"Amateur Radio Emergency Communications Consistenc

Hi, below is a copy of the letter that I sent to my U.S. Representative . We need more hams to get busy and contact their elected Representatives if we want this bill to pass.

If you like this letter, you may copy it and/or change it to fit your specifics and send it to your U.S. Representative.

73s de Jorge, K4KB

====================================

Dear Mr. (your U.S. Representative):

This is to request your support for the "Amateur Radio Emergency Communications Consistency Act", which  aims to ease our antenna restrictions from private Homeowners Associations' Covenants and Restrictions, CC&Rs, regarding the placement of amateur radio antennas. It has been re-introduced this year, again by Rep. STEVE ISRAEL(D-NY).

Designated as HR 1478, this bill would require private land-use regulators, like homeowners' associations, to "reasonably accommodate" amateur radio antennas, in line with the PRB-1 limited federal preemption. Wording if this bill is identical to when it was introduced last year: "For purposes of the Federal Communication's Commission's regulation relating to station antenna structures in the Amateur Radio Service (47 CFR 97.15), any private land use rules applicable to such structures shall be treated as a state or local regulation and shall be subject to the same requirements and limitations as a state or local regulation".

Amateur Radio operators, are licensed by the Federal Communications Commission. Many of us provide Emergency Communications in case of disasters or National Emergency, when conventional communications are unable to handle the radio traffic, i.e.: the 9/11 tragedy in which thousands of amateur radio operators in New York, Washington, DC and nationwide, picked-up the slack and provided a reliable communications outlet when Public Service and Commercial systems were overloaded or non-existent.

I am a member of the Amateur Radio Emergency Service in my County, we have a ham radio station set up at the County EMA. In addition another ham radio station has been set up at the National Weather Service.

Emergency Communications are also provided. by Amateur Radio operators, to agencies such as the American Red Cross, the Salvation Army, and we also provide support for, FEMA and the National Hurracaine Service, when requested.

Please support this bill so we may be able to obtain "reasonable accommodation" in the placement of our antennas, so we may continue to provide this FREE and VOLUNTEER SERVICE to Georgia and our Nation.

Respectfully yours,

Jorge Mestre

FCC License Call Sign, K4KB
Douglasville, GA 30134

 

If you need help in finding your representative or his / her address, go to http://www.house.gov/.

Good job, Jorge!

 

Edited appropriately, and sent.
nraila.org has a nifty utility where you can CC everone with one click, by the way. I have been annoying the elected that way for some time. And yes, I am a member of the NRA, but that isn't required to use the site.

As to the username, I passed the test for Tech on last Tuesday, and am waiting.
The antenna is in the air and my dad (W7UZB) has an IC-245 that is mine, when he finds it. Just won an older Kenwood HT on Ebay as well, so it won't be long.
And, my grandfather was W7VHY. The call is now owned by the Puget Sound Repeater Group.
Bugging the kid now to get his He is in the USAF, so it might be a bit.

Once I get the call, I'll correct the login, but for now

73

 

HR 1478 came to my attention at our local club meeting, with the advice to not only email, but also follow-up via U.S. Mail.

The ARRL Web site has text of the bill and provision to email your Representative. I have pointed bill.wb7tjd.org to that ARRL page for your convenience.

The direct page referenced is http://www.arrl.org/govrelations/hr1478/.

73
Larry

 

This bill doesn't seem to include apartment lease restrictions, which are just as problematic, I think.
We moved in here 3 or 4 years ago but the lease expired 2 years from when we moved in, so technically, I think we're off the lease and in a good-faith tenancy. We would ask our manager about outside antenna mounting, but we're hoping to be on our way out to a non-restricted place and don't want to be given another lease to sign or face eviction.

 

A note on email. Most emails sent to house or senate members are ignored, as each member gets about 7000 emails a day. Best bet is a snail mail letter to the reps local office.

Good luck

 

I don't know about most. My rep and my senators respond to every single e-mail I send. Granted, it's usually a form letter regarding the subject, but it's a reply nonetheless.
I even sent a rebuttal e-mail to my rep when it seemed like some intern didn't read my original e-mail well enough and snail mailed me a garbage response. Even my rebuttal e-mail was responded to, with full understanding of my issue, so someone higher up (if not my rep himself) must have read it.
In fact, my rep's contact page says:
"Due to new mail handling procedures for government office buildings, postal mail to my Washington, D.C. office may be delayed by several weeks or even months! Please fax or e-mail, if possible."
I figure if it's e-mail, his staff can read it in D.C. and get it brought to his attention faster (if necessary) rather than snail mailing it to his district office and have it take weeks to get up to the capitol.

 

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (n3xp @ May 26 2003,19:45)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">A note on email. Most emails sent to house or senate members are ignored, as each member gets about 7000 emails a day. Best bet is a snail mail letter to the reps local office.

Good luck[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
After the antrax stuff and with the current scanning and screening of mail, snail mail to most DC offices can take up to 3 weeks to reach the actual recipient. I have received responses (both paper and email) from senators/representatives that I have emailed.

For anything important (and not time-limited) it is better to follow-up on the email with a paper letter or a FAX to the office.

 

Maybe it's just me, but...

I think this bill is bad. What business does the Federal Government have to fiddle around in private contracts? It's one thing to have Federal preemption of local ordinances etc., but this is bad precedent, IMHO. If you don't like CC&Rs and homeowners associations, don't sign them, or negotiate exemptions between private parties. I shiver thinking about what the Feds think they need to regulate next when it comes to agreements or contracts between private parties...

I for one am going to write my reps and senators to not support this bill, and I would urge others to do the same.

Sorry, no vote from here. -Alain, NIØZ.

 

Great idea! I did it. Sent it to my representative.

I don't think NI0Z is thinking for the greater good of amateur radio, but he is within his rights to object to the bill. He doesn't think the government should be involved in private contracts. Well, the US government is already in everything - private or public.

K2WH

 

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ni0z @ May 27 2003,13:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I think this bill is bad. What business does the Federal Government have to fiddle around in private contracts?  [/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

The same reason the government has to make car makers put safety equipment on cars (such as seat belts), airlines run safe airplanes (i.e. planes flown by FAA certified pilots, worked on by certified mechanics).  Grocery stores are regulated by government to sell safe foods.  Utilities must also run their supply lines in a safe manner, etc.  If these regulations did not exist, then companies would get by with their interests (lowest dollar cost, high profits) over that of the consumer.  (Very seldom to companies VOLUNTEER to recall an unsafe product.)  

I see little difference in making the "private" company respond to this regulation in the same manner as they have to respond to building codes.  Can you imagine a new house today without smoke detectors?  This is a regulation a "private" company has to respond to.  Yes, you DO have a contract with a private company but they MUST respond to certain regulations put forth by the government already.

Don't get me wrong, I think that the government gets involved with way too many things they should not.  But some companies need a kick to get them started in the right direction.

 

Alan NI0Z’s response is interesting! I wonder if he knew that CC&R are
NON-Negotiable, are not a private contract between parties to be negotiated. Developers
will attach CC&R to the run with the land in perpetuity and they spell out what you can
NOT do with your property. In a development of many home sites one would have to
negotiate with all of the fee owners to change the CC&R’s, you can imagine how that
would go! A new comer to a Homeowners Association would find a deft ear to making
changes re antennas. However, someone who has been around awhile is well liked ect
would stand a better chance of getting the Associations rules changed.

In well developed cities/communities it is very common now to attach boiler plate
CC&R’s to the land. Rural areas like the one I live in CC&R’s are a liability for selling
homes. One has to consider the priorities when house hunting when my wife and I
purchased our first house 30 years ago we had to go 27 miles out from where we worked
to find a development with no CC&R’s. A choice we made, however when someone who
already lives in a development with CC&R and gets a ham license they have a whole
different choice to make and that generally is where the problems lies. Almost all newer
developments will have CC&R’s and the older ones with CC&R that are ignored generally
don’t get enforced thus rendering them mute. When a fellow ham friend was house
hunting CC&R’s were important and I suggested that when he found a house he liked
look around and if other house had outdoor antennas chances are the CC&R’s were not
being enforced and be guided accordingly. I have been a Real Estate Broker for 22 years
and have done my share of developments so I can’t feel sorry the those looking for houses
as they have a choice but I do feel sorry for those who own a house with CC&R’s and
now get a ham license a whole different option of choices.

 

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ni0z @ May 27 2003,14:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I think this bill is bad. What business does the Federal Government have to fiddle around in private contracts? It's one thing to have Federal preemption of local ordinances etc., but this is bad precedent, IMHO. If you don't like CC&Rs and homeowners associations, don't sign them, or negotiate exemptions between private parties. I shiver thinking about what the Feds think they need to regulate next when it comes to agreements or contracts between private parties...

Sorry, no vote from here. -Alain, NIØZ.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I sympathize with your concerns regarding private property rights.  But I believe the issue is a bit more complicated than it first appears.  For example, would you support a restriction upon selling real estate to "mongols" or Jews?  Both restrictions can be found in many older deeds.

Although property rights are a central concern of our Constitution, they are not the only concern.  Freedom of speech is also important.  When you restrict the means to communicate, you necessarily restrict the substance of the communication as well.  I would argue that this bill is justifiable as it protects a decentralized and largely unregulated forum for speech (a forum that would be especailly valuable at times of crisis).

Furthermore, the US Supreme Ct. has held that while individuals are free to enter into contracts, the courts cannot, as a state actor, enforce some contracts that offend public policy.  Racially restrictive covenants are one example.  I think it can be argued that while the private contracts are not per se invalid, the court's should be prohibited from enforcing the contract if it imposes an impermissible burden on freedom of speech. (The Constitution governs government action, not private action.  The contract is private, but the court's enforcement is government action).

As another poster pointed out, most of the CC&Rs (I always think curio and relics first as I have a C&R FFL) are not subject to negotiation.  They run with the land.  While our legal system generally supports freedom to contract, it also disfavors land restrictions imposed by the dead hand from the grave.

All that said, when my wife and I went house shopping, we specifically instructed our agent to not show us homes in areas with any significant CC&Rs.  Downside is we have to look at the neigbors rusty shed.  Upside is that if I want a nice picket fence in my front yard, I can install one.

I don't have a better answer than already presented, but I wanted to point out that the issue is more complicated than it has been framed and that the proposed bill is not necessarily inconsistent with current law.

-derek a. ward

 

I should mention that there is one great thing about areas with strong and active CC&Rs. You can almost always find something that is not covered that, when done, will drive the HOA nuts. They can then make a choice, allow you to do what you really want, or you can continue doing something they hate, but can't stop.

I can't give too many specifics because you really have to read the particular CC&Rs to find the loophold. One homeowner (in a nice area) in KCMO made the news about 10 years ago. He wanted to paint his house a particular color. The HOA said, "no". So he read the rules. They said the house could be painted in any of the approved colors. So he painted 2' wide bands of alternating approved colors around his home. Guess what happened. They decided that maybe his desired "unaproved" color wasn't so bad after all.

If you provide me with a copy of your CC&Rs, I will gladly give you some ideas to discuss with a local attorney, if interested.

derek ward

 

Great article! Our emails (wife and I) went out today and the letters will go out tomorrow.

BTW, letters to our representatives do not have to come only from hams. Don't ignore other members of the family and friends, relatives, business associates, etc. They can all send letters to their respective representatives. Many will be happy to help with our fight. We can increase our campaign ten fold by doing that!

Also, don't forget that you can send both emails and snail mails. Most of the representatives have at least two snail mail addresses (local and DC). Note: many emails do not get read, form letters (like the example) are better; non form letters are even better (make up your own); finally, a hand written letter gets the most attention. You can also send it in a non-traditional manner, so that it stands out.

In my opinion, CC&R's are some of the worst strangleholds endangering and ruining our fine hobby. I have noticed that the hams in areas where CC&R's are most in use are less active than those in other areas. Of course! They cannot put up antennas to operate efficiently and are limited to mobile operation. And when demonstrating your radio to non-hams, especially kids, they aren't nearly as interested in seeing you talk on a local repeater. If you can show them a QSO with another ham in Africa or Asia, they might get a little excited. And it takes a decent (outdoor) antenna to do that easily in most cases.

So let's get moving! Let's get all the help we can from everybody. (Don't forget that our politicians also like monitary donations, that can't hurt.)

73,

Allen N5XZ (just another soldier in the struggle)