Slashdot Mirror
The Ham Radio Parity Act Unanimously Passed By US House (arrl.org)
This week the U.S. House of Representatives unanimously passed "The Ham Radio Parity Act" -- a huge victory for grass-roots advocates of amateur radio.
Slashdot reader bobbied reports: This will allow for the reasonable accommodation of amateur radio antennas in many places where they are currently prohibited by homeowner associations or private land use restrictions... If this bill passes the Senate, we will be one step closer to allowing amateur radio operators, who provide emergency communications services, the right to erect reasonable antenna structures in places where they cannot do so now.
The national ham radio association is now urging supporters to contact their Senators through a special web page. "This is not just a feel-good bill," said representative Joe Courtney, remembering how Hurricane Sandy brought down the power grid, and "we saw all the advanced communications we take for granted...completely fall by the wayside."
The national ham radio association is now urging supporters to contact their Senators through a special web page. "This is not just a feel-good bill," said representative Joe Courtney, remembering how Hurricane Sandy brought down the power grid, and "we saw all the advanced communications we take for granted...completely fall by the wayside."
Is that deed restricted properties are even allowed under law.
Only complete idiots thinks it's a good idea to hand over the deed right to you property to an association that can foreclose on you because you let your grass grow to 3" instead of the maximum allowed 2.5".
These types of places were tolerable only until they started taking over ALL available property within the best school districts, good locations in cities, and other important qualities of a property. Generally based on municipalities who want to collect taxes but not be held accountable for maintaining common spaces (parks, pools, sidewalks, etc.) and thus _require_ all new development to be done under a deed restricted plan. It's a "lovely" work around to that whole pesky property rights issue that governments face due to federal, state and local constitutions, laws, etc.
I saw some Democrats supporting this bill. Therefore, as a Republican, I'm going to have to oppose this bill on principle.
No, I'm kidding, of course. I'm not a ham radio operator myself, but it seems like this is some common-sense legislation. Homeowner's associations can be remarkably priggish at times. I think some people just enjoy lording nitpicky rules over others, and that's the only mechanism they have, other than making family members miserable.
Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
There is an entire body of stealth antennas that have been developed for legally and space-constrained homes, such as flagpole antennas, magnetic loops, folded attic dipoles, and even tuned metal gutters! Yet these are all compromise antennas due to their limited height from the ground , proximity to metal objects and wiring, and size (for the 40m band on HF, you need at least a 10m/33ft vertical plus one or more counterpoises of that length on the ground). Some HOAs are even more draconian and allow nothing outside of a strict approved list of items per the HOA contract. This means that even a 1/4 wavelength vertical wire antenna that is barely visible to the eye is disallowed. Ironically, it's these same antennas that contribute to RFI issues for neighbors, increase RF exposure and worsen problems that would not be present with a properly deployed non-compromise antenna. HOA agreements have a disproportionate impact on hams who tend to be older and often use ham radio to communicate with their friends. Some of these are ex-military and civilian volunteers who are part of the Military Auxiliary Radio System or Civil Air Patrol, or participate in volunteer civil safety services such as Amateur Radio Emergency Service, Radio Amateur Civil Emergency Service and Skywarn that use HF frequencies as well.
The HOAs have been vociferously opposed to this act as an infringement of civil liberties and have written both to the FCC and to congress opposing this. Yet there are already FCC-mandated requirements for such things as satellite antennas on HOA-governed properties that supersede any restrictions that may be contained in HOA contracts on spectrum which is technically regulated by the FCC. The intent is not to replicated a nearly 200' tall antenna tower with stacked Yagis, but to provide reasonable accommodation. A 1/4 wavelength vertical wire antenna barely visible to the eye can literally communicate with the entire world, yet somehow the HOA board fanatics claim that even these should be restricted. Even one of the trapped multiband vertical antennas in a back yard can make a big difference in getting out and participating in radio, but they again want no part of it.
There is bias against what we don't know or don't want to know. Heck, people think that there is an environmental impact to these antennas. I'm hopeful this will get passed and withstand scrutiny in the inevitable court battle that will ensue over it. But in a country turning its back on science for sports, maybe even the discussion with the non-ham folks might actually activate a few brain cells.
Or, people would like to be able to own homes in areas unblighted by rooftop antenna towers.
Chimneys, satellite TV or ISP dishes, HDTV antennas, wind vanes, flag poles, roof-mounted security lights, rain gutter systems, skylights, solar panels.
You forgot these things we should also get rid of, just to be fair.
SIGERR: laziness exceeds quota
This legislation is a needed benefit for the ham community, but the NIMBY problem is far bigger than this. I have seen cases where a small group of Concerned Citizens (aka tinfoil yammerheads) can prevent needed cell towers from being installed in their town because 'radiation'.
What I would like to see is legislation that would strip NIMBYs of court access to prevent the construction of any public infrastructure project that conforms to published specifications for safety, appearance, and environmental impact for the project type, as adjudicated by the relevant regulatory agency. To obstruct a project, an opponent would be burdened with proving that the project did not conform to its type specification.
because Hams make a sport out of creating links where "mere mortals" would curl up in a screaming ball.
with a good rig and even half decent materials you could get a relay setup to reach a couple hundred miles station to station (assumes presence of a suitable hill to put your relay).
All Else Failing the ARC has the local Hams "stand down" when they get there ( those Hams that are not staff of ARC)
"Or, people would like to be able to own homes in areas unblighted by rooftop antenna towers."
Or on the third hand, they might want to move into a neighborhood and then inveigh against existing ham antennas. This happens all the time.
The ham service is already regulated in the way I describe, in this case by the FCC and in conformance to international treaties. What you describe would be strictly illegal under the existing rules.
It's you NIMBYs who see the world as an unending series of Pandora's boxes.
Pot-bellied retirees reliving their childhood pretending to matter in the modern world...
Ham radio spans the globe, not just the US.
And when the shit seriously hits the fan, the grid goes down in some 3rd-world country, it's the ham radio guys that move the news in and out. They can even tcp over it.
When the Zombie Apocalypse comes - in whatever form it may be - it'll be *our* hams moving info.
The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
This thinking really bothers me, and while I know the principle you cite is generally true, I can't help but think that by far, I'd prefer to live next to a slob than someone who's going to tell me what I can and can't do on my own property. I can't speak for anyone else on this, but I, for one, would abandon any bargain on the sale of a house, upon being told that there's an HOA involved. That is a total deal breaker. If I'm going to buy a house, I'm buying a place to live. If it's an investment that I want, I'll try venture capital, trade goods or the stock market. Or comic books, as I'm already doing that.
Learning about brewing beer, by brewing beer.
A "reasonable" HOA can help protect your investment, I guess, by preventing other people from massively changing the character of the area.
There really are some nasty extreme things a neighbor could do which would make things less appealing for you, and make your property hard to sell if they wanted to.
The covenants were willing agreed when they bought in though. So no, they can't put in that 200 foot tower, rent out their front yard to 5 families as a trailer park, never cut their grass, leave a bunch of broken-down cars as permanent yard ornaments, and wake up the neighborhood every morning with loud noises from their roosters, etc, etc.
I, for one, would abandon any bargain on the sale of a house, upon being told that there's an HOA involved. That is a total deal breaker. If I'm going to buy a house, I'm buying a place to live.
The trouble, is unless you go to great lengths in your due diligence, you are unlikely to discover the HOA and the HOA rules until the final stages of the transaction, when you have to sign on the dotted line, and the HOA rules are in the fine print on page 562, and you won't understand that they exist or what they mean without a consult with a real-estate attorney that has your interests at heart, and not making a quick sale.
Meaningless fodder bill in an election year.
Not at all.
This is so much better than where things stand now. For example, I have a friend who put up a wire antenna in his back yard in an HOA and was forced to take it down even though you could not even see it without trespassing on his property. How is a wire that no one can see without trespassing affecting anyone's home value? But, as things are, it can be banned. Banning a wire that no one can see certainly would not "constitute the minimum practicable restriction on such communications to accomplish the lawful purposes of a community association seeking to enforce such restriction."
Will everything immediately go smoothly and every ham operator get exactly what they want? No, of course not. Will people end up going to court to sort this out? I'm sure that will happen. But over time, an understanding of what all of this means will arise just like it has for satellite dishes and over the air antennas.
This bill certainly isn't perfect. But, it is infinitely better than where things stand right now.
In fact, HOAs can still enact reasonable restrictions on satellite and TV antennas.
Only the rules that do not impair installation, maintenance, use, or reception of a high-quality signal are allowed.
Around here, mounting the antenna so close to the ground for Satellite, over the air TV reception, or Fixed wireless reception for internet (Which the rule also applies to), would prevent getting a quality signal.
An inexpensive transmitter can blockout a 10 mile radius.
These frequencies being used by cell phones have ultra-short wavelength, close
to the microwave ranges, and the HOAs would never notice such a small antenna which doesn't need to be more than a few feet off the ground to effectively jam cell phones for many miles.
On the other hand, if someone's dumb enough to put an intentional jammer of any kind on a tower, they would easily be tracked down, and they would then lose the tower, their operator license, all their equipment, and go to jail.
A bonafide ham will never be intentnionally jamming anything, and the parity law does not cover CB operators or other non-licensed.
Ham Radio is true geek. Even the FCC is scared of them. Nuff said.
You don't understand. Hams do this for enjoyment. If these restrictions ruin enjoyment, then they won't do ham radio at all. So, when the community does need emergency communications, there will be no one with a radio that is able to help. People aren't going to become hams just to spend money to be of help in an emergency, they spend the money to have an enjoyable hobby that has as a byproduct the ability to help the community when emergency communications is needed.
You're not paying attention. There hasn't been a crime in that neighborhood since the Roaring '20s. There are more police than squirrels in that neighborhood.
You are welcome on my lawn.
A trucker with a CB can send critical information 40 or 50 miles on the 11m band on a good day. Legally they are limited to 5w output. Even with a yagi, this is going to be tough.
HAMs (Skilled QRPers) on the other hand regularly communicate to other continents with 5w of power. Your typical 100-150W HF rig is going to be able to communicate anywhere in the world--or worst case, anywhere in the continental US. Some HAMs are also trained in emergency communications and/or formal traffic handling (to verify the accuracy of messages.) HAMs can use modes like SSTV (Slow Scan TV) to send an image of a piece of damaged infrastructure or a damaged building so engineers or rescuers can come in properly prepared. APRS mode is designed to update a real-time map of mobile and stationary transmitters using GPS. Information like this can also be critical in a disaster information. Rescuers won't have to guess where to look to find an injured person, etc... HAM radio is much more than Morse Code (CW) and people talking to each other like on CBs.
"Frequently wrong, never in doubt."
Unfortunately, that is a wholly optional construct, valid only in the context where those who hold power agree it is true.
Rights are things that are enforced by those with the power to enforce them. The instant that the power to enforce them is lacking or withheld, they are not rights - they are extra-societal acts, quite often crimes. You can elect to try to exercise what you perceive as a right, but if you are constrained, coerced, or killed when those in power become aware of it, you had nothing worth having.
The idea that government should respect rights as you describe them, as inherent to the human condition, is written into the US constitution. That defined the power that was, top-down, to codify and respect various important rights. The US congress and the supreme court have been working in concert, quite successfully, to water down or explicitly remove those inferences and stipulations.
The public has, and continues to, put up with it. That, in a nutshell, is how the constitutional intent for rights to be treated as inherent in the US became "just a piece of paper." There is no longer any power behind the idea; it is dead. The only right you have is the right to do what you're told. Because that, the government is consistently enforcing.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
I sent my reps the email.
I am glad that it may have helped.
(Amature Radio Service Operator).
Come on guy, the American way to solve that problem is to ask the woman for $10,000, get some Mexican to water your petunias for $500. She sells the house, gets out of your hair and everybody wins.
That's what Trump would do.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
You should have demanded $20 from her. Since your lowering her home value saved her money in taxes!
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
You're a silent key (SK, aka dead person)? Radio from the grave? Did they bury you with your rig?
And how do you get on the Internet?
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
If you live in an area where all or nearly all the property has restrictive covenants, you don't have a lot of choices. You can live in such a place or you can move to another city. Here in New England it's relatively easy to escape them because a lot of the housing stock predates the widespread use of covenants, but the situation in other parts of the country is far more challenging.