The supreme court has ruled that it s perfectly legal if the aim is to
improve the tax base.

The most oppressive, draconian, government entities are your local zoning
boards.


"Stinger" wrote in message
.. .
.. I believe it is unconstitutional for a city
government to use eminent domain laws to force an owner of private
property
to sell it (so the government can grant the land to a developer who will
build a shopping center) because the government will make more tax revenue
on a new shopping center. Yet this is happening time and again all over
the
United States. It' just plain wrong.

-- Stinger

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

"Stinger" wrote in message
. ..
Frank,

As I mentioned to Wes, nobody forces you to buy into a neighborhood
with
covenants. I also mentioned that they are not for everybody. In my
case,
they are a good idea, and one of the reasons I built my house where I
did
was specifically because I knew what to expect from neighbors as they
built
nearby.

I don't feel bad that I can't let my yard get waist high, park junk
cars on
the lawn, or paint my roof purple. Rather, I feel good knowing my
neighbor
won't.

By the way, I happen to be a Republican Kung-Fu black belt (Dragon
Claw
1992) that knows a good, honest mechanic that helped me teach my son
how to
change the heads on his antique T-Bird in his garage.

So much for your lily-livered weenie who won't fix their own car
argument.

I honestly don't understand the hostility in your tone, Frank. What's
the
real problem?

-- Stinger




I am hostile to the whole concept to a Homeowner's Association. These
are contractual arrangements, and not laws. If a person is penalized,
he doesn't have his usual legal rights. He either pays the penalty,
sells the property or sues the Homeowner's Association. If he sues,
it's the Homeowner's Association which will get the benefit of doubt in
Court. Policing power is one of genuine responsibilities of the
publicly elected government, and it ought to be done by public employees
who are directly answerable to the courts.

And there's the related issue of ownership. Let's say, after another
marathon session of listening to SW kooks, I completely lose it and
paint my roof purple. It's my roof, isn't it? If it does cause some
damage to someone else it should be provable. But the complainer ought
to be prepared to put up some sort of evidence.

So, yeah, homeowner's associations ain't for me.

I could go on with my opinions about the public sector getting
improperly in the private sector and vice versa.

My brother and I practically rebuilt his 64 T-Bird right in the
driveway. If I was bothering anybody, nobody spoke up.

Stinger, HOA are mostly comprised of residents that never have had a
job where they supervised other humans and now is their chance to tell
someone what to do. I do agree that no one want's a junk yard in their
neighborhood. But I don't agree that the guy next door can/should be
able to tell you what you are permitted to do on property you pay the
mortgage, taxes and up keep on. He/she or they can frankly go to hell.
The plan I (for DOC) "BOUGHT" a home in even has restrictions of 18'
satellite dishes, part of the antenna restriction clause. Since the
latest FCC decision the HOA can kiss that part good by. And yes,
receiving antennas can be hidden quite well. Some of us are licensed ham
and enjoy our hobby as you do. Just because we move into a new home in a
new area why should we give up the hobby we so enjoy? We shouldn't have
too. Not all hams have gigantic towers and beams, some of use are
satisfied to use a piece of wire to TRANSMIT on. I have and will
continue to do so when I move. HOA's bring out the evils in good people,
we have to get sneaky and stealthy to enjoy life as we have for many
years.

I know, I've heard this before. It was our choice to purchase in a plan
with restrictions, show me a plan or find me a plot (1/2 acre) of land
where there there are no restrictions in the U.S.A.. If the politicians
arn't telling you what to do it's some nosey neighbor.

Ya'll have a positive day.

Stinger wrote:

Homeowners associations are a good thing! They are basically an agreement
that you and your neighbors will follow some clearly defined rules for the
specific purpose of maintining optimum property values for everyone. In
other words, you won't have to worry about buying an expensive house and
having your next-door neighbor decide to use his yard to store a dozen
wrecked automobiles while he builds a hot-rod or runs a car-repair business.
Common sense should tell anyone that their rights end when they start to
infringe on anyone else's, but sometimes you need it in writing. ;^)

Receiving antennas are easily concealed. If you can find mine from the
street, you were born on Krypton. I think this is an overly-hyped problem.

Broadcasting antennas are another animal, though. For instance, nobody
wants to live next to some clown running a bunch of linear amps through a CB
"base station." It will literally be "seen" on well-shielded cable
television connections, and is a nuisance. I think that's a lot of what the
"external antenna" rules are meant to curb.

-- Stinger

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 10:23:52 +0500, "John Doty" wrote:

|In article , "Wes Stewart"
wrote:
|
| Heh heh. When the guys from MIT come out to argue with you, you know
| you're in trouble. But fools rush in...
|
| I have made thousands of measurements in anechoic antenna ranges and I
| have never seen a difference between measuring s21 and s12. (Without the
| circulators, and accounting for mismatch effects of course)
|
| Where did I go wrong?
|
|You didn't ionize the air in the range :-)
|
|Seriously, for your purposes you did nothing wrong. Just don't call
|reciprocity a "law", OK? It's a useful idea of wide applicability, but
|physics does not require it in general. Calling it a law confuses people.

I never made that statement.

[snip]
|
|Directivity matters equally for receiving and transmitting. Was your wet
|string as directive as your other antenna?

I don't know. Remember I live in the desert; I couldn't keep the
string wet long enough to find out.

|2 meters is also quiet enough
|that there's not much room for inefficiency: in some directions the sky
|temperature is 200K.

Yep. Love that quiet sky.
|
|
| I have observed the same on 20 meters. My Yagi at a modest height of
| 50 feet is *always* better than an indoor wire.
|
|Throw a thin wire with dark brown insulation over a tall tree, up over one
|side, partway down the other (shaped like a "?"). Tie it in place with
|nylon fishing line. It will be invisible unless you're very close. Couple
|to coax with a grounded 9:1 broadband matching transformer. Bury the coax
|run to the house.

Tall tree? What's a tall tree? The best I have is some 35 foot tall
Saguaro cactii. They're a bitch to climb, although when the coyotes
went after the cat, she managed. Let's see, I could tie a string to
the cat's tail and find a coyote.....

[snip]

| In the general sense of h-f to microwave, I stand by my claim.
|
|For the special case of confinement to a small number of narrow bands (as
|in ham radio), you are reasonably correct above 10 MHz. To me as a
|hobbyist listing to LW/MW/SW, that isn't the general case. Of course the
|game changes when I'm operating a satellite, but that isn't my *hobby*.

See, one of the groups this got cross-posted to is an *Amateur Radio
Antenna* group. I'm reading and writing it from this group and
commenting from that perspective. I normally don't cross post but did
the first one by accident and since I've developed such a loyal
following I didn't want to lose anybody G.

Regards,

Wes Stewart, N7WS

Typical example where that woman runs her house with an iron hand and
tries to do the same with other households, like yours. Just do as she
tells you or she may sell your home from under you.

She needs to wake up. The would doesn't revolve around her.

Soliloquy wrote:

"RP Jones" wrote in
:

I work with a guy that is the president of a Home Owners Association.
Talk about an asshole. A woman in his area approached him to get
permission to have a yard sale. Of course he vacillated, and she grew
angry. He reassured her that her request would be considered by the
council.

Of course, her request was denied. All those cars parking in front of
other people's property would not be fair to the other people.

Fair, fair, fair. boy have I tired of this word.

This guy seems severely traumatized by the fact that these neighborhood
associations no longer have the ability to regulate satellite antennas
39.37" or smaller in diameter.

We have trouble with our interloping neighbor even though we don't live
in an area covered by these prohibitions. The neighbor is the vice
president of the city council in the small borough that we live in near
Pittsburgh. We first moved here, she expressed a desire for us to cut
down (for safety reasons of course LOL), every freakin tree on our
property. She made sure to tell us that the leaves on our property were
"our responsibility" to rake up. (hell, I didn't put them there, the
trees should have to rake them up). We had the diseased trees removed at
a considerable cost, and had the others trimmed.

You think that she would have had a geriatric orgasm. Noooo, she found
more things to harp about. My son had bought a 1967 Chevy that we parked
at the top of our driveway, even though the car was not licensed, as it
needed work before it was roadworthy. We were away for the weekend when
the local police drove onto our property and tagged our car as abandoned,
we had a week to get the car licensed. Enter Classic car plates. We had
to get regular plates for our car, then subsequently applied and were
issued classic car plates. The car was legal, they couldn't tow it, and
there it sat as before her interloping started.

But she never quits. We wanted to erect a privacy fence, but in this
relatively dilapidated neighborhood, believe it or not, there is an
ordinance against them. We had to resort to a shadow box fence. Prior to
this, we had the property surveyed, and the front of our property
includes a small part of what the neighbors assumed were theirs.
Apparently the loss of a small part of their property was too much to
bear, as the survey spike was removed and moved closer to our property.

Imagine this woman in charge of a homeowners association? I'd rather
live in the country in West Virginia (I like West Virginia, very pretty
country) with a refrigerator on the front porch and a small junk yard in
my front yard than to live in a neighborhood covered by a covenant.
Years ago in a telecommunications magazine, I read an article in which an
amateur had crafted an antenna, essentially a pole with a narrow skirt,
and placed it in the yard. He told the neighbors that it was a
birdfeeder, and that the design was to preclude squirrels from climbing
it. The only problem was that other neighbors began to ask if he could
help them construct similar birdfeeders. Well, at least theirs won't
require a buried wire running to them.

http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/reg...trictions.html

Big BIG mistake, its all over for him.
Nothing worse then board members of these associations, I rather live
in an airplane fuselage with livestock.
I suggest this guy try and get out of the lease
Show up to a meeting babbling in pajamas and pee on the floor !!!
-RP
"'Doc" wrote in message
...

The only one you can blame for this problem is your
self. You signed the lease...
'Doc

Frank it's called a "sky hook".

Frank wrote:

Dave Holford article ...

^ I have personal experience, some 40 years ago, with an
^ HF antenna which consisted of the top half of the tail
^ (about a 15 to 20 foot square metal surface) which was
^ tuned by a remote ATU (Collins CU-351 ISTR) and performed
^ at least as well as a fixed wire over the range of 2.5 to
^ 30 MHz.

If I could put an antenna like that 20,000 feet over my house I would be very
happy indeed!

Frank

Wes Stewart ...

^ Tall tree? What's a tall tree? The best I have is some
^ 35 foot tall Saguaro cactii.

That might serve as a 40m vertical if the roots are dry and shallow.

Frank

"RP Jones" wrote in message
...
Big BIG mistake, its all over for him.
Nothing worse then board members of these associations, I rather live in
an
airplane fuselage with livestock.
I suggest this guy try and get out of the lease
Show up to a meeting babbling in pajamas and pee on the floor !!!
-RP


That's also prohibited by the CC&R's.

Ed
WB6WSN

Pappy127,
You are absolutely right! I don't know anything
about you.
The point being, that if you sign an agreement with
the knowledge that you do not intend to abide by that
agreement, then you shouldn't be upset when you are
penalized for breaking the agreement. Is that so hard
to understand?
'Doc

"A.Pismo Clam" wrote:

I live in San Diego and have been a PBS
supporter for many years. An article in this
months "On Air" PBS magazine has made
my day! The article is on page #3. It is
written by the General Manager of the tv
station. I have not read the document in
question, but it does sound too good to
be true. How curious are you? If you live
in San Diego, you might find a copy in
your local library. (snip)


There was legislation proposed last year in the House of Representatives
that would have prevented Home Owner Associations, and similar groups, from
banning the use of outside antennas by Ham Operators. The idea was to apply
the same "reasonable accommodation" rules that previous legislation had done
regarding towns and cities. The legislation was supported by several House
members, sent to committee for review, and I never heard anything else about
it. Perhaps someone else is aware of what actually happened to it.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

"Jim Higgins" wrote:

It limits you to antennas 1 meter in diameter
or across the diagonal. No 6-ele 20M beams
here.


No, it doesn't have that limit. The first paragraph describes antennas for
satellite services and the second paragraph describes antennas for video
programming services. The third paragraph...

(3) An antenna that is designed to receive
local television broadcast signals. Masts
higher than 12 feet above the roofline may
be subject to local permitting requirements.

...describes antennas for broadcast television and no size limit is
described (only the height limit). By the way, a large 20M beam should
receive broadcast television fairly nicely (with a little hardware to cut
out the television while transmitting).


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/