On Dec 18, 10:30*pm, Lids wrote:
N9OGL wrote:
On Dec 18, 10:28 am, N9OGL wrote:
On Dec 15, 4:28 pm, policy-ham wrote:

Palmdale, "Kalifornia" is attempting to outlaw amateur radio. *The
city of Palmdale has now passed a draft zoning law that proposes an
enforcement unit that could seize amateur radio equipment and restrict
antenna height to one inch above a fixed structure's roof.
It also applies to mobile and portable operation using an HT. They can
even arrest you and take your HT just for walking down the street and
talking on it.
I am not kidding. Here is a link to the actual proposed ordinance
where you can read it for yourself.http://www.cityofpalmdale.org/city_h...spl120479c.pdf
QRZ.com are leading the hams in a campaign to stop this law from
taking effect. You can read all about it he *http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?t=185892
There is also are some videos on YouTube from N9FAA about it.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmWLF...utube.com/watc...
Hams in "Kalifornia" and the whole country have to unite to fight it
now!
Louis
I got law....I think all need to read it again

Todd N9OGL

CORRECTION: I've got a copy of the law and you all need to read it
again!

Todd N9OGL

You are both LIDs!

and YOUR an ASSHOLE...if you can't discuss without calling people
names...BTW a LID only really applies to radio

"N9OGL" wrote in message
and YOUR an ASSHOLE...if you can't discuss without calling people
names...BTW a LID only really applies to radio

Actually they probably drew up the law just because of someone like you.

On Dec 19, 1:30*am, Lids wrote:
N9OGL wrote:
On Dec 18, 10:28 am, N9OGL wrote:
On Dec 15, 4:28 pm, policy-ham wrote:

Palmdale, "Kalifornia" is attempting to outlaw amateur radio. *The
city of Palmdale has now passed a draft zoning law that proposes an
enforcement unit that could seize amateur radio equipment and restrict
antenna height to one inch above a fixed structure's roof.
It also applies to mobile and portable operation using an HT. They can
even arrest you and take your HT just for walking down the street and
talking on it.
I am not kidding. Here is a link to the actual proposed ordinance
where you can read it for yourself.http://www.cityofpalmdale.org/city_h...spl120479c.pdf
QRZ.com are leading the hams in a campaign to stop this law from
taking effect. You can read all about it he *http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?t=185892
There is also are some videos on YouTube from N9FAA about it.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmWLF...utube.com/watc...
Hams in "Kalifornia" and the whole country have to unite to fight it
now!
Louis
I got law....I think all need to read it again

Todd N9OGL

CORRECTION: I've got a copy of the law and you all need to read it
again!

Todd N9OGL

You are both LIDs!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Lidsville is the Koo-Koo-Kookiest,
Lidsville is the Ki-Ki-Kickiest,
Lidsville is the Groo-Groo-Grooviest
Lidsville is the living end, friend

If you have a chance to go-go there
You'll be glad you did, 'cause
Everybody who goes to Lidsville really flips his lid

How's that for a topper?

So if you bump into a bonnet
With ears and nose and eyes upon it
Nope, you haven't gone bats
That's Lidsville

Lidy-lidy-lidy-ville
Not to be confussed with nitty-gritty-ville
The land of living hats
That's Lidsville

In rec.radio.amateur.misc lid wrote:
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 16:28:10 -0800 (PST), policy-ham
wrote:

Palmdale, "Kalifornia" is attempting to outlaw amateur radio. The
city of Palmdale has now passed a draft zoning law that proposes an
enforcement unit that could seize amateur radio equipment and restrict
antenna height to one inch above a fixed structure's roof.

It also applies to mobile and portable operation using an HT. They can
even arrest you and take your HT just for walking down the street and
talking on it.

I am not kidding. Here is a link to the actual proposed ordinance
where you can read it for yourself.
http://www.cityofpalmdale.org/city_h...spl120479c.pdf


Cities, or even States, can NOT regulate or restrict, ham radio.


Sure they can; all they need to do is pass an ordinance.

Whether or not someone has the resources to file a court challenge
and fight it is a separate issue.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On Dec 15, 6:30*pm, wrote:
In rec.radio.amateur.misc wrote:
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 16:28:10 -0800 (PST), policy-ham
wrote:

Palmdale, "Kalifornia" is attempting to outlaw amateur radio. *The
city of Palmdale has now passed a draft zoning law that proposes an
enforcement unit that could seize amateur radio equipment and restrict
antenna height to one inch above a fixed structure's roof.

It also applies to mobile and portable operation using an HT. They can
even arrest you and take your HT just for walking down the street and
talking on it.

I am not kidding. Here is a link to the actual proposed ordinance
where you can read it for yourself.
http://www.cityofpalmdale.org/city_h...spl120479c.pdf

Cities, or even States, can NOT regulate or restrict, ham radio.

Sure they can; all they need to do is pass an ordinance.

Whether or not someone has the resources to file a court challenge
and fight it is a separate issue.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

technically no they can't, Congress passed a law in 1983 giving the
FCC full authority of RF energy also in the 1980's the FCC passed
PRB-1 which exempts amateurs to some degree, for example any ordinance
that bans all antenna violates PRB-1. Any ordinance created must use
the lease restrictive means to serve the government interest.

On Dec 15, 9:42*pm, N9OGL wrote:
On Dec 15, 6:30*pm, wrote:





In rec.radio.amateur.misc wrote:
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 16:28:10 -0800 (PST), policy-ham
wrote:

Palmdale, "Kalifornia" is attempting to outlaw amateur radio. *The
city of Palmdale has now passed a draft zoning law that proposes an
enforcement unit that could seize amateur radio equipment and restrict
antenna height to one inch above a fixed structure's roof.

It also applies to mobile and portable operation using an HT. They can
even arrest you and take your HT just for walking down the street and
talking on it.

And you all didn't believe me that SOME cities and counties are doing
this.

I didn't even know about the Palmdale California one until reading
this message. So chalk up ANOTHER city making such a rule.
technically no they can't, Congress passed a law in 1983 giving the
FCC full authority of RF energy also in the 1980's the FCC passed
PRB-1 which exempts amateurs to some degree, for example any ordinance
that bans all antenna violates PRB-1. Any ordinance created must use
the lease restrictive means to serve the government interest.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

"must use the least restrictive means"

then what about all the previous statements in thse newsgroups that
legally the local authorities are allowed to be more restrictive than
the federal
radio rules, but not legally allowed to be less restrictive than the
federal rules???????

It seems to be if thety're allowed to be MORE restrictive than the
federal rules, then the ban on ham radio in that city by that city is
completely
legal, if the law passed.

On Dec 15, 7:18*pm, radioguy wrote:
On Dec 15, 9:42*pm, N9OGL wrote:



On Dec 15, 6:30*pm, wrote:

In rec.radio.amateur.misc wrote:
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 16:28:10 -0800 (PST), policy-ham
wrote:

Palmdale, "Kalifornia" is attempting to outlaw amateur radio. *The
city of Palmdale has now passed a draft zoning law that proposes an
enforcement unit that could seize amateur radio equipment and restrict
antenna height to one inch above a fixed structure's roof.

It also applies to mobile and portable operation using an HT. They can
even arrest you and take your HT just for walking down the street and
talking on it.

And you all didn't believe me that SOME cities and counties are doing
this.

I didn't even know about the Palmdale California one until reading
this message. So chalk up ANOTHER city making such a rule.

technically no they can't, Congress passed a law in 1983 giving the
FCC full authority of RF energy also in the 1980's the FCC passed
PRB-1 which exempts amateurs to some degree, for example any ordinance
that bans all antenna violates PRB-1. Any ordinance created must use
the lease restrictive means to serve the government interest.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

"must use the least restrictive means"

then what about all the previous statements in thse newsgroups that
legally the local authorities are allowed to be more restrictive than
the federal
radio rules, but not legally allowed to be less restrictive than the
federal rules???????



Not true, many cities believe they can, but if you were to fight it in
federal court, they would lose. Cities, States and Federal according
to the courts must use the "lease restrictive mean necessary to
substances governmental interest". There has been many court cases
including Supreme Court cases and which the courts has ruled that is
how it's suppose to be. That's where the FCC got that term in PRB-1.

It seems to be if thety're allowed to be MORE restrictive than the
federal rules, then the ban on ham radio in that city by that city is
completely
legal, if the law passed.

Actually Federal laws also have to abide by the "lease restrictive
mean" as well, although a lot of government agencies don't

In rec.radio.amateur.misc N9OGL wrote:
On Dec 15, 6:30Â*pm, wrote:
In rec.radio.amateur.misc wrote:
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 16:28:10 -0800 (PST), policy-ham
wrote:

Palmdale, "Kalifornia" is attempting to outlaw amateur radio. Â*The
city of Palmdale has now passed a draft zoning law that proposes an
enforcement unit that could seize amateur radio equipment and restrict
antenna height to one inch above a fixed structure's roof.

It also applies to mobile and portable operation using an HT. They can
even arrest you and take your HT just for walking down the street and
talking on it.

I am not kidding. Here is a link to the actual proposed ordinance
where you can read it for yourself.
http://www.cityofpalmdale.org/city_h...spl120479c.pdf

Cities, or even States, can NOT regulate or restrict, ham radio.

Sure they can; all they need to do is pass an ordinance.

Whether or not someone has the resources to file a court challenge
and fight it is a separate issue.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

technically no they can't, Congress passed a law in 1983 giving the
FCC full authority of RF energy also in the 1980's the FCC passed
PRB-1 which exempts amateurs to some degree, for example any ordinance
that bans all antenna violates PRB-1. Any ordinance created must use
the lease restrictive means to serve the government interest.

Technically, yes they can.

A city can pass an ordinance making it illegal to wear a white shirt
and it is law until challenged in court.

And, for what it is worth, California adoptd AB 1228 in 2003 which
basically makes PRB-1 part of state law.

Neither AB 1228 nor PRB-1 mean anything until a locality passes and
enforces an ordinace contrary to state and federal statute AND an
individual is "harmed" by the ordinance AND the individual challenges
the ordinance in court.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

wrote in message
...

Neither AB 1228 nor PRB-1 mean anything until a locality passes and
enforces an ordinace contrary to state and federal statute AND an
individual is "harmed" by the ordinance AND the individual challenges
the ordinance in court.

And to add insult to injury, you'll have to spend your money to get your
antenna installed, spend your money to fight the city's illegal rules, and
then you'll have to pay your taxes.. which the city will use to FIGHT YOU
and your antenna installation.

The Government(at all levels) passes all kind of laws that probably aren't
legal or constitutional. They're supposed to at least try to pay attention
to existing rules, laws, and the Constitution but frequently they don't.
And then we the people have to spend our time and resources fighting the
people we elect to these offices.

The real problem is no one pays attention to these things. Even if you
manage to go to court, get these rules thrown out, the people who wrote them
will not be penalized in any palpable way.

I had a HAM friend in a town near Sacramento who had to fight city hall on
an antenna tower he'd set up. He had it up for almost 10 years before the
city noticed.. and then tried to pull some permit nonsense to get him to
take it down. Luckily he found a city clerk with half a brian, explained to
them that the FCC handles these matters, and they left him alone.

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 16:28:10 -0800 (PST), policy-ham
wrote:
Palmdale, "Kalifornia" is attempting to outlaw amateur radio. The
city of Palmdale has now passed a draft zoning law that proposes an
enforcement unit that could seize amateur radio equipment and
restrict
antenna height to one inch above a fixed structure's roof.

It also applies to mobile and portable operation using an HT. They
can
even arrest you and take your HT just for walking down the street
and
talking on it.

I am not kidding. Here is a link to the actual proposed ordinance
where you can read it for yourself.
http://www.cityofpalmdale.org/city_h...spl120479c.pdf

Cities, or even States, can NOT regulate or restrict, ham radio.

Agreed. However, Palmdale is shooting itself in the "foot."

For those not aware, Palmdale is adjacent to the San Andreas Fault. I
can easily envision any and all amateur operators in the area REFUSING
to take part in any emergency communication, whether practice or real,
with regard to any disaster in the area. Palmdale obviously does not
value the operators as a resource.

Note that Palmdale also went after TV and satellite antennas. Again,
there are laws separate from PRB-1 and its state equivalent that exist
at both the federal and state levels of government that clearly PERMIT
these antennas. Practically EVERYTHING cited in the proposed statute
is pre-empted at a higher government level. Is the City really that
clueless?