 foot Rohn 45 towers. After closing on the house and land, I submitted the drawing with a building permit application in July 1999. On August 5, 1999, I was issued a permit for the towers.

I went about construction and buying materials. Then, on December 8, the Building Official, along with three associates (guess they were afraid of me) showed up, unannounced, and delivered a "Stop Work Notice." They said they issued the permit in err and that Amateur Radio towers and antennas are not allowed in any residential zone in the county. I immediately retained a land use knowledgeable attorney. After two letters and 60 days, demanding to know the details of their position, the county said that in June 1999 an ordinance was passed permitting Amateur towers in two non-residential zones (I was not told of the ordinance when I met with the building officials prior to permit application nor was it in the zoning code package I purchased). Their logic is; if it is permitted in two non-residential zones, it is not permitted in residential zones (convoluted, right?).

A provision in the county code allows an administrative appeal of a Stop Work Notice to a county board of appeals and, on appeal, the Stop Work Notice is stayed until the appeal is heard. We appealed and continued construction. The county issued another Stop Work Notice; we appealed and continued construction. I also filed for a declaratory judgement in state district court asking the court to decide that Amateur Radio towers must be allowed in residential zone and any law or ordinance to the contrary is preempted by the FCC PRB-1 ruling.

The county filed for a restraining order in district court. I prevailed and continued construction.

I have made a motion for summary judgement in this matter with the court. It will be heard in late September. Meanwhile, the neighbors, some 30 of them, have intervened in my suit against the county, claiming nuisance and devaluation of property. The ARRL, through the offices of Chris Imlay, has written an amicus (friend of the court) brief in my support.

I expect to win this struggle, even if I have to appeal the matter this matter to a higher court. I will not let Amateur Radio go down the tubes on such arrogant action on the part of a government. However, the legal bills are huge. No, you don't get it back on prevailing.

A lawyer friend, C. D. Carter, W5IP, who does not practice in land use, has set up a Tower Defense Fund to help defray my legal cost. If you don't mind helping, here is his address. Make your check payable to the "The Tower Defense Fund". Along with the fund, three trustees have been appointed to make sure dispusements are proper. I promise; the money will only be used for legal costs in my situation. If there is money leftover (I doubt it) it will be retained for future hams having legal costs just to use their property for our hobby.

Tower Defense Fund
C. D. Carter, W5IP
904 Four Hills Road SE
Albuquerque NM 87123

If you would like to contact me, please do. My Email is w6ter@att.net. My telephone is 505-281-2721.

73, Gerry Smith
W6TER

Member Comments:
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
 
New Mexico Tower fiasco  
by K9RX on June 11, 2000 Mail this to a friend!
Dear Mr. Carter,
I am sorry about the legal nightmare you are currently going through. We do as hams have to stick together and therefore... I have sent a check to your defense fund. Please keep us apprised.

It probably means very little but... you can tell them they are doing a disservice to their community. I have wanted to move to Albuquerque for some time. My second hobby - astronomy - begs me to go there for some of the best skies in the country. But if this is the attitude they have towards ham radio then I want no part of it.

Regards and best wishes...

Gary Myers
K9RX


 
RE: New Mexico Tower fiasco  
by W6TER on June 12, 2000 Mail this to a friend!
Gary,

Thanks for your comments and your check. It is appreciated.

Gerry
 
RE: New Mexico Tower fiasco  
by WN3VAW on June 12, 2000 Mail this to a friend!
Gerry,

Do I have your permission to reprint this article in my next club newsletter? (I will, of COURSE, give full credit to you and note that it came from the eHam.net site)

The more publicity we get, the better!

73, ron wn3vaw
wn3vaw@arrl.net
 
RE: New Mexico Tower fiasco  
by W6TER on June 12, 2000 Mail this to a friend!
Sure, pleaso.

Gerry, W6TER
 
re: New Mexico  
by KF6UEF on June 13, 2000 Mail this to a friend!

New Mexico not ham friendly?? I'm surprised... Sounds more
like zoning board trying to save-face... Or a neighbor with
alot of influence(more likely the latter).

Interesting that here in Sunnyvale, CA... heart of SiliconValley with a bizzion people... is more ham friendly.

go figure!

Good luck,

73,
Antonio

 
W6TER's Tower Nightmare  
by WF0H on June 15, 2000 Mail this to a friend!
Gerry - I think you should contact Rush Limbaugh. I'm not a big fan of his show, but this is the kind of governmental malarkey that he loves to use as examples. If the 'bad guys' in this case are liberals or at least Democrats he would probably talk about it on the air for at least a week. If they're Republicans, though, he will probably turn it around to look like it's your fault. How many hams helped out during the fires in Santa Fe?
 
RE: New Mexico Tower fiasco  
by AG5M on June 15, 2000 Mail this to a friend!
Gerry

You have a check coming from me too. Your situation is exactly why I asked eHam.com to start the forum topic on antenna restrictions. This whole business of obtaining "reasonable accomodation" against tower and antenna restrictions is a "must win" situation for the ARRL and the amateur community if this hobby is to survive, let alone thrive. Keep us informed.
 
I really hate it when this kind of thing happens..  
by KG6ANJ on June 15, 2000 Mail this to a friend!

It's really sad when people in public office are too cowardly to do anything important, but when it comes to meddling in peoples affairs, they are at little risk and can look important. My check is in the mail.


73,
Mark
 
New Mexico Fires  
by W6TER on June 16, 2000 Mail this to a friend!
I am so proud of the ham community in New Mexico. During the Cerro Grande fire, around Los Alamos, hams manned 14 locations, 17 operating positions, 24 hours each day for 11+ days. On average, they handled 7,200 messages a day. Great service!

Gerry, W6TER
 
Government Tower Woes  
by VE3SRD on November 11, 2000 Mail this to a friend!
Would it be possible to give an update on this situation now?
Bob, VE3SRD
 
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.

Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help

Related News & Articles
How Much is a New Tower?
What Antenna Restrictions?
Tensioning Guy Wires
Towers...
Do You Know Where Your Tower Came From?


Other Regulatory Articles
Bandwidth versus Keying Speed
Fact or Fallacy?
HFA Spotlights ARRL Board Meeting
Kiss 33cm (900 MHz) Goodbye?
Group Lists 'Antenna Allies' In Congress