Re: Amateur Radio Parity Act

Tom O'Brien

Thank you for your comments.
I am going to send e-mails to my Senators, as well as Fax letters.  Based on their responses to my earlier communications on other issues, chances are slim that they will hear my "voice crying in the wilderness".  But at least I will know I took action.  

My HOA has covenants that were prepared by some shade-tree lawyer with a word processor, and the paragraph about antennas is garbled to the point that an English teacher would give it a grade of F-.  The text is something like this:  "No antenna shall be erected on the property with  the express written permission of the Architectural Control Committee. (emphasis mine).  Thus it says the exact opposite of what was intended.

-----Original Message-----
From: "Ken Nichols ken.nichols.kd3vk@... [STXDXCC]"
Sent: Sep 17, 2017 11:02 AM
Subject: Re: [STXDXCC] Amateur Radio Parity Act



I believe you are spot on and I've already asked my  to vote it down. When it was first advertised by the ARRL, I was in favor of the bill based on their description. 

Even though I'm a life member and supporter of the ARRL, now that I've learned more about the flaws in the bill, I am very much disappointed in their actions by caving in to the HOA lobbyist. And especially their doubling down in their defense of that position, even after so many members have told them they made a big mistake.  

Ken Nichols KD3VK

On Sep 17, 2017, at 9:06 AM, Tom OBrien tpobrienjr@... [STXDXCC] <STXDXCC@...> wrote:


Fellow DXers,

I have sent the following letter to various ARRL officials (President, West Gulf Division, South Texas Section). I urge you to read it and the Amateur Radio Parity Act, and to act as your conscience tells you.

I have read the Amateur Radio Parity Act, and while I think its stated purpose is admirable, I am dismayed at the prospect of what will happen to amateur radio when HOA groups begin to operate within the new regulations.

My amateur radio experience goes back to 1957. I have always operated my fixed stations with dipoles and verticals, and never with beams or towers.
For the last 40 years I have been in neighborhoods that had HOA's and antenna restrictions. This year, I completed 10 years of service as Chair of my local Architectural Control Committee.

The part of the Amateur Radio Parity Act that bothers me is Section 3, Subsection (b), Paragraph (3), which states "subject to the standards specified in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a), permit a community association to establish reasonable written rules concerning height, location, size, and aesthetic impact of, and installation requirements for, outdoor antennas and support structures for the purpose of conducting communications in the amateur radio services."

There are more than 30,000 HOA's in the United States. It is unimaginable to me how that many HOA's can competently "establish reasonable written rules concerning height, location, size, and aesthetic impact of, and installation requirements for" amateur radio communications equipment. The word "reasonable" makes this an open-ended, vague bill, unworthy of the U.S. Congress.

I predict that passage of this bill, with the "ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS" subsection will give the FCC a giant regulatory headache that will dwarf the 27 MHz CB radio debacle.

Please explain to me how the ARPA accomplishes anything positive at all for Amateur Radio.

I plan to ask my Senators to vote against the Amateur Radio Parity Act, as currently written.

Tom O'Brien
San Antonio, Texas

Join to automatically receive all group messages.