ARRL Reaches Agreement with Community Associations Institute on Parity Act

My mother was a lawyer, I Work with Property Title and Contract Law so, I never try to tip the other side! Analyze the facts and think about this, "Pike & Fischer" and whose lawyers are more familiar with the term. Google is your friend.

 

It's the usual claptrap of legalbabble mumbojumbo. Large wind through the cocoanut palms, but very few cocoanuts fell.

 

The ARRL was too busy celebrating their new CEO and I'm disappointed as well.

 

Make NO mistake about it: The Other Side did indeed just blink. And agree, with the above post, no permission needed if no rules against. Fair to have an antenna denied that's going to fall on a neighbor...and ALSO fair TO have a wire, OR a tower that's NOT....The HOA'S were downright ridiculous denying that as they did in the past.

I guess we'll never know just WHY The Other Side did indeed, Blink. But I think they didn't want to risk The Ballgame that they have on control otherwise... I mean, someone's liable to leave their garage door up, or paint it off white. And I think that they realise that the preponderance of opinion is that individual property OWNERS want to be left alone, because they are mad as Hell, and aren't going to take it anymore.

Even if this bill is "too late" for this year, if it is a stalling tactic, The Blink will NOT be forgotten next year. When Congress meets. Again. Bright and early. And if they DIDN'T realise that The Jig Is Up, they would have never sat down with us and agreed to a compromise. Never. Never!

I believe The Winds of Change and The Sun will, in the long term, be setting on the very concept of the HOA tyranny.
And that is a Good Thing.

 

So what happens if the purpose of the community association is to install and manage roads-- lets say they never meet as a group...and you now will have to get their approval on an...ANTENNA?

This is such a 'doh!' moment.

The revised bill (draft?) , as shown on the CAI website, has 'wording problems'.

 

Maybe not. Section 5(1) defines "Community Association". If the association fits that description then, yes. However in the case you raise, the ONLY purpose is to maintain roads, it may not. The way I read it, it may depend on whether there is a formal "declaration of covenants", or an agreement "created pursuant to a covenant or other applicable law ...".

So the broader question that encompasses your example, is what happens if there ARE "declaration of covenants" or other instrument, but that does NOT restrict antennas? Do you still have to get CA permission?

Yes there are some "wording problems". Maybe they are deliberate, in order to kill the bill. CAI has no reason to even have a bill at all, I would imagine they like the status quo where they can do anything they want.

 

Still, changing the wording would be easy.

As it stands, it should not be publicly avalable until ready to submit. Huge embarrassment for hams, bigger for ARRL, IMO.

Hey Ron--

Some people think your prime number thread was a n attack on me...you might wanna go take a look.

 

Is the Organization a Non-Profit Corporation or an Unincorporated Association?
Is the Organization in good standing with the Secretary of State or Corporation Dept?
Does the Organization has a Service of Process Contact?
Does the Organization File 1120-H or 990? Does it hold a 501 (c) 4 Letter?
Does the Organization have Bona Fide Declaration filed in the Conveyance Records
Covering the Subject Property detailing the obligation to pay for common expenses
being mandatory in nature to said Organization?

Food for thought. This will bring up a million unanswered questions, but one thing is for
sure, read Section 3 (a) 1 & 2. Ambiguity is a good thing sometimes.

 

Perfect Pete - that is the whole issue. As the first "antenna" in the development do I propose a 50' crank over and triband? Then negotiate down to a trap dipole? The bill leaves the ham at feet of the HOA pleading.

 

As the first ham to break ground in the pristine development what would be a "reasonable" antenna? A j-pole strapped to a vent pipe? 50' crank up? The decision is up to the HOA.

 

The LARGE print giveth, the small print taketh away.

 

Sold out again by the ARRL!!!

 

A lot of good comments here....healthy discussion stimulates action I believe.

Okay ARRL, what's your POA (plan of attack) from this point foreward...do you think you owe the membership as well as the ham community in general a short overview of the proceedings held with the CAI and how to proceed from here? Perhaps an edititorial right up front in QST. The ARRL has asked for (and received) a lot of support on this issue and of course we realize we are only helping ourselves when we respond to the ARRL's request. But the ARRL is carrying the banner and as the focal point should outline the plan to get this done. It is the right thing to do. Thank you.

Randy
KA4AQM
Chesapeake, VA

 

I agree Randy, the ARRL needs to COMMUNICATE, this is an important issue for so many hams and the ARRL is our ADVOCATE in this matter.

 

The ARRL has released a statement on the amended bill: http://www.arrl.org/news/arrl-commu...ute-find-common-ground-on-parity-act-language