ARRL Reaches Agreement with Community Associations Institute on Parity Act

The ARRL reports that they have reached an agreement with the Community Associations Institute on the ARRL's website.
http://www.arrl.org/news/arrl-reaches-agreement-with-community-associations-institute-on-parity-act

The ARRL did not provide text of the proposed amendments, but the amended bill can be found on the Community Associations Institute's web site. https://www.caionline.org/Advocacy/FederalAdvocacy/PriorityIssues/Documents/H.R. 1301 Amendment.pdf

 

hmmm, it's got no teeth:

...

(8) Community associations should fairly ad9
minister private land use regulations in the interest
10 of their communities, while nevertheless permitting
11 the installation and maintenance of effective outdoor
12 amateur radio antennas. There exist antenna de13
signs and installations that can be consistent with
14 the aesthetics and physical characteristics of land
15 and structures in community associations while ac16
commodating communications in the amateur radio
17 services.
​

and

...

(3) subject to the standards specified in para​

2 graphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a), permit a com
3 munity association to establish reasonable written
4 rules concerning height, location, size, and aesthetic
5 impact of, and installation requirements for, outdoor
6 antennas and support structures for the purpose of
7 conducting communications in the amateur radio
8 services.
​

in other words, the HOAs can make up whatever they want. It is going to be difficult to challenge subjective ideas like "reasonable" and "aesthetic".

But this is probably the best compromise language on all sides...

 

"reasonable"? "fairly"? "aesthetic"? The spirit of this comprimise exists on the side of the radio operator only. The HOA will continue to do whatever they want.

 

This really seems like a one sided compromise. I'm very disappointed in the ARRL. All that money and effort for something changes an outright antenna ban to a de faco antenna ban.

 

I "missed the memo" declaring only hams are reasonable. Can you share a link to it?

 

Subsection (b)(1) kills it for me. Now amateurs have to request and receive approval from their HOA for any outdoor antennas, or face being in violation of Part 97. The FCC will be responsible for enforcement of this rule. The ARRL basically gave the CAI everything it wanted, except requiring insurance, and amateurs will now be required to report all of their antennas to their HOAs under federal law. This went from being a mere contract dispute to whatever the FCC decides will be the consequence of failing to comply with Part 97.

 

ARRL agreed to this ? Imagine that ! So the ARRL jumped the shark & backed down ?

 

I don't get your objections at all. Most of this basically sounds like PRB-1 in slightly different form.

 

If there is a comment period before the Federal changes to part 97 take effect we should all object to the paragraph requiring licensed amateurs to apply for permission from the association. This is a civil matter between a property owner and the private association. The government should not make this a matter of Federal Law. The upside of this wording is that if an association acts arbitrarily it could be taken into court for violating a Federal Regulation just as a zoning rule can be challenged in court under PRB-1.

 

WOw...... How embarrassing.
Way to go.

 

I would think that a simple change in wording would be fine. "No amateur radio operator, by the terms of this bill, is exempted from following CC&R or Homeowner Association approval process" would be sufficient. I'm not a law writer so I'm sure someone else could make that even smoother. I do not think the intent of the amendment was to require approval, just to ensure that amateurs didn't use the ARPA act as a way around seeking approval in the first place.

 

The original bill, prior to the amendment, did not have ANY of the text after the words "ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS". That is the compromise language and completely shifts the bill from forcing HOAs to follow the same rules under PRB-1 to placing the burden on amateurs to report their antenna plans to their HOA and receive permission to install them, prohibits installation in areas "not under the exclusive use or control of the licensee" (which could mean anything from antennas on vehicles in HOA-maintained driveways to trees in a yard mowed by the HOA), and allows the HOA to make the rules for what kind of antennas will be allowed. The ARRL sold us out to the CAI. The bill was never intended to require amateurs to need to get permission or approval from an HOA, but the amendment changed all of that.

 

ARRL's attorneys seem to think this is a pretty excellent deal. They probably should have consulted with all of the IANAL experts here though.

 

While compromise with the CAI is a hurdle overcome through the ARRL, let's continue to focus on the bigger picture....we need to get these bills through the Congress otherwise we start all over again. Do we really want to go through all this again?

I will take ANY endorsement to help further the cause rather than holdout until we get everything we want. This is progress. Not perfect, but progress.

Again, look at your calendar, We are halfway through the year. Now is the time I would expect the ARRL to proceed full steam ahead. Give them credit for what they have accomplished and let's keep going. We don't know all the details behind the scene to get this type of concession by the CAI and may not know for a long time. But we need to keep the pressure on, otherwise we have no one to blame but ourselves.

 

And one more thing. In many communities (I know I am not alone) the CCRs recorded with the city are stand alone restrictions. By that I mean, there is no association, at all. So, if bills are passed, good on those who have an association they can approach for reasonable antenna accommodation. Not sure how the bills will address hams who have the restrictions, but no one to approach so antennas can go up.