Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
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

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 2 [3] 4 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: S. 1534 Amateur Radio Parity Act pulled from Subcommittee markup  (Read 7814 times)
KN6SD
Member

Posts: 151




Ignore
« Reply #30 on: October 15, 2017, 06:43:38 PM »

Has anyone that purchased a home in an HOA controlled community received any written guarantees regarding Return on Investment Percentages after X number of years?Huh

Wow, nobody got anything in writing... To all of the Pro-HOA folks, you might want to check out this Lady's website and radio program http://onthecommons.us/ ...

Just another website opinion blog. As with any organizational entity, there will always be some "bad apple, renegade" HOA's, in the great minority. It all comes down for the potential homeowner to decide where and how they want to live, and perform their due diligence. If they feel an HOA is taking away their rights, then don't buy in one. Nobody should be criticized one way or the other.

I did not criticize Frank's decision to purchase in an HOA, I asked him a question, then I put it out there to anyone in an HOA...

As far as your assumption about most HOA's being good for the average homeowner, I respectfully disagree. There's plenty of online sources to back up my opinion about the HOA/CID problem. The only Professionals that promote the HOA situation in a positive light seem to always be connected to the Real Estate industry.

73,
Russ

I'm not suggesting that you criticized Frank, just that many others in various forums have suggested that HOA dwellers are stupid for moving into one. I say that it's none of their business where and how one decides to live. Who really cares?

HOA's not being good for the "average" homeowner? Yes, we disagree. Not everyone is a ham, or a "you're taking away all my rights" proponent. As I stated before, in the 25 years I've lived in three HOA communities with literally thousands of homes. I have known many neighbors, attended HOA meetings, and heard all the scuttlebutt out there. Yes, there have been some scattered disputes, but bad for the "average" homeowner? Naaah. The very great majority love where they live, and don't mind the "rules" if they're just normal, law-abiding people.

Understand that I'd love to erect some form of an outside reasonable antenna, and support permissive legislation. But until that happens, I'll follow the rules I agreed to, and continue to operate with antennas that no one can see...not that difficult, and doesn't bother anyone. Sometimes there are other priorities in life than ham radio. Others may feel differently...whatever.

73, Bob K7JQ

Well, according to your QRZ webpage you're having fun with ham radio. Here's what you have posted about your antennas:

As a result of living in an antenna-restricted community, my main antenna is a Tarheel 200A-HP screwdriver for 80 through 6 meters, ground-mounted on a hill behind my house, with sixty 25-foot radials stapled to the ground. Fortunately, with it being so far away from any houses, I have no artificial noise level, no RFI, and it can "see" for many miles in all directions from the top of the hill (pictures below). It is well camouflaged,only visible from a vantage point up the street from my house at the end of a cul-de-sac (picture below). As a backup, I have mono-band dipoles from 10 thru 40 meters in the attic, remotely switched from the shack, andalso have a Par Omniangle 6 meter antenna at 16 feet in the back yard.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now Bob, you do know your setup in most HOA's would get you a daily fine if you got caught... And the Board doesn't care if your antennas can't be seen, if they know they're there, it's a CC&R violation... The Rules are the Rules...

My point being, you seem pretty laid back about the whole HOA drama because you're getting what you want, you're on the air with a decent signal... Most Amateurs don't have the same living arrangements as you do.
Logged
K7JQ
Member

Posts: 947




Ignore
« Reply #31 on: October 16, 2017, 04:55:53 AM »

Sometimes there are other priorities in life than ham radio. Others may feel differently...whatever.

73, Bob K7JQ
Yep. But, I missed working you in AZQP.

vy 73 es gl,
Bryan WA7PRC

Not much genral hamming or contesting the past few months. Dealt with a prolonged illness and resulting recent death in the family. Coming back on this major contest season.

73,  Bob
I'm sorry to hear that, Bob. You have my condolences for your loss.
vy 73,
Bryan WA7PRC

Thanks, Bryan. See you in the Fall tests.
73,   Bob
Logged
K7JQ
Member

Posts: 947




Ignore
« Reply #32 on: October 16, 2017, 06:36:29 AM »


Well, according to your QRZ webpage you're having fun with ham radio. Here's what you have posted about your antennas:

As a result of living in an antenna-restricted community, my main antenna is a Tarheel 200A-HP screwdriver for 80 through 6 meters, ground-mounted on a hill behind my house, with sixty 25-foot radials stapled to the ground. Fortunately, with it being so far away from any houses, I have no artificial noise level, no RFI, and it can "see" for many miles in all directions from the top of the hill (pictures below). It is well camouflaged,only visible from a vantage point up the street from my house at the end of a cul-de-sac (picture below). As a backup, I have mono-band dipoles from 10 thru 40 meters in the attic, remotely switched from the shack, andalso have a Par Omniangle 6 meter antenna at 16 feet in the back yard.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now Bob, you do know your setup in most HOA's would get you a daily fine if you got caught... And the Board doesn't care if your antennas can't be seen, if they know they're there, it's a CC&R violation... The Rules are the Rules...

My point being, you seem pretty laid back about the whole HOA drama because you're getting what you want, you're on the air with a decent signal... Most Amateurs don't have the same living arrangements as you do.

Well, Russ, thank you for pointing that out, and assuming how "laid back" I seem to be "about the whole HOA drama". The fact is, I didn't move into this house with the intent of using the hill for an antenna. There were many other priorities besides ham radio operation. I used (and still use) attic dipoles for many years in this and my two other HOA controlled homes before discovering a spot on the hill that popped an idea into my head. It's called "giving it a shot and see what happens". A screwdriver is a very small, efficiency-compromised antenna, with no guarantees as to how good it will work in this application. All the other hams have complimented me for trying it out. In fact, many times the attic dipoles work better with different propagation. At least I can run higher power into the screwdriver.

Another fact is that HOA's, upon discovering a violation, provide a notice with a time frame to remedy before issuing any fines. If that situation happens, it's exclusively back to the attic antennas. No harm, no foul. And HOA's aren't the main problem. They don't "make" the rules. They're in place to enforce the underlying CC&R's on any property. Even without the presence of an HOA, if the property CC&R's have antenna prohibitions, any neighbor can sue you to remove your antennas...and they would win.

I don't know what your problem is. We just have different non-professional opinions about whether HOA's in general are good or bad for the "average" person, not just concentrating on antenna restrictions. You're basing it on website opinions, and I'm stating from personal experience. Then you basically attack me for trying out a different antenna solution, and "getting what I want". How do you know how "decent" my signal is, and what my "living arrangements" are? I happen to like where I live, despite antenna restrictions. And yes, I have fun with ham radio, even with attic dipoles.  Can't we just agree to disagree without getting personal? I always thought that's what internet forums were for.

73,  Bob K7JQ 
Logged
KN6SD
Member

Posts: 151




Ignore
« Reply #33 on: October 16, 2017, 04:14:07 PM »


Well, according to your QRZ webpage you're having fun with ham radio. Here's what you have posted about your antennas:

As a result of living in an antenna-restricted community, my main antenna is a Tarheel 200A-HP screwdriver for 80 through 6 meters, ground-mounted on a hill behind my house, with sixty 25-foot radials stapled to the ground. Fortunately, with it being so far away from any houses, I have no artificial noise level, no RFI, and it can "see" for many miles in all directions from the top of the hill (pictures below). It is well camouflaged,only visible from a vantage point up the street from my house at the end of a cul-de-sac (picture below). As a backup, I have mono-band dipoles from 10 thru 40 meters in the attic, remotely switched from the shack, andalso have a Par Omniangle 6 meter antenna at 16 feet in the back yard.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now Bob, you do know your setup in most HOA's would get you a daily fine if you got caught... And the Board doesn't care if your antennas can't be seen, if they know they're there, it's a CC&R violation... The Rules are the Rules...

My point being, you seem pretty laid back about the whole HOA drama because you're getting what you want, you're on the air with a decent signal... Most Amateurs don't have the same living arrangements as you do.

Well, Russ, thank you for pointing that out, and assuming how "laid back" I seem to be "about the whole HOA drama". The fact is, I didn't move into this house with the intent of using the hill for an antenna. There were many other priorities besides ham radio operation. I used (and still use) attic dipoles for many years in this and my two other HOA controlled homes before discovering a spot on the hill that popped an idea into my head. It's called "giving it a shot and see what happens". A screwdriver is a very small, efficiency-compromised antenna, with no guarantees as to how good it will work in this application. All the other hams have complimented me for trying it out. In fact, many times the attic dipoles work better with different propagation. At least I can run higher power into the screwdriver.

Another fact is that HOA's, upon discovering a violation, provide a notice with a time frame to remedy before issuing any fines. If that situation happens, it's exclusively back to the attic antennas. No harm, no foul. And HOA's aren't the main problem. They don't "make" the rules. They're in place to enforce the underlying CC&R's on any property. Even without the presence of an HOA, if the property CC&R's have antenna prohibitions, any neighbor can sue you to remove your antennas...and they would win.

I don't know what your problem is. We just have different non-professional opinions about whether HOA's in general are good or bad for the "average" person, not just concentrating on antenna restrictions. You're basing it on website opinions, and I'm stating from personal experience. Then you basically attack me for trying out a different antenna solution, and "getting what I want". How do you know how "decent" my signal is, and what my "living arrangements" are? I happen to like where I live, despite antenna restrictions. And yes, I have fun with ham radio, even with attic dipoles.  Can't we just agree to disagree without getting personal? I always thought that's what internet forums were for.

73,  Bob K7JQ 

I don't have a problem with you Bob... And for the record, I am glad you can operate and enjoy your hobby...

I have a REAL Problem with the Developers and Local Governments that push the HOA situation on to everyone that wants to buy a home that has been built in the last 30 years.

You don't see some of the negatives because you're happy, I get that, I'll say 73 and the best of luck to you...

Russ
Logged
WA2ZQX
Member

Posts: 2




Ignore
« Reply #34 on: October 25, 2017, 10:07:06 AM »

Another let down! Fall-back, take your time and regroup ARRL...with a better team, a better bill and fresh input from your "very smart" membership. Nice to be a Florida resident, I get to vote against Senator Baker's bid for a new term in 2018...REVENGE IS SWEET!
Logged
N5BCN
Member

Posts: 28




Ignore
« Reply #35 on: October 30, 2017, 09:23:24 AM »

Just trying to understand the status of S. 1534; since it's been "pulled" does that mean it's dead, and if so, will ARRL have to wait until next year to file a new resolution?

73 Brian N5BCN
Logged
K4FMH
Member

Posts: 425




Ignore
« Reply #36 on: October 30, 2017, 06:49:15 PM »

It’s not dead in the sense that it couldn’t be put up for Subcommittee review (“markup”) during this session...but dead in the practical sense that the cosponsorung Senator who chairs the Subcommittee (Wicker) knows that his constituent who lobbied him to cosponsor no longer supports the CAI-ARRL changes resulting in the current version AND that Subcommittee member Sen Nelson (D-FL) wants even more changes.

Does this help?

Just trying to understand the status of S. 1534; since it's been "pulled" does that mean it's dead, and if so, will ARRL have to wait until next year to file a new resolution?

73 Brian N5BCN
Logged
N5BCN
Member

Posts: 28




Ignore
« Reply #37 on: October 30, 2017, 07:20:44 PM »

Yes, thank you.  Sounds like both sides have walked away from it.

73 Brian N5BCN
Logged
KN6SD
Member

Posts: 151




Ignore
« Reply #38 on: October 30, 2017, 07:54:22 PM »

It’s not dead in the sense that it couldn’t be put up for Subcommittee review (“markup”) during this session...but dead in the practical sense that the cosponsorung Senator who chairs the Subcommittee (Wicker) knows that his constituent who lobbied him to cosponsor no longer supports the CAI-ARRL changes resulting in the current version AND that Subcommittee member Sen Nelson (D-FL) wants even more changes.

Does this help?

Just trying to understand the status of S. 1534; since it's been "pulled" does that mean it's dead, and if so, will ARRL have to wait until next year to file a new resolution?

73 Brian N5BCN

Here's my latest version of "Parity"... Let's get something passed that can benefit more than just ham radio..

    Homeowners Wireless Freedom Act of 2018
                    
AN ACT

To direct the Federal Communications Commission to amend its rules so as to prohibit the application to all Wireless Communications Devices of certain private land use restrictions, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the “Homeowners Wireless Freedom Act of 2018”.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress finds the following:

(1) In 2016, there were about 125.82 million households in the United States. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, a household consists of all the people who occupy a housing unit. Of the 125.82 million household it is estimated that 60 million homes have private land use restrictions that preclude wireless communications devices.

(2)  The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulates radio frequency (RF) devices contained in electronic-electrical products that are capable of emitting radio frequency energy by radiation, conduction, or other means.

(3) There is a strong Federal interest in the effective performance of Wireless Communications Devices established at residences. Wireless Communication Devices may provide homeowners with a means to aid other homeowners or call for help when the standard communication paths are unavailable or destroyed. Such devices have been shown to be frequently and increasingly precluded by unreasonable private land use restrictions, including restrictive covenants.

(4) The Federal Communications Commission has sought guidance and direction from Congress with respect to the application of the Commission’s limited preemption policy regarding Wireless Communications to private land use restrictions, including restrictive covenants.

SEC. 3. ACCOMMODATION OF WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS DEVICES.

Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Federal Communications Commission shall amend the Code of Federal Regulations, so that such applicable section(s) prohibits application to Wireless Communications Devices of any private land use restriction, including a restrictive covenant, that—

(1) precludes such communications;

(2) fails to reasonably accommodate such communications; or

(3) does not constitute the minimum practicable restriction on such communications to accomplish the legitimate purpose of the private entity seeking to enforce such restriction.

SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS:

   In this Act:

(1)   WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS DEVICE. —The term “Wireless Communications Device” means any Two-Way or One-Way Radio Service licensed or unlicensed by the Federal Communications Commission that may allow a Citizen to communicate without the local or national telecommunications infrastructure.



Logged
N5BCN
Member

Posts: 28




Ignore
« Reply #39 on: October 31, 2017, 08:45:51 AM »

On ARPA, remember is is only Sen Nelson in Florida who stands in the way of S. 1534 at this point. The CAI doesn’t have another Senator on the Subcommittee in their pocket. I’ve said before, the League’s cattle call for everyone to call/write his or her Senator was wasted bandwidth. Only Florida’s hams should’ve been mobilized to call Sen Nelson’s Office. Nelson stands for election next year. Reports are that Gov Scott (R) will run against him. Getting Scott to talk about the recent (and past) value of amateur radio communications during storms, floods, and other emergencies now is a soft point for Nelson. This is standard lobbying action. But the League never consulted anyone else about this. There is also nothing as of last week that Sen Nelson wants for a political quid pro quo.

K4FMH:

If I'm understanding you correctly, S. 1534 had a decent shot with the exception of Sen. Nelson's opposition and then the co-sponsor pulling support.  However, isn't it true that it got as far as it did because of CAI support (maybe I'm wrong on that point)?  And the only reason CAI would support it is because it benefits them (at the expense of hams).  That's the crux of the issue.  IMHO, any resolution that truly benefits hams will have no CAI support, any resolution that benefits the CAI (theoretically) shouldn't have the support of the ARRL.

I think that's KN6SD's point, widen the scope and you might get broader support, even outside the ham community.

Interesting discussion, will be curious to see how it resolves.

73 Brian N5BCN
« Last Edit: October 31, 2017, 08:49:02 AM by N5BCN » Logged
AF7JA
Member

Posts: 255




Ignore
« Reply #40 on: October 31, 2017, 11:48:02 AM »


If you're in an HOA, you'd better find out how much of a Reserve Fund it has... It is estimated that almost 70% of the HOA's out there have almost NO Reserve Fund. Why, because most Board Members do not know how to run a business, and they don't want to P.O. the Homeowners by raising fees.

Just my 1/2 cents of rant...

73,
Russ

We ran into this when looking for our Townhouse in Salt Lake. There is a large, and very nice looking, community near Salt Lake (to the south). However, a little research showed that they have nowhere near the reserve funds to meet future operating expenses. My daughter was doing some of the research and when she tried to ask questions about the HOA funds. They became convinced that she was a reporter and started to refuse to call he back and when she got through to them they would hang up on her.

Needless to say, we didn't buy there.

As for why a townhouse, it goes back to compromises. I am gone nearly all year. As such I do not have the time for yard maintenance. For me a townhouse works well; but it does restrict me to an attic antenna. I could put something in the yard; but I prefer to use the back yard for growing my grapes (even if the dog does eat them all).
Logged
K1ZJH
Member

Posts: 3301




Ignore
« Reply #41 on: October 31, 2017, 03:12:35 PM »

Please be careful, grapes are very toxic to some dogs.
Logged
K4FMH
Member

Posts: 425




Ignore
« Reply #42 on: November 01, 2017, 07:09:38 PM »

Actually, the CAI did not support ARPA at all...but it got passed in the House and got submitted in the Senate. They focused on Sen Nelson (and a Senator in CA...name escapes me right now) to get on their side. Nelson wanted more concessions even after the League agreed to several changes (see  my initial post in this thread) which many hams could no longer support (including me).

Frank
K4FMH

On ARPA, remember is is only Sen Nelson in Florida who stands in the way of S. 1534 at this point. The CAI doesn’t have another Senator on the Subcommittee in their pocket. I’ve said before, the League’s cattle call for everyone to call/write his or her Senator was wasted bandwidth. Only Florida’s hams should’ve been mobilized to call Sen Nelson’s Office. Nelson stands for election next year. Reports are that Gov Scott (R) will run against him. Getting Scott to talk about the recent (and past) value of amateur radio communications during storms, floods, and other emergencies now is a soft point for Nelson. This is standard lobbying action. But the League never consulted anyone else about this. There is also nothing as of last week that Sen Nelson wants for a political quid pro quo.

K4FMH:

If I'm understanding you correctly, S. 1534 had a decent shot with the exception of Sen. Nelson's opposition and then the co-sponsor pulling support.  However, isn't it true that it got as far as it did because of CAI support (maybe I'm wrong on that point)?  And the only reason CAI would support it is because it benefits them (at the expense of hams).  That's the crux of the issue.  IMHO, any resolution that truly benefits hams will have no CAI support, any resolution that benefits the CAI (theoretically) shouldn't have the support of the ARRL.

I think that's KN6SD's point, widen the scope and you might get broader support, even outside the ham community.

Interesting discussion, will be curious to see how it resolves.

73 Brian N5BCN
Logged
KN6SD
Member

Posts: 151




Ignore
« Reply #43 on: November 02, 2017, 05:44:58 AM »

To Anyone:

Any suggestions on how HR 555 / S 1534 can be made acceptable???
Logged
K1ZJH
Member

Posts: 3301




Ignore
« Reply #44 on: November 02, 2017, 06:13:38 AM »

I'd suggest using one of the rebuttals used by a hater--that this legislation only affects a very small percentage of those living under HOAs.  It is then obvious that the negative aspects, minimal and if any, will be far outweighed by the benefits offered by allowing licensed amateurs some consideration by Federal law.

Pete
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 2 [3] 4 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!