Alan wrote:

First let's not that most CC&Rs and/or Home Owner Asocciation terms are
not clearly stated nor are they easy to discover on your own.

This is why one must insist on seeing the details before signing.


If it were that simple, no problem, but convenants and restrictions running
with the land are often well hidden. Truthfully a seller only has to be
able to legally convey the property and use of the land it sits on, any
other deed restrictions are there. Even an attorney who specializes in real
estate can miss well hidden CC&Rs or not notice how significant antennas
being restricted, or not being able to park an RV in the backyard can be
until after it's too late. HOAs can be really problematic, even after
you've lived some place for let's say 2 decades, said association can change
its rules/regulations and produce results which are really undesirable.

The really sad part is that the FCC could decrease restrictions on Antennas
and supporting structures rather easily as it did with satellite dishes and
less than one meter TV antennas, but I suggest that builders and realty
sellers oppose any such change.

On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 00:12:54 EDT, Art Clemons
wrote:

The really sad part is that the FCC could decrease restrictions on Antennas
and supporting structures rather easily as it did with satellite dishes and
less than one meter TV antennas, but I suggest that builders and realty
sellers oppose any such change.

The FCC adopted the OTARD rule for TV antennas and satellite dishes
only because The Congress mandated such. We have been trying to get a
similar mandate for many years and it's falling on Congressional deaf
ears.. The FCC was very clear a few years ago that absent such a
Congressional mandate, it will not make such a rule on its own.

As for "hidden" restrictions, many states, including California,
require that the seller (through agent, if that is how the
transaction is made), provide the buyer with a true copy of both the
list of CC&Rs and any HOA rules that affect the property and the buyer
has the option to review and decline to proceed with the purchase,
just as with a title search and home defect inspection.

When we bought this house in Oregon, we had our agent's office request
that info from the county recorder through a title search company
before we even got serious, and we declined several houses which were
nicer and newer because there were such restrictions, including one
brand new townhouse that screamed "CC&Rs" even though they couldn't
find any on file. It's called "exercising due diligence".
-- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane
ARRL Volunteer Counsel

email: k2asp [at] arrl [dot] net

On 10/17/11 3:05 PM, Phil Kane wrote:
The FCC adopted the OTARD rule for TV antennas and satellite dishes
only because The Congress mandated such. We have been trying to get a
similar mandate for many years and it's falling on Congressional deaf
ears. ...

They were heavily lobbied by the satellite interest groups who have deep
pockets...Murdoch and his ilk. Hams can't offer them anything comparable
so we're just SOL...

On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 00:12:54 EDT, Art Clemons
wrote:

The really sad part is that the FCC could decrease restrictions on Antennas
and supporting structures rather easily as it did with satellite dishes and
less than one meter TV antennas, but I suggest that builders and realty
sellers oppose any such change.

The FCC says that they lack the authority to override CC&Rs and HOA
agreements as they are between private parties, but that they would
override them if Congress passes a law giving them permission. So,
let's lobby our federal lawmakers to pass such a law. That's the way
the TV industry got the FCC to override CC&Rs and HOAs for TV
receiving antennas.

Dick Grady, AC7EL

On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 10:23:20 EDT, wrote:

So,
let's lobby our federal lawmakers to pass such a law. That's the way
the TV industry got the FCC to override CC&Rs and HOAs for TV
receiving antennas.

There has been a bill to that effect introduced in the last three (or
is it four now) sessions and it dies in committee. One of the
powerful leaders of the House is a ham. The League is on top of it.
Bottom line -- Money talks.
-- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane
ARRL Volunteer Counsel

email: k2asp [at] arrl [dot] net

On 10/18/2011 4:59 PM, Phil Kane wrote:
On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 10:23:20 EDT, wrote:

So,
let's lobby our federal lawmakers to pass such a law. That's the way
the TV industry got the FCC to override CC&Rs and HOAs for TV
receiving antennas.

There has been a bill to that effect introduced in the last three (or
is it four now) sessions and it dies in committee. One of the
powerful leaders of the House is a ham. The League is on top of it.
Bottom line -- Money talks.

OK, I'm going to be the one who opens the box Pandora left lying around:
get ready for some fireworks.

I'm going to ask a serious, and seriously discomfiting, question -

Do Hams _DESERVE_ special treatment?

I'm not going to mince words: if we're going to overcome HOA/CC&R
restrictions, we need to have a real, believable, valid argument that
can convince legislatures and neighbors that we deserve it, and I can't
think of one: there are hams seriously dedicated to public service and
EmCom, but their numbers are small, and I don't think that hams have
enough of a claim on the government's pool of good will to warrant being
given special privileges to rescind contract provisions which we don't like.

I've written about this before, and it's as applicable to this debate as
to arguments about what frequency assignments we're "entitled to", or
being excepted from the laws against having a radio that can listen to
the police channels, or to getting a discount on vanity license plates.

I'm open to suggestions, but I don't see how ham radio can dig itself
out of the hole that changing technology and computer-synthesized
frequency-agile public safety radio networks have put us in.

* It's not enough to say that we know Morse code: even if it were still
required, it wouldn't be relevant.

*It's not enough to say that we know things that others don't: the
expertise which used to be required to make disparate networks and
radios inter-operate has been programmed into LSIC chips inside public
safety transceivers, and changing them to form a new team is a matter of
a few minutes time.

* It's not enough to claim that we can carry messages: public safety
agencies have had the capacity to communicate outside of disaster areas
for years, and "Heatlh and Welfare" traffic is a "feel good" capability
that doesn't translate into votes.

I'm not saying that ham radio is dead: that's not the question here. The
question is if "we" deserve special consideration from the government
because we're hams.

Look, guys, Pandora left a box behind!

Bill, W1AC

--
Bill Horne
(Filter QRM to email me directly)

On 10/18/11 9:22 PM, Bill Horne wrote:

I'm not saying that ham radio is dead: that's not the question here. The
question is if "we" deserve special consideration from the government
because we're hams.

I agree with your contention. No, ham radio is not dead . . . but we
cannot expect any special treatment based on knowledge or abilities that
we can provide. Part of this is progress in technology and part of it
is our own fault.

Developments in technology have reduced the need for what we can offer.
Mother Nature still reminds us that our fine technology is at her
pleasure, but not often. Hurricane Katrina illustrated the frailty of
modern communications, but it also illustrated how things have changed
in the role of ham radio in disasters. We no longer are a significant
carrier of health and welfare traffic.

There are groups that do a good job of public service and obtaining
recognition, but they're rare and getting rarer. The general public,
and by extension the legislators who make our laws, perceive ham radio
in the same way that they knew Citizens Band in its day, and that
perception is painfully accurate. If we don't provide a benefit to the
public, why should the public make any effort to reward us?

73, Steve KB9X

On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 11:27:41 EDT, Steve Bonine wrote:

Hurricane Katrina illustrated the frailty of
modern communications, but it also illustrated how things have changed
in the role of ham radio in disasters. We no longer are a significant
carrier of health and welfare traffic.

Or a backup for public safety or other "commercial" communications.
--

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

e-mail: k2asp [at] arrl [dot] net

In article ,
Phil Kane wrote:

Hurricane Katrina illustrated the frailty of
modern communications, but it also illustrated how things have changed
in the role of ham radio in disasters. We no longer are a significant
carrier of health and welfare traffic.

Or a backup for public safety or other "commercial" communications.

I think that depends, to a very significant degree, on how well
organized and trained we are, and how well integrated with the local
emergency-response community.

A randomly-selected gang of hams, with their radios but with no
specific tranining or organization or ability to work as a group, is
not likely (in my opinion) to be very useful in times of emergency.
They won't know how to figure out what the local governments need in
terms of emergency communications, they won't know where to go or who
to talk with, they won't be set up with any sort of predictable
communications plan in advance, etc.

If they show up at the location of a disaster or emergency, they'll
probably be treated as "loose cannons" by the police, fire department,
other government representatives, etc. and asked to go away and let
the professionals do their job. At best they'll be treated like any
other "convergent volunteers" of unknown capability and reliability.

On the other hand... I believe that local ham groups, if well
organized and trained, working in close cooperation with local
governments and emergency-response teams, can be a very valuable
asset, and see as such by government organizations.

I have the good fortune to live in a city (and county) which has some
very effective arrangements of that sort. We *have* been called out
by the county on at least one occasion in the past few years, to serve
as backup communicators for the police/fire infrastructure (somebody
sabotaged several fiber-optic cables and knocked out all of the
telephones and cellphones in south Santa Clara County back in 2009).
I still have a very nice thank-you letter from the city manager of
Morgan Hill.

One area in which our service has been particularly useful to the
cities is our ability to act as "eyes and ears" during the first few
hours after a disaster. We can provide the city emergency manager
with a quick overview of damage (e.g. after an earthquake, or during a
winter storm with flooding) throughout the city, within 15 minutes or
so, via neighborhood walkthroughs and "windshield survey" drive-by
summaries. This helps the city figure out where their (strictly
limited) police and fire resources are best utilized. It would take
the city hours, if not days, to do this just with their own
personnel... and the city governments view this as a very valuable
service for us to provide.

If hams want to be treated as being worthy of some special treatment,
then I believe that this must be earned, through practical
demonstration and through active cooperation and training. It *can*
be done, but it doesn't come for free.

It's not the "ham radio" per se that's important (although the
privileges are very useful)... it's the fact that we're trained,
dependable communicators willing to serve.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

On Oct 24, 2:37 pm, Phil Kane wrote:
On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 11:27:41 EDT, Steve Bonine wrote:
Hurricane Katrina illustrated the frailty of
modern communications, but it also illustrated how things have changed
in the role of ham radio in disasters. We no longer are a significant
carrier of health and welfare traffic.

Or a backup for public safety or other "commercial" communications.

(The following, while just opinion, is probably a major heresy.)

And that minor role is just fine. in the last ten years or so, there
has been a major attempt to mutate amateur radio into some sort of
official adjunct to emergency communications.

And let's just say it has had mixed success. We were looking at
background checks, including financial. While the financial part was
dropped, it surely set the tone. The emergency types came in fast and
hard, and they had no illusions that Amateur Radio was anything else
but emergency ops - and if grudging acceptance was afforded,
acknowledged that some Hams messed with unimportant stuff like
contesting, DX, ane electronic design. But they "knew" exactly what
Ham radio was for, and I always caught the undercurrent that they
thought most of us were a bit foolish. We still get a lot of that in
the discourse. I sat at meetings where some guy from some emergency
outfit comes in and tells us that since by nature, everything they do
is a matter of life and death, therefore it's always an emergency,
that they have unrestricted priority over our repeater system.
Basically that our repeater system was now theirs. He was wrong of
course, but that's my point. There are people out there who think that
way.

A local Ham wastrying for a radio check to see if his HT was making
it into one of our repeater satellite voting relays a few weeks ago.
One of the emergency Op types came back to him, and told him he was
coming in okay. Then the testing Ham moved, and his signal got a
little scratchy. The EO guy noted the dropoff in clarity, the testing
Ham said that it was just his HT he had in case of emergencies. Well,
that started the ball rolling. The Emergency guy starts to deliver a 5
minute lecture to the other Ham about how people shouldn't be using
HT's for much of anything. The testing Ham noted that he already had a
sufficiently powerful setup. But the Emergency Op wasn't done yet. He
went on another tirade noting that although he'd only been a Ham for a
very short time, his job was to show other Hams that they were
technically pretty backwards, and even the older Hams, because it was
his "experience" that older Hams just didnn't keep up. He ended with
some bizarre comment about how he thinks that his pointing out other
peoples shortcomings makes the world a better place. I thought I'd
have a little fun with him. I called in, and noted that it was good to
have a technically astute Ham on the air, then tried to involve him in
a discussion of the technical aspects of our repeater. Turned out the
limits of his techical abilities were to get a 50 watt radio, put up a
J-Pole, and mash the PTT button. But we can compre anecdotes all day.

Then emergency employees were getting technician licenses as an end-
around to get employees using the radio instead of volunteers.
Unfortunately, many of the employees thought that the amateur
frequencies were a sort of back channel for their use. Many were
disappointed to find that we had some rules and restrictions.

As far as I am concerned, the role of Hams in an emergency situation
is that if there is a Ham in the area where the disaster is, he or she
might use their station to relay messages into areas that might be
coordinating help. That's enough.

The idea that we provide someone to fill a seat at an EC is sort of
illogical anyhow. Why would the EC not have a trained professional in
that seat? Are all the others there unpaid volunteers? If I were
running one of these places, I'd have someone filling that seat that I
was a supervisor over.