Amateur Radio Parity Act New Video

KY6LA_Howard

The Homeland Security Department brokered the beginning of the Amateur Radio Parity Act legislation initiative in Congress in conjunction with the ARRL

That legislation is now moving with alacrity having gained sponsors in the House and Senate

As you can imagine, HOAs are spewing lies and innuendo to try to stop it.

It has not helped that some hams have opposed this legislation with claims that Hams
who want antennas can just buy a house without an HOA.  Of course, this attitude is not only harmful, it is totally unrealistic since virtually every new home built since 1980 comes with some form of deed restrictions.  (In California, almost 100% of new home are deed restricted)

The ARRL produced and released a Youtube video to explain to HOAs that hams are not all bad people and antennas should be allowed. It shows that the act does not give a blanket exemption but rather it only requires that the HOA negotiate a "Reasonable Accomodation"

You can see the video at:

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=parity+act

Sergey R5AU

Howard , here in Russia we have several of organizations who are against any HAM radio activities and for sure HAM Ant's is a biggiest issue however on the Federal level any we have regulations concerning installation and usage of the ant's and masts but the key requirement to have an agreement with people in the neighborhood area.

Steve G1XOW

Howard,

Is this issue in some way Flex / SDR specific? or are you deliberately misusing this forum for your own purposes?

This is how valuable focus groups get dragged down in to the crud, and good contributors start leaving in droves. Please take it to a more appropriate place.

73 de Steve G1XOW

Burt Fisher

You are correct, a matter where hams are trying to abrogate an agreement reached in good faith does not belong here.  Imagine the reaction if Flex tried to negate your warranties because it didn't feel like spending the money to honor a promise made?

DrTeeth

@ Steve. Occasionally, a topic/situation comes along that is so important that it needs maximum publicity - this is one of those times IMHO - admittedly only for stateside hams. I personally prefer a forum with a relaxed attitude to subject rather than the alternative.

@Burt. I would think of those antenna restrictions as imposed as a reluctant price to pay for a home purchase rather than a good-faith agreement. I do not think that there would be many hams who would let their otherwise ideal home sale fall through because of antenna restrictions. OTOH, I would expect any ham to jump at any chance to remove to get any restrictions lifted. Where did such swathing restrictions come from anyway?

Ernest - W4EG

Steve, G1XOW,

This is an effort to help those that are bound by HOA and CC&R's; be happy that you are able to install antennas.

Less than a year ago I had approximately 2 acres in California. I had towers and antennas from HF to UHF and my wife and I decided to move to a tropical climate. Well. we love Florida and moved to Amelia Island (IOTA NA-138.) And we  bought a home with HOA's. Why, because we like it! Check W4EG - QRZ.COM

This information affects not only us, but Flex radio and all radio manufacturer too.

If every ham was regulated by these rules;Flex Radio and all the rice boxes manufactured in Asia and Europe would be interested in the decision the USA congress makes. You maybe asking WHY? ... Well let me tell you ... We (I) would NOT be buying radio gears!

You would be singing a different tune, if this affect you. 

And by the way Howard's KY6LA comments do not affect his home: He took the homeowner association to court and won.Thank you Howard 

Walt - KZ1F

I don't believe that is actually what happened Ernest. You should ask Howard to elaborate.

Walt - KZ1F

This, even if passed, does not unwind hoa. It merely means one can make their case to the hoa. They could say a small vertical is all you're allowed. Or a wire dipole.

DrTeeth

Walt, I believe it was neighbour resistance that was Howard's problem. Not only did he win, but got enough compensation that it effectively paid for all his radio kit.

Walt - KZ1F

Howard told me the story. I suggest you ask him.

DrTeeth

He told me too.

Bob G W1GLV

Walt, that's better than nothing. Some of these HOA are very unforgiving if you break the covenance rules. Not fair to a person who spent thousands for a home. The covenance most of the time is crafted by the developer so he can continue building homes without having to spend time acquiescing to the present homeowners. These rules are often unable to be changed because of a quorum rule. 

Ken - NM9P

Howard's antenna "war story" was published in QST or some other ham rag a few years ago, and was on his website last time I looked.  If I remember correctly, part of the story involved abuse of power, bad-faith negotiations, arbitrary enforcement, administrative stalling techniques, and other illegal actions by neighbors and the powers that regulated the zoning in his community (not so much the HOA).  It is an interesting read.  One lesson they learned, which I believe was part of the magazine article, is that when a zoning board arbitrarily and illegally piles up requirements for engineering study after engineering study merely to delay or deny a tower project by burying it under a mound of paperwork, and not to assure the safety of the community, then the individual who DID all those unnecessary studies (Howard) can sue for compensation for the illegally required studies and receive compensation at his hourly engineering rate!  If the individual has the stones, resources, and tenacity to countersue....  Sometimes you CAN beat city hall.

Ken - NM9P

Walt - KZ1F

And the fact there was no HOA restrictive covenents in effect at the time.

Walt - KZ1F

In complete agreement Bob it took us about two years to find this place even though there were better places closer to our kids but were deed restricted.

Ken - NM9P

As I begin looking to my retirement in 5-10 years, I am developing a list of requirements for housing:

1) NO CCRS, Restrictive deeds or Covenants.  NO HOAs, or IF there is a HOA, I will need to look at their policies and attitudes before ever considering a house there.

2) RF Quiet location...Nowhere near potentially disruptive high power lines, or industrial/commercial zones that might generate RRF Hash.  I want to see my Flex panadapter as low and flat as possible.  

3) Enough elbow room to put up my antennas, and enough space from neighbors to keep the peace from those who may not appreciate aluminum forests.

4) Close to (within senior citizen driving distance) but not in a larger community.  preferably somewhere out in the country, by a pond or trout stream, or in a woods with a clearing large enough for a tower and antenna at least as big as I have now.

5) DX friendly location.

6) Near friendly folks, good health care, adequate shopping/groceries.

7) tax friendly to retirees.

8) affordable on a retired pastor's pension!  (No, I am not financially stacked like some TV preachers!)

8) Easy for my son and other relatives to find us.  (He will be entering college when I retire.)

OK...where is this magic location?  ha.

Ken - NM9P

Ernest - W4EG

What I posted was what I understood at the DX club meetings which we are members.
Howard spoke freely of his problems regarding antenna issues. And when the City of Poway and the HOA was  taken to court and the hams won their case to allow towers and antennas in 2015.   

James Del Principe

Tim, is there really such a place on this planet?   If you find it, please let me know!   73, Jim     KD1I

Ernest - W4EG

I think he is dreaming!

Richard McClelland, AA5S

Steamboat, CO would fit the bill except for items 8...  You'll have to enter tonight's Powerball drawing in order to afford living there and to have your relatives flown in.

Ken - NM9P

Yep...I think #8 is going to be the limiting factor!  
Especially considering that my son will either be beginning High School (if I retire at 63) or beginning College (If I go to full retirement age) when we begin our retirement years!  The performance of the market, my 403b account, and my health will determine the timing!  If 2015 is an indicator of things to come, it is going to be a long wait....it actually lost 0.2% for the year, even WITH the contributions put in all year.  

Richard McClelland, AA5S

Bill Gross (bond guy, not a ham guy-at least as far as I know) says that investors today should be looking for a return of their money and not a return on their money.  It sounds like you are right on track there.  I'll be 62 when my son enters college so I can empathize with you regarding the finances.

DrTeeth

Ken, #8 will be a limiting factor, especially as you have written two of them ;-). I reckon the second #8 will be the limiting factor.
Children at University + working parents = erosion of parent's funds.

Ken - NM9P

Oops! I added the first #8 in front of the other one and forgot to change it to #9! In any case, we have already saved about one year's worth of tuition, room, board and fees. Only three more to go! I am praying that David will be dedicated enough in high school to earn at least partial scholarships!

Burt Fisher

If this is true there is no point to this legislation, you can do that now. What it really is to impose your desire to play ham radio by erecting monstrosities to disturb the peace in your neighborhood. What if a hobby was fixing junk cars? Unlike ham radio that actually accomplishes a purpose. 99% of hams sit on their **** and cackle. The other 1% are mostly Flex owners who do some good. 

Burt Fisher

Someone tell me why I had no trouble finding housing on Cape Cod with no restrictions? However unlike many of the respondents here when I give my word, I keep it.

KY6LA_Howard

For the First Time in 4 Years...It's actually raining in Southern California - No more Drought!!

Steve Wragge G1XOW
Yes I believe that the Parity Act and the associated video is totally appropriate to this forum because if USA Hams do not do support the Bill to mitigate HOA Antenna Restrictions with some form of "Reasonable Accommodation" soon no NEW Hams in the USA will be allowed to have antennas and companies like Flex and Elecraft will cease to exist due to lack of sales.

It is important to you that the largest by $ sales market for Ham Gear remain healthy and vibrant. HOA Deed restrictions are doing serious harm to hams,  Further the USA tends to set precedents..if we can mitigate HOA Deed Restrictions then hams around the world could point to the USA when negotiating with their powers that be.

@Burt
We all realize that you like to take controversial positions even when have no stake in the game and you likely know that your actions (such as writing letters to Congress opposing the Act) will cause  harm to other hams just  to raise the ire of people in this community.

@Ken
We were fortunate enough to be able to afford to buy our retirement home on a street without an HOA and paid at more than twice as much for the property  as the next street behind us that had an HOA.  ((FYI - it is well documented that HOA Deed Restrictions actually harm the value of property by limiting what you can do with your own property)

FYI - I did not get it in a RF Quiet Zone.... you can't get everything...


@My Antenna Wars
After 9 years in the courts I have unwillingly become quite knowledgeable about antenna regulations.   

HOA's came into being because the Banks which funded developers desired to have some conformity in their financing products so it would be easier to package their loans for resale. Fact of life, virtually every new home built in the USA since the 1980's has some form of bank imposed deed restriction.  So the argument they hams should buy a home without an HOA is really facetious because unless you have unlimited funds it is just not realistic to be able to find such a property.  

Starting in the late 1960's, Antenna Deed Restrictions were added to HOA Agreements because Cable Companies PAID Developers to include them so that new homes would need to purchase cable to have TV.  Unfortunately the deed restrictions were overly broad and came to include ham antennas.   

in 1995 Congress removed the HOA Antenna Deed Restrictions for Over The Air Receiving Devices (OTARD) to allow homeowners the freedom to install their own TV and Satellite Antennas.. What further compounded the issue is that the banks still use the same old HOA Antenna Restriction documentation requirements to fund developers even though they no longer are applicable.. So basically the Antenna Deed Restrictions now only apply to Ham Antennas, hence the need for the Parity Act to right a wrong perpetrated on hams who cannot afford to live elsewhere.

My own antenna wars are well documented, 

I bought a property without antenna deed restrictions,  I obtained building permits - after fighting though the expense of 13 major engineering  plan revisions  clearly designed to discourage hams of lesser means...the tower and beam were installed and passed all legal, engineering and final inspections.  ( In my professional career my companies have build hundreds of communications tower all over the world but the one at my house was perhaps the most over engineered and safest tower I have ever been involved with)

Then the wars started.. a group of "Entitled" neighbors funded a local councilman (he is now a Congressman) who ordered the City to "I don't care if it is totally legal... find something wrong with it and get it taken down"... I said "Entitled:" because when it became known that I had helped rescue some people during Katrina.. one of them actually said "He should not be allowed to save the lives of anyone outside of La Jolla"

Fortunately I had the means to hire good attorneys - when the City took up the neighbors cause and started to harass me and my  totally legal tower, my lawyers preemptively sued the City.  The cases dragged on in the courts for years.. and consumed vast amounts of $$... at one point we counted 43 different people on the CIty's side who were involved in the case.   

Cities do not play fair.. they lie to the courts, they withhold documents that are in the public domain with the clear intention of making you give up the case because you can't afford to continue to fight City Hall...Well I did continue to fight for 8 years ... We ultimately won mainly because the City was caught lying to the judge too many times.... and I received significant financial judgments because the City was sanctioned for lying..

Along the way the City of San Diego, with new legislation from the Councilman, tried to implement new ultra restrictive ham antenna permitting rules.. But Hams in the city banded together, hired professional lobbyists and attorneys and successfully defeated the measure.


Not to give up.. in the 9th year.. 3 neighbors tried to sue us and the City to force me to get an $30,000 California Coastal Permit..because my antenna can been seen from the Pacific Ocean.  Even though it initially cost more than the permit to fight . this time the City was on my side in the case and I won financial judgments against the 3 neighbors. 


FYI - the tower and MonstIR beam have been up continuously since 2005 during the entire time of the wars....and played a role in saving lives and property during Katrina and the 2007 San Diego Fires as well as several other disasters...

Bottom Line:  Today any ham can get easily a tower building permit in City of San Diego as the City does not ever want to incur the expense of fighting hams again...


So why do I support the Parity Act when it does not apply to me directly?

Because I strongly believe that as long as Ham who cannot afford to or due to other circumstances are not able to purchase a home outside of an HOA continue to be discriminated against then Ham Radio in the USA and perhaps the world is doomed to die due to lack of antennas... 

KY6LA_Howard

Because you live in Cape Cod which has numerous Older Areas that were built before the Banks demanded HOA Deed Restrictions as part of their developer financing process...you were able to easily find a home without an HOA

Such is not the case in most of the rest of the USA and especially for most homes built after 1980 ...   today it is almost impossible for a young person to buy an AFFORDABLE Home with Deed Restrictions..

I suspect that if you lived in California where unless you are rather wealthy you cannot find any homes without deed restrictions you would quickly fall off your high horse about "keeping your word" and be the first one on the band wagon to pass the Parity Act.

Rick Hadley - W0FG

Ken, maybe you should look at Iowa.  Lots of places and few HOAs outside of the major cities..  Take a look at W0GJ's page on QRZ.com if you want to see what is possible.  One of my best friends is a retired pastor (not a ham, however) and they bought a nice acreage up near the Mississippi river.

Ken - NM9P

The part that galls me is that the city "leaders" lied and withheld evidence and almost got away with it.  Glad they got sanctioned.  Thanks for fighting.  I know that your battle has served as a model for others in their struggle against their local political "machine."

I knew a ham in Corpus Christi who was denied a permit by the Building inspector because he planned to make the concrete base for his tower STRONGER than the specs called for!  He quoted some nonsense about making it too strong might also make the concrete brittle, causing a premature failure.  Some bureaucrats will try to do anything to keep their campaign contributors happy.  The ham hired a structural engineer who set him straight with so much math that it made his head spin....the ham got the permit eventually.

Walt - KZ1F

No Burt, we just went through that. When the deed says NO, it means NO. My only point above was that if Howard's experience was a little different, like an active HOA withe do's and do not's, the outcome would perhaps been much different. So the ARPA removes the flat out no. Removing the no does not imply yes to a hundred foot tower with stacked MonsterIRs. Our RI qth was my great aunt's and we bought it from the estate. Our kids and their families live in RI but when we wanted to move back those places we considered all had deed restrictions. So we're just over the line in CT. The development literally abutting our property is still deed restricted. Ours is not. Do not assume people are abrogating agreements they've signed. That is an unfair assumption.