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: [1] 2 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The Amateur Radio Parity Act reintroducd to the Senate Take 3  (Read 4478 times)
WB2KSP
Member

Posts: 634




Ignore
« on: October 07, 2017, 05:17:07 PM »

Maybe third times a charm and those making trouble won't be able to get this one locked down. A suggestion to other board users, instead of getting into shouting matches with those intent on disrupting legitimate debate(defined; stop repeating the same point over and over with escalating anger and vitriol until the moderator locks the thread) I can keep creating new threads. It's just unfortunate that the same people keep going back and forth with the same point until the name calling starts. If I am able to create a thread about this subject why don't you do the same but take the other side. The only reason I can see that not happening is because your aim isn't to debate but to disrupt and aggravate.
Logged
KK4GGL
Member

Posts: 1293




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: October 07, 2017, 06:10:30 PM »

Einstein
Insanity
Logged

73,
Rick KK4GGL
WA7PRC
Member

Posts: 1845


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #2 on: October 07, 2017, 10:55:32 PM »

Maybe third times a charm and those making trouble won't be able to get this one locked down. A suggestion to other board users, instead of getting into shouting matches with those intent on disrupting legitimate debate(defined; stop repeating the same point over and over with escalating anger and vitriol until the moderator locks the thread) I can keep creating new threads. It's just unfortunate that the same people keep going back and forth with the same point until the name calling starts.

I agree. Some of you have taken to personal attacks on those who don't share your point of view. Merriam-Webster includes that in their definition of "trolling" (link).

If I am able to create a thread about this subject why don't you do the same but take the other side.
If your intent is to have everyone singing the same hymn, that would be pointless.

The only reason I can see that not happening is because your aim isn't to debate but to disrupt and aggravate.
According to Merriam-Webster, that is the definition of the term "trolling" (link). However, dating back to dial-up BBSs and USENET, the primary reason for forums is to include ALL points of view... including that which is not in lockstep with yours. If that aggravates you, you're free to not create or participate in threads.
Logged
ND6M
Member

Posts: 569




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: October 08, 2017, 07:56:08 AM »

I really don't think there is anything new to add about this subject that hasn't been regurgitated MANY times.
Logged
KN6SD
Member

Posts: 169




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: October 08, 2017, 09:09:03 AM »

WB2KSP,

As long as ARPA is ARPA and only benefits hams, I don't believe it will get through Congress. What is needed is a "Homeowners Bill of Rights" that severely limits what restrictions a Seller can place on a Single Family Residence.. Any private restrictions that are allowed to run with the land should only deal with Utilities Access/Easements and Common Right-of-Way issues.

Now, for all of you HOA lovers out there. If a Seller puts an HOA in place as he/she completes the development, the HOA must be re-affirmed by 60% of the homeowners every 7 years. NO MORE 30 year commitments placed on unsuspecting homeowners..

It's time to stop treating the symptoms, and deal with the root of the problem. The problem modern homeowners are facing is CC&R's are being used as a Legislative tool that circumvents the State & Federal Constitutional protections most of us assume always apply. Everyone's Rights and Government Privileges (Ham Radio) are being CC&R'd away from us.  

Your home should be your castle. Ham radio is one of many things new homeowners should have the right to enjoy.

Just my 2 cents...

73,
Russ
KN6SD  
Logged
WB2KSP
Member

Posts: 634




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: October 08, 2017, 01:18:37 PM »

WB2KSP,

As long as ARPA is ARPA and only benefits hams, I don't believe it will get through Congress. What is needed is a "Homeowners Bill of Rights" that severely limits what restrictions a Seller can place on a Single Family Residence.. Any private restrictions that are allowed to run with the land should only deal with Utilities Access/Easements and Common Right-of-Way issues.

Now, for all of you HOA lovers out there. If a Seller puts an HOA in place as he/she completes the development, the HOA must be re-affirmed by 60% of the homeowners every 7 years. NO MORE 30 year commitments placed on unsuspecting homeowners..

It's time to stop treating the symptoms, and deal with the root of the problem. The problem modern homeowners are facing is CC&R's are being used as a Legislative tool that circumvents the State & Federal Constitutional protections most of us assume always apply. Everyone's Rights and Government Privileges (Ham Radio) are being CC&R'd away from us.  

Your home should be your castle. Ham radio is one of many things new homeowners should have the right to enjoy.

Just my 2 cents...

73,
Russ
KN6SD  
Excellent post Russ. I agree with you and would be all for that. I'm surprised that so many people go like sheep to HOA's where their freedom is taken away. At this stage there is nothing new on the parity front but occasionally something new does occur.That's what this thread is for.
Logged
KN6SD
Member

Posts: 169




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: October 08, 2017, 01:53:46 PM »

I sent the following to the ARRL:

Mr. Henderson,

I understand the Amateur Radio Parity Act was scheduled for a hearing during a Senate Markup Session, but was pulled from the schedule at the last minute. Senator Nelson continues to oppose the legislation by using Senate rules to derail the Bill from being heard in the full Senate.
 
Both Senator Nelson and Representative Eshoo have expressed concerns about a Federal Pre-emption of private real estate agreements and how such a pre-emption would affect the Rights of Homeowners Associations across the Country.
 
The Community Association Institute also has expressed concerns about the proposed pre-emption, and has stated HOA boards do not always deny requests by Amateur Operators to have outdoor antenna(s), and such decisions are best decided by the community.
 
I have given the situation some thought, and wish to propose the following:
 
1. Kill the current language and resubmit the bill with the original HR 1301 language.
 
2. Add language allowing HOA/CID Governed Communities the right to deny amateur stations when certain conditions are met.
 
Denial Conditions:
 
1. The HOA Board must be elected by, and made up of community residents that own property in the development.
 
2. The Board must have public meetings no less than Two times a year.
 
3. There MUST be an application process in place to allow or deny the construction of an amateur radio station at a residence.
 
4. Approval or Denial of a request to construct an amateur radio station Shall be made in writing and take no longer than 120 days.
 
5. If an Applicant is Denied Permission to construct an amateur station, the Applicant SHALL have the Right to appeal the Board decision directly to the Member Homeowners by calling a special vote. The HOA Board SHALL take a vote of the Member Homeowners to resolve the Applicant's appeal within 180 days of the Appeal Request. Homeowners that do not vote, do not count as a "NO" vote. The Applicant must have a YES vote from no less than 65% of the Homeowners Participating in the appeal process to Override the Board denial.
 
6. Amateur Radio Station antenna configurations approved by the Board or an Appeal vote Shall Not be revoked.
 
I think the above tweaks will make most of the concerned parties a lot happier than they are now. It give hams a lot more choices when buying a home. Non-HOA homes with anti-antenna CC&R's would be pre-empted, and HOA properties would have a process for hams to have a shot at installing a station, right now they have zero chance if a Board says no...
 
If you have any questions, do not hesitate to ask. Thank you for your time and attention.
 
73,
Russ Brill
KN6SD
Logged
KN6SD
Member

Posts: 169




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: October 08, 2017, 01:58:35 PM »

In other words, HOA's have to give an Amateur Due Process if they want to be exempted from ARPA...
Logged
KN6SD
Member

Posts: 169




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: October 08, 2017, 08:38:44 PM »

FYI: I did get a response from Mr. Henderson today. He was very nice in his response and stated the League is still working on getting ARPA passed. Understandably he would not give specific details, but I have no reason to not believe him.

Stay tuned....
Logged
KK4GGL
Member

Posts: 1293




Ignore
« Reply #9 on: October 09, 2017, 03:25:56 AM »

I sent the following to the ARRL:

Mr. Henderson,

I understand the Amateur Radio Parity Act was scheduled for a hearing during a Senate Markup Session, but was pulled from the schedule at the last minute. Senator Nelson continues to oppose the legislation by using Senate rules to derail the Bill from being heard in the full Senate.
 
Both Senator Nelson and Representative Eshoo have expressed concerns about a Federal Pre-emption of private real estate agreements and how such a pre-emption would affect the Rights of Homeowners Associations across the Country.
 
The Community Association Institute also has expressed concerns about the proposed pre-emption, and has stated HOA boards do not always deny requests by Amateur Operators to have outdoor antenna(s), and such decisions are best decided by the community.
 
I have given the situation some thought, and wish to propose the following:
 
1. Kill the current language and resubmit the bill with the original HR 1301 language.
 
2. Add language allowing HOA/CID Governed Communities the right to deny amateur stations when certain conditions are met.
 
Denial Conditions:
 
1. The HOA Board must be elected by, and made up of community residents that own property in the development.

AFAIK, Boards are already made up of owners. I can only speak for FL specifically, but that is built into the governing state law.
 
2. The Board must have public meetings no less than Two times a year.
Again,  public meetings should already be prescribed by state law.
 
3. There MUST be an application process in place to allow or deny the construction of an amateur radio station at a residence.
This does not guarantee actual consideration of the application. There is already lack of negotiation or bad faith negotiations. That is why the legislation is needed.
 
4. Approval or Denial of a request to construct an amateur radio station Shall be made in writing and take no longer than 120 days.
 
5. If an Applicant is Denied Permission to construct an amateur station, the Applicant SHALL have the Right to appeal the Board decision directly to the Member Homeowners by calling a special vote. The HOA Board SHALL take a vote of the Member Homeowners to resolve the Applicant's appeal within 180 days of the Appeal Request. Homeowners that do not vote, do not count as a "NO" vote. The Applicant must have a YES vote from no less than 65% of the Homeowners Participating in the appeal process to Override the Board denial.
That is a virtual guaranteed no vote. Voting percentages in Associations are  historically lower than national elections.

 
6. Amateur Radio Station antenna configurations approved by the Board or an Appeal vote Shall Not be revoked.
IMO, Nelson would see that as taking rights away from homeowners.
 
I think the above tweaks will make most of the concerned parties a lot happier than they are now. It give hams a lot more choices when buying a home. Non-HOA homes with anti-antenna CC&R's would be pre-empted, and HOA properties would have a process for hams to have a shot at installing a station, right now they have zero chance if a Board says no...
 
If you have any questions, do not hesitate to ask. Thank you for your time and attention.
 
73,
Russ Brill
KN6SD

My comments are based on owning condos in two very different areas of the state, being an owner of this last one for over 20 years, serving on the Board for more than 5 years and president for the last 2.
Logged

73,
Rick KK4GGL
W9FIB
Member

Posts: 2105




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: October 09, 2017, 05:46:53 AM »

WB2KSP,

As long as ARPA is ARPA and only benefits hams, I don't believe it will get through Congress. What is needed is a "Homeowners Bill of Rights" that severely limits what restrictions a Seller can place on a Single Family Residence.. Any private restrictions that are allowed to run with the land should only deal with Utilities Access/Easements and Common Right-of-Way issues.

Now, for all of you HOA lovers out there. If a Seller puts an HOA in place as he/she completes the development, the HOA must be re-affirmed by 60% of the homeowners every 7 years. NO MORE 30 year commitments placed on unsuspecting homeowners..

It's time to stop treating the symptoms, and deal with the root of the problem. The problem modern homeowners are facing is CC&R's are being used as a Legislative tool that circumvents the State & Federal Constitutional protections most of us assume always apply. Everyone's Rights and Government Privileges (Ham Radio) are being CC&R'd away from us.  

Your home should be your castle. Ham radio is one of many things new homeowners should have the right to enjoy.

Just my 2 cents...

73,
Russ
KN6SD  

That's a great idea Russ. Properly worded and properly enforced would make for a fair process that does not actually favor 1 small group over the much larger group. That was my original problem with the legislation. Then the compromise language made things much worse.

There are many problems in HOA's beyond just HR. A homeowners "bill of rights" that can bring a tolerable outcome for most any problem could garner wide support and then have a chance of doing something good for all, not just a small selective group.
Logged

Happy being an Amateur Extra!
Nothing says CB on my printed license.
Ares/Races but no lights or crown vic.
N2SR
Member

Posts: 660




Ignore
« Reply #11 on: October 09, 2017, 08:20:34 AM »

That's a great idea Russ. Properly worded and properly enforced would make for a fair process that does not actually favor 1 small group over the much larger group. That was my original problem with the legislation. Then the compromise language made things much worse.

There are many problems in HOA's beyond just HR. A homeowners "bill of rights" that can bring a tolerable outcome for most any problem could garner wide support and then have a chance of doing something good for all, not just a small selective group.

But didn't the OTARD rule favor a small percentage over the much larger group?   The larger group saying that they do not want to see any outside antennas - at all.   

How many outside TV antennas or small satellite dishes are actually in use in an HOA development?  Verses those that are fine with plugging their HDTV into the female F connector provided.   

Sure anyone is allowed to put up a satellite dish or TV antenna in an HOA development, but even after OTARD passed, there was still some "resistance," because some HOA homes faced South, and the HOA "executive board" asked those homeowners to put their dish on the North side of their house, so as to "not be seen from the street."   

That same type of "resistance" has been noted many times with solar panels.  The HOA "executive board" asked those homeowners who's houses faced South, and wanted to install solar panels, to place the panels on the North (or some other side of the roof), so as to not be seen from the street. 



Logged

If no one is doing it that way, there is a probably a very good reason.
W9FIB
Member

Posts: 2105




Ignore
« Reply #12 on: October 09, 2017, 09:15:17 AM »

But didn't the OTARD rule favor a small percentage over the much larger group?   The larger group saying that they do not want to see any outside antennas - at all.   

How many outside TV antennas or small satellite dishes are actually in use in an HOA development?  Verses those that are fine with plugging their HDTV into the female F connector provided.   

Great questions.

I don't have a real number, but back in the analog cable days the little F connector was not as widely available as it is today. And add to that many people thought paying for free TV was something they didn't want to do back then.

Again, not based on any real number, the group that wanted OTARD at that time was much larger then the HR group will ever be. I base that on locally experienced anecdotal evidence only when analog cable was first extending into my more rural area. Many of the developments had antennas on the houses or even a central tower that distributed the free TV out into the developments. However that was the past, and conditions have changed greatly as technologies continue to advance.

My little town finally got cable only a few years ago. And that expansion was due to digital fiber optic becoming less expensive to expand  coverage.

Sure there are some restrictions, but HR will have restrictions no matter how liberal the law will be if ever passed. But yes those are valid points. And I am sure other counterpoints can be thought of. Which is why I wrote the possible solution in the fashion that I did. But just think how some of the HOA silliness could go away if we had an all inclusive "Homeowners Bill of Rights" vs ARPA.

Any proposal would have its pluses and minuses, I just got inspired by KN6SD and what he wrote.
Logged

Happy being an Amateur Extra!
Nothing says CB on my printed license.
Ares/Races but no lights or crown vic.
N2SR
Member

Posts: 660




Ignore
« Reply #13 on: October 09, 2017, 09:40:34 AM »

Great questions.

I don't have a real number, but back in the analog cable days the little F connector was not as widely available as it is today. And add to that many people thought paying for free TV was something they didn't want to do back then.

No it wasn't, and I know that HOA communities were around since the 1970s (?), but the more restrictive ones came about in the late 80s/early 90s, and I'm sure that no one would have wanted to move into one unless cable TV were available.   And if I'm not mistaken, many developers "guarantee" X amount of subscribers (basically all of them) to the cable company if the cable company would run cable throughout the new HOA development, and maybe even have to run a line down the road TO the new HOA development. 

How did the developer "guarantee" X amount of subscribers?   Because when they wrote the covenant for the HOA, they specified "no outside antennas."  Of course, some homeowners may have placed a TV antenna in the attic of their house, but the builder could have made that difficult by designing the houses so that the attic space was small or that were weren't large open spaces within the attic. 

Again, not based on any real number, the group that wanted OTARD at that time was much larger then the HR group will ever be. I base that on locally experienced anecdotal evidence only when analog cable was first extending into my more rural area. Many of the developments had antennas on the houses or even a central tower that distributed the free TV out into the developments. However that was the past, and conditions have changed greatly as technologies continue to advance.

Of course, and they also had the backing (and money) of the satellite TV companies.   But my point is that is an HOA community/development has say 500 houses, how many homes of that 500 have decided to use satellite TV, an outside TV antenna, or even cut the cord altogether?   

Sure there are some restrictions, but HR will have restrictions no matter how liberal the law will be if ever passed. But yes those are valid points. And I am sure other counterpoints can be thought of. Which is why I wrote the possible solution in the fashion that I did. But just think how some of the HOA silliness could go away if we had an all inclusive "Homeowners Bill of Rights" vs ARPA.

Any proposal would have its pluses and minuses, I just got inspired by KN6SD and what he wrote.

I agree.  The majority of HOA homes are on very small lots, so there is no way a HOA would approve even a crank up tower.  Though, many municipalities would approve something if the tower were say no higher than 50 feet, and cranked down when not in use.  Of course, that depends on the actual size of the lot.   

I think that most people would be happy with, is that an HOA not be more restrictive than a local municipality.   In most cases, approval for a tower is through the permit/variance process.   In most (not all) HOA's, everything seems to be "against the rules," unless specifically allowed, which seems to go against the typical local municipality codes.   Everything that was federally (or state, or even municipal) allowed that wasn't allowed by the HOA ended up being some sort of court fight.  OTARD, solar panels/clothes lines, flag poles, etc.  Why can't most HOA's be somewhat reasonable, or even....have some common sense?   


Logged

If no one is doing it that way, there is a probably a very good reason.
W9FIB
Member

Posts: 2105




Ignore
« Reply #14 on: October 09, 2017, 11:00:55 AM »

Well that's why my references were to the old analog age. Digital satellites did not exist. Nor did cable carrying internet exist. Even cell phones did not exist. Think TS-520 era. Wink
Logged

Happy being an Amateur Extra!
Nothing says CB on my printed license.
Ares/Races but no lights or crown vic.
Pages: [1] 2 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!