ARRL Reaches Agreement with Community Associations Institute on Parity Act

I'm not here to argue or fight. I simply want to tell my story.

I've had pretty good antennas for what I do in an HOA for 16 years and have had formal approval from the architectural controls committee for 14 years. I have a letter signed by the HOA president at the time, begrudgingly allowing my antennas, that is a legally binding private agreement. The opinion is that if these bills pass and are signed into law, my legally binding contract will be pre-empted by Federal law. Whether that's true or not is really immaterial and for the courts to decide. The issue is that I may have to get an attorney and fight something that I have had a right to for the previous 14-16 years while living in this home.

From my standpoint these bills need to be allowed to die and they need to go back to the drawing board in the future if they feel this is a worthy fight. Its certainly not an easy one. I feel its wrong to "at least get something" as has been said among directors that have been in the decision making process at the ARRL. As written, the power is in the hands of the CAI/HOA and people like me potentially become unintended collateral damage even though we followed the rules.

My faith in the ARRL is once again shaken. I've been a member for almost 30 years and this is really beginning to become a habit.

73,

John KB5NJD / WG2XIQ

 

Several obvious poison pills in this "compromise" which is doomed to fail.

1. The FCC has already "declined to invalidate private contracts" so will Congress ask them to change their rules to force private citizens to "report their antennas to the association" per "Additional Requirements?"
2. An "effective antenna" is an unconstitutionally vague term and the bill is therefore unenforceable - see "void for vagueness" or "vagueness doctrine" or "doctrine of overbreadth."
3. Anyone who has a stealth antenna will be in violation if he/she hasn't informed the association about his/her antenna.
4. What are the consequences of failing to report your antenna to the association per FCC rules? Double secret probation? Financial penalties? Legal penalties?
5. When did the 80% of amateurs who don't belong to ARRL, give ARRL permission to secretly negotiate on their behalf?
6. The easiest compromise would be to write a bill to simply extend PRB-1 protection to HOA situations - but that would be too simple.

https://www.caionline.org/Advocacy/FederalAdvocacy/PriorityIssues/Documents/H.R. 1301 Amendment.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vagueness_doctrine

 

The ARRL has no authority to act on behalf of the US ham population. It does do good faith initiatives along that line, and this is one of them.

It is fatuous to 'register' all ham antennas.... my HT antenna is inside the HT, for example.

The issue is towers, not antennas. We seem to equate the two.

If you can get up a tower, that's great!

 

Agreed. Actually, I see it as somewhat more beneficial than people realize - in effect it gives hams a seat at the HOA table, which they didn't have before. As I read it, in exchange for that seat, the ham is expected to submit antenna proposals for evaluation.

The whole concept of reasonable accommodation is exceedingly complex, but as far as I can see, unavoidable. A blanket "anything goes" accommodation is highly unlikely (and I'd be opposed to such myself). But until this agreement, HOAs were not even required to consider, let alone haggle over what constitutes "reasonable accommodation" of such a request.

It's a solid step forward.

73 Chris NW6V

 

I'm surprised they don't want us to register our guns too

 

Towers are fine... but Chip, I suspect there are many HOA resident hams who'd be happy to put a CC R-7 vertical in an inconspicuous location. Reasonable is reasonable. I don't see where hams can show that towers and beams are reasonable in most HOA communities. The idea is to let hams be able to enjoy their hobby, while not ruining the ascetics of the community. Too many hams are forced to use hidden antennas. If flags, satellite dishes, etc. are allowed, then small ham antennas should also be accommodated.

Pete

 

[QUOTE/]
Well, there's not a whole bunch I can suggest about THAT as far as a choice of XYL's go but, next time, in lieu of an XYL, who doesn't care for a moment of your desires in life, may I suggest a golden retriever?

AH, COME ON SPARKY! DON'T GO AWAY! COME BACK! I'LL LET YOU GUEST OPERATE IN MY SHACK!

Oh, my. Poor Sparky.[/QUOTE]

Your golden retriever is named...let me guess...'Sparky'...right?

 

Good points, Pete.

73
Chip W1YW

 

Google "GRANDFATHERED" you already have an agreement.

 

If anyone thought home owners' associations were going to voluntarily relinquish their power, they were sadly mistaken. The measure is not as definitive and strong as I would have preferred but, as K6CLS said, it's probably the best compromise the amateur community could have expected. At least it leaves the door open a crack to facilitate future clarification and/or modification.

 

As I said, that is immaterial. It will have to be addressed in the courts, which will ultimately cost me money, in spite of the fact that I should be 'grandfathered' under the previous agreement. Federal law may, in fact, pre-empt any agreement so grandfathering is not necessarily valid here.

 

It is better than before but it has to many holes. At least now they must allow antennas. The problem is, it is left up to the HOA to establish guidelines and those can be almost as restrictive as "No Antennas" effectively.
It's is too bad a little more definition was given to height and other restrictions. We gained a little but could have gained so much more. I am also very disappointed in the results.

 

Wow I'm glad I'm not paying for a membership to the ARRL , they are all talk and no show

 

As a ham who was the constituent lobbying Sen Wicker (R-MS) to submit the Senate bill, I am disappointed that the ARRL has not made this revised document public. I requested a copy via my Division Director last week but without response. The CAI at least let their constituents know what they agreed to.

73,

Frank
K4FMH

 

Or a simple wire dipole strung between two trees behind the house. Those can be very effective if constructed properly.