ARLB011 Amateur Radio Parity Act Language Inserted in National Defense Authorization Act

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by N9PBD, May 11, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: L-MFJ
ad: l-assoc
ad: Subscribe
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: Left-3
ad: Left-2
ad: l-BCInc
  1. W1YW

    W1YW Ham Member QRZ Page

    HR555 does not apply specifically to HOA's. It applies to CA's, which is a far wider spectrum of communal agreements, a vast majority of which do NOT invoke antenna restrictions---but if HR555 becomes law, ALL of these CA's will now have to deal with antennas from hams, for these agreements have wording of :"other matters as they arise", or similar.

    That's the issue.

    For example, I do NOT live in an HOA, but my farm in KY HAS several CA',s which meet the above. None of these agreements talk about antennas, All have 'other matters as they arise' langauge. Because of this and under advice of multiple counsel, I decided to can construction of a superstation. The prediction I got is that a court case--which would inevitably arise undr HR555-- would cost me about $400,000 and take 2-5 years. I can afford the cost, but can think of far more constructive ways to spend that bread. But-- I am 63. ^%*%^* waiting 5 years for resolution on something that should have been done properly in the first place.

    Really a pity. The farm has a hill with the farmhouse, and a 60-80 foot gently sloping drop off in almost all directions. A limestone cave, too. True ham nerd-vana.
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2018
    KI4AX likes this.
  2. K1VSK

    K1VSK Ham Member QRZ Page

    That is another in a series of unintended consequences arising from this effort. Call it a CA or an HOA - the result won't help anyone. Whether it was well-intended or simply a marketing ploy some delusional person though might expand their revenue stream is irrelevant.

    We are 'treated' every day with groups foisting self-serving programs under the guise of moral superiority. This is ham radio's version of the Trojan Horse.
     
    KI4AX, WA7PRC and W1YW like this.
  3. K7KB

    K7KB Ham Member QRZ Page

    We will have to see how this plays out if the bill passes, but I have a bad feeling about all this. The ARRL is taking the risk of loosing a lot of members if they screw it up.
     
  4. K4ULP

    K4ULP Ham Member QRZ Page

    The opening title to this page really caught my attention:

    "

    ARLB011 Amateur Radio Parity Act Language Inserted in National Defense Authorization Act"

    That opening ... National Defense Authorization Act ... wow. That is heavy. NOW to you wimps who tacked on the "with HOA approval" ...
    Once again we miss a great opportunity with that organization on our side ... an endorsement from the NDAA would be so powerful.

    I am sick and tired of common sense being left out of this entire subject.

    73 and all the best !

    DE K4ULP / Lanny

     
    N5PZJ likes this.
  5. K4BJS

    K4BJS Ham Member QRZ Page

    With regards to future litigation, wouldn't this be handled the same as the OTARD litigation? My understanding of OTARD is, all cases are automatically transferred to an FCC administrative law judge. There is no trial or even court appearance, just paper work. Would ARPA be handled differently?

    For what its worth, reading through the OTARD case law, I'd say about 98% of the cases are decided for the property owner.
     
  6. ND6M

    ND6M Ham Member QRZ Page

    HUH???? what are you talking about?

    An attached rider bill doesn't have any endorsement or support from the bill it is attached to.

    It's only attached because it can not be passed based on its own merit. The correct term should be legal extortion.

    Lets do have some common sense.
     
    N4KCD likes this.
  7. K1VSK

    K1VSK Ham Member QRZ Page

    In this case, it's "pork barrel" legislation minus any benefit to anyone.
     
  8. KK5JY

    KK5JY Ham Member QRZ Page

    PRB-1's accommodation requirement language was almost identical to that in ARPA, but I suspect you'd be hard-pressed to find a single case of FCC enforcement(*) of that rule, either. And that's over more than 30 years of that rule's existence.

    So no, don't expect FCC to enforce ARPA, even if they do write it.

    (*) ...when I say "enforcement," I mean forcing a municipality to comply with the rule, under the threat or actual levy of monetary forfeitures, on behalf of a specific amateur licensee.
     
  9. KI4AX

    KI4AX Ham Member QRZ Page



    Thank you for posting the text of the Bill...

    As I said in a previous post, many Hams are underestimating the egos of those that head up HOAs and CAs.

    Everyone seems to be missing Sect. 3B3 where it says:

    "establish reasonable written rules concerning height, location, size, and aesthetic impact of, and installation requirements for, outdoor antennas and support structures for the purpose of conducting communications in the amateur radio services."

    This means the HOA or CA can regulate every aspect of your antenna. What is 'reasonable' to you may not be 'reasonable' to others. This gives the HOA/CA the right to tell you where, how tall, how wide, method of installation, and most importantly 'aesthetic impact' of outdoor antennas and support structures..." What kind of antenna do you think will be 'aesthetically pleasing' to your neighbors? I can assure you it won't be large and it won't be on a tower...

    Here is an example of something your Neighbors MIGHT find acceptable:

    http://www.wolfrivercoils.com/products.html

    Here at KI4AX I currently do not have to contend with restrictive antenna regulations. But, what I really want to know is if a County or City (Government) can be considered a form of HOA or CA?

    Dan KI4AX
     
    KC2YSO likes this.
  10. K3LI

    K3LI Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Wrong. Every single HOA must comply with State and Federal law. If they have do not have that process in place, the must put it in place or be in violation of the law. Quite a few HOAs have a clause that requires them to respond in a certain time frame to requests. My son's is 30 days. If they do not reply, or fail to follow guidelines, then you are free to do as you please. His barn required a variance, HOA failed to respond timely, barn was built just as he wanted.
     
    WA8FOZ and KC8VWM like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page