Censured ARRL Director Dick Norton at the Yuma Hamfest on HamRadioNow

I watched the video which I rarely do but I have to agree with Chip W1YW that the presentation was not toxic and was done in pretty neutral and respectful manner.

Just my take on it.

73 & GUD DX,
Thomas F. Giella, W4HM
Lakeland, FL, USA

http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/spaceweather
https://www.facebook.com/thomasfranklingiellaw4hm

 

Dumbest thing I ever heard. You must have the "permission" of the HOA to install the antenna. Sure you can inform them, but that gives you no right to install anything. Dumb statement. Don't think so? Move into one and stick a tower or antenna on your roof and see just how much your "informing" them is going to cost you.

 

I would say the law is your right.

 

What possible reason why any HOA wouldn't want to define this? Since the HOA development is their responsibility, it's up to them to write pre-defined antenna installation guidelines for thier HOA. If they don't do this, then I guess there are no guidelines to follow.

Also an HOA cannot possibly enforce any rules that are simply not there in writing. It just doesn't work that way. For an HOA to cite any kind of violation against anyone, it has to be based on something they already have in writing.

So if there are no written guidelines for antenna's at their HOA development, that kind of leave themselves wide open and in a pickle doesn't it? So I suspect contrary to your thoughts, there will indeed be "pre-defined" antenna installation guidelines for people to follow in the vast majority of HOA's and every one of them, are probably going to be written different than one another.

Incidentally, HR555 cannot possibly address and define an "effective outdoor antenna" because not all HOA's are created equal.

What you can reasonably install in an HOA out in the country side is entirely different than what you could reasonably install on the second story balcony of a townhouse development.

One size doesn't fit all, and that's why HR555 is purposely vague. What is occurring here exactly, is many hams are trying to nail jello to the wall which isn't necessary. It's best left vague so it can accommodate a larger group of individuals in a multitude of various living situations.

Besides, it would be kind of silly to change the wording of ARPA to be more specific so it specifically permits something like 40 foot towers to be installed in all HOA's. Then what would occur is this would include second floor balconies at any townhouse development. That's what some hams are suggesting the wording in ARPA should do. Do you see why a one size-fit's all approach doesn't work?

 

So you signed the papers when you moved into the home that was covered by the HOA agreements and now you want to bitch about what you agreed to when you signed the papers? How dumb can you get. Gee, officer, I saw the speed limit but now I do not agree with it. Grow up and take responsibility for your actions.

 

For one thing, ALL hams are banned from installing antennas at HOA's regardless if they actually sign anything on paper or not. This prohibition is not particularly difficult for anyone to understand and also explains why that favorite "go to" strawman argument is completely irrelevant for that matter.

HOA's are growing in numbers every year, and what comes along with this growth are these entirely unjustified and completely unnecessary boiler plate antenna bans.

This anti-antenna disease needs to stop spreading and changing this through government legislation IS taking personal responsibility for this ongoing and growing problem.

It has nothing to do with observing the posted speed limit and everything to do with the future growth and development of the amateur radio service today, and into the future of tomorrow for many other hams to come.

So what are you doing to preserve the future of amateur radio?

 

IMO you are confusing intent with wording.

Of COURSE we all agree on the intent. But the HR555 wording is FATAL.

To wit: here is a single--there are many--example how improved wording would pull HR555 out of the black hole of death for Part 97:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"an effective outdoor antenna for the desired Part 97 communication..."

----------------------------------------------------------------

Right now the six inch whip is what meets the criterion of HR555. Dumb, dumb, dumb.

73
Chip W1YW

 

You want a one size-fits all solution.

As I explained earlier, that's not going to work because HOA's are not created equally.

I agree an effective outdoor antenna is the desired objective, but mincing words about that objective only complicates matters further. Leaving it "open for interpretation" actually allows for more leeway in your potential antenna installation options at an HOA.

 

Wow. That's a heavy rap on a stranger....

Let me take a stab at it.

For one thing, as an antenna professional, I see customers clamoring for spectrum, new spectrum, everyday.

E-V-E-R-Y-D-A-Y.

Its not just enough to tell them about ham radio. If I had to make a generalization, they view Part 97 as a "SPECTRUM WARMER"-- someone who keeps the seat warm waiting for the big guy to take it.

Educating them on hAM RADIO, AND telling that Part 97 IS THE LARGEST licensed data base is a bit of an eye opener for them.

Look: just because HR555 has fatal wording, doesn't mean those who want it changed are lazy, and not working on our behalf.

We ALL agree on an ARPA. Let's focus on that.

73
Chip W1YW

 

No,

I benefit from 100 years of expensive and picky and EXPERIENCED advisement.

As a 23 year in- business- businessman, who gets glassy-eyed reviewing and changing draft ANTENNA contract clauses from dumb, outrageous and POOR wording --under advisement of counsels-- I am telling you that HR555 is a stinky piece of legislation that will kill Part 97.


Because it is, being nice, 'poorly worded'.

73
Chip W1YW

 

As a business "person" myself, this attempt of nailing jello to the wall isn't the solution to this particular problem Chip.

 

Better to nail jello than poo...

;-)

 

For the record, I want to take the opportunity to fully recognize and validate this.

The bit about nailing poo stuff, not so much.. lol

 

What law? This is the bill's third trip and will never see the senate floor for a vote. C. Bill Nelson (D-FL) will never let it get past him. Bought off by the Community Associations Institute (CAI) his loyalty is to kill the bill. Turning 76 years old in September he is running for reelection this year.

 

And that's what really is the focus....

The ARRL may not want to modify HR555 because to do so will suggest ambiguity in its need. That would kill the bill.

If Senator Nelson kills it, then all save face.

Given the huge lobbying bills accrued--how much have those multi year DC hotel stays cost.... $150K? $300K?, the ARRL membership has to ask what IS the right wording on an ARPA bill, and what will get it passed.

HR555, for so many reasons, is NOT it.