August 2016 - arrl-odv - reflector.arrl.org

[arrl-odv:23688] Thank You and HNY!
by Brian Mileshosky 02 Jan '17

02 Jan '17

Okay, now I'm bored on the air -- same for a zillion other League members and hams across the world. Fair warning: I'm making a Director's motion in January to create a Centennial QSO Party Anonymous or Points Anonymous service, because lots of people now find themselves staring hopelessly at their now absolutely quiet radios. A huge THANK YOU to everyone -- ODV, staff, volunteers, members, hams -- for an absolute home run on the air this past year. Centennial celebration aside, if there is one thing that I hope everyone who participated in the QSO Party walked away with, it is that they became better and more dedicated radio operators throughout the year. That they used this year-long opportunity to learn more about themselves as an op, learned more about their gear, uncovered station and operating limitations and found ways to resolve them, and rediscovered the magic, fun (God forbid), and camaraderie that is ham radio. One very profound moment today was working a few folks in the QSO Party who I hadn't worked since back in January 1, 2014. Staring at that date in the log, and greeting those hams once again, with literally one year of time padding our last QSO was an in-your-face "this year has absolutely flown by way too fast" epiphany. I hope everyone enjoyed it as much as they could while it lasted. Happy Centennial, and Happy New Year everyone. Be safe this evening and see you in a few weeks. 73, Brian N5ZGT ARRL Director, Rocky Mountain Division

4 5

[arrl-odv:25620] PRB-1 gets another black eye - from the US 3rd Circuit this time.
by Bob Famiglio, K3RF 31 Aug '16

31 Aug '16

Dear Colleagues: The major PRB-1 case pending in the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals for WN3A, Jeffrey DePolo has been decided - unfortunately it deals a body blow to the effectiveness of PRB-1. For background, the Amateur Radio Operator seeking relief from the Pennsylvania township's denial of his application for tower, is Jeff DePolo, WN3A - the widely known, published and heralded VHF, UHF and microwave experimenter (not a contester, as has been alleged by some here) - who was the trustee of N3KZ of the University of Pennsylvania for many years. He is now the sole benefactor of the massive University of Pennsylvania repeater system, N3KZ, which covers five states, linked by RF only (103 receivers and 64 transmitters, all on emergency power at hardened mountaintop sites). Jeff's tower at his home was also to be the location of the repeater-switching center as well as the hub of the Chester County ARES 5 GHz multimedia, wideband emergency system. The county emergency services guy testified that this specific ham tower was mission critical. Jeff purchased the property on which the tower was to be located specifically for ham use and had just finished building a new home on the most rural, tower-suitable property that was available in the township. It was across the street from a former Nike radar base with many platforms and towers that had been dismantled in 2000, after long use by the University of Pennsylvania Ionosphere Research Center. Jeff spent much time there as a student, and thereafter. A University of Pennsylvania radio club station was located there. The old Nike and UPenn research site is just a few hundred feet from his property line. To strip the 3rd Circuit's opinion to its basics, it effectively holds that whatever a local town zoning board decides is a reasonable accommodation is just that - no matter what evidence was presented or not presented. It means that a local zoning board can assert their opinion as fact and that will stand. A federal court will not review the "reasonable accommodation" decision; it may review only the narrow preemption issue. You should read the opinion, even if you are not a lawyer. The decision is precedential -a declaration that appears as the first line at the top of its first page. This is a significant setback for Amateur Radio, as admitted by the Third Circuit itself. Legally, the Opinion is applicable only to States in the US Third Circuit, but in my view, and the view of other knowledgeable lawyers who have reviewed the Opinion, it is reasonable to expect this Opinion will be used by other municipalities to dial back PRB-1 and expand their denial of Amateur Radio tower and antenna applications. Some cities and towns will hope the Opinion is adopted by those Federal Circuits inclined to roll back the rights of radio amateurs - as we have seen in recent years. For Jeff DePolo, the good news is that we have a plan to proceed in state court with a path that we have spent time in the last 24 hours defining. Under a particular Pennsylvania statute, we believe the case can be transferred to state court. However, we don't believe that a state court is going to more sympathetic than we thought a federal court would be in interpreting what is largely federal law. This decision is consistent with several other local, un-appealed cases I have had in the last several years where municipalities have no desire to allow Amateurs to have any antennas over 35 feet in the Eastern Pennsylvania region. As the US District Court judge wrote, their argument is that Hams can use the internet or satellites to communicate. Their opinion is that a 16 foot high antenna works perfectly well for microwave. This a large disappointment for hundreds if not thousands of our Members who are planning towers, or are users of the University of Pennsylvania linked-repeater system throughout New York, New Jersey, Delaware and Maryland. Though there is a difficult road ahead, this particular case will eventually get to another trial though in state court, not federal court. Worse for Jeff DePolo is that the township has suggested that the original 65 foot variance (wholly unusable) expired after a year. Opponents now will fight anything over 35 feet, despite Pennsylvania's minimum of 65' statute, claiming the language of the state statue is ambiguous as to the definitions of "by right" exceptions. By the way, 35 feet is Jeff's roof line. In my view, the PA state statute is an example of what happens when we permit a statute to be drafted without any input from lawyers with Amateur Radio experience. This is a hard lesson to be learned about supporting local groups lobbying for state statutes in the blind. Amateur Radio needs a federal statute similar to the considerations of the Telecom Act of 1996. I raised this in early 2015 as the writing was well on the wall by then. PRB-1 does not and never did guarantee usable antennas, only reasonable accommodation, which is now just what the any town tells you it is. If you have any questions, it would be better to call me. It is a complicated matter on which I have spent hundreds of hours over the last several years. It is easier and faster to explain in a live conversation. If you need another copy of our 3rd circuit legal briefs which explain the case in detail, let me know. Keep the faith. Bob Famiglio, K3RF Vice Director, ARRL Atlantic Division 610-359-7300 www.QRZ.com/db/K3RF

4 5

[arrl-odv:24932] Status of the WN3A PRB-1 antenna case
by Bob Famiglio, K3RF 31 Aug '16

31 Aug '16

Fellow ODV members: At least three of you have asked recently about the status of the notorious WN3A antenna litigation and whether it has been resolved yet. Here is an update as to the federal court proceedings. You all will recall that the ARRL filed an amicus brief in support of the radio amateur I represent. Copies of my WN3A briefs were also circulated through the ODV server late last summer. You might also recall this case before the 3rd circuit court of appeals concerns a federal judge's legal opinion that any accommodation a town provides a ham, in the towns own judgement no matter how arbitrary, is reasonable accommodation under PRB-1. The federal court ruled hams need not bother coming to federal court for relief under PRB-1 as long as they get a hearing before a local zoning board and a decision is rendered. PRB-1 was found to be very limited in effect by the court. We appealed. Recently we received the attached correspondence from the court clerk scheduling oral argument the week of our next board meeting. This is significant in that the 3rd circuit court does not routinely grant oral argument anymore-decisions are based on the lengthy briefs and research provided by the parties, as they should be. However, in cases which are of first impression and in which a significant precedential decision is anticipated, oral argument is requested by the court as it is here. Our panel of three judges includes the chief judge of the court. This appeals court controls the federal courts in Pennsylvania, Delaware and New Jersey, but the decision will surely affect the whole country as the case will be quoted as a significant circuit court decision no matter which way it goes. The argument is just a few days before the January board meeting. I may know from the questions from the court as to any leanings, but that speculation is always dangerous. What seems certain is that the court will not just treat this case as a "do over" by just sending it back to the trial court. They could do that without the need for argument. Rather, it likely will decide what PRB-1 actually means in view of the conflicting court decisions and rules for its interpretation from around the country, all raised by the numerous opponents and their various legal arguments against all ham antennas. I expect a written decision in February now, but that prediction may be off. I hope to see you all in the greater Newington area in a few weeks and will let you know what the judges wanted to know during argument. Let's keep our collective fingers crossed. I hope you are all enjoying the holiday season. I am hoping for a late Christmas present from the 3rd circuit court. 73. Bob Famiglio, K3RF Vice Director, ARRL Atlantic Division 610-359-7300 www.QRZ.com/db/K3RF

5 6

[arrl-odv:25621] Parity Act Status
by Mike Lisenco N2YBB 31 Aug '16

31 Aug '16

Dear Colleague, Chris Imlay and I have begun to pave the way for the Bill’s movement to the Senate from the House of Representatives. Over the past two weeks, we have been meeting with Senate staffers to bring them up to date regarding the amended Bill, its status, and how we hope to see the Bill get through the Senate. We will be continuing these meeting over the next few weeks until all 100 Senate offices have been visited. The response has been completely favorable particularly with the knowledge that there is a consensus and that the Bill is no longer opposed by either party. It is our hope that the Bill will pass the House on suspension in the upcoming work period that begins next Tuesday for the entire month of September. It would then be sent to the Senate for consideration and hot-lining. Upon passage in the House, ARRL will begin a mass email campaign using the RallyCongress application. It will begin with an email from President Roderick to the entire membership and be followed up with emails from all the Directors to their members seeking membership participation in the email campaign. This campaign will be critical to our success and we will need complete support from the entire Board. Have a great Labor Day weekend. 73 de Mike - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mike Lisenco, N2YBB Director, Hudson Division Chairman, ad hoc Legislative Advocacy Committee ARRL - The national association for Amateur Radio™ 917-865-3538 n2ybb(a)arrl.org

1 0

[arrl-odv:25609] Re: Info
by Doug Rehman 26 Aug '16

26 Aug '16

I am utterly unimpressed with the lack of attention given to this by HQ. I just tested two former Vice Directors’ callsigns(a)arrl.org <mailto:callsigns@arrl.org> and found the mailboxes to be functioning. (In addition to what I had indicated about WA4AW’s .org address in my email below.) It is clear that the POLICY has been that Vice Directors do indeed retain their .org email addresses. Who made the decision to go against that policy and deactivate Mike’s .org email address and based upon what reason and authority? This makes it appear that Mike has done something wrong. Mike provided a parting statement to K5UR which Rick chose not to share with the Board. If anyone that hasn’t seen it in private email cares and would like a copy, email me privately and I will send it directly. Doug K4AC From: k5ur(a)aol.com [mailto:k5ur@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2016 5:15 PM To: doug(a)k4ac.com; mikelee0531(a)me.com Cc: ny2rf(a)arrl.org; k4ac(a)arrl.org Subject: Re: Info I know that former Directors and Section Managers keep their .org addresses, is that not also true of Vice Directors? Doug, good question but I don't know the answer. Tom, can you check what our policy, if there is one, or practice has been and let us know, please? Thanks. Rick ... -----Original Message----- From: Doug Rehman < <mailto:doug@k4ac.com> doug(a)k4ac.com> To: k5ur < <mailto:k5ur@aol.com> k5ur(a)aol.com>; 'Michael Lee' < <mailto:mikelee0531@me.com> mikelee0531(a)me.com> Cc: ny2rf < <mailto:ny2rf@arrl.org> ny2rf(a)arrl.org>; k4ac < <mailto:k4ac@arrl.org> k4ac(a)arrl.org> Sent: Thu, Aug 25, 2016 6:26 am Subject: RE: Info Mike’s .org address has been deactivated, so he is probably already off of ODV as well. I’ll post a message from Mike if that’s his desire. I know that former Directors and Section Managers keep their .org addresses, is that not also true of Vice Directors? WA4AW maintained his .org address from being a Vice Director after losing an election. Has something changed? Doug From: <mailto:k5ur@aol.com> k5ur(a)aol.com [ <mailto:k5ur@aol.com?> mailto:k5ur@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2016 1:30 AM To: <mailto:aa6ml@arrl.org> aa6ml(a)arrl.org Cc: <mailto:ny2rf@arrl.org> ny2rf(a)arrl.org; <mailto:k4ac@arrl.org> k4ac(a)arrl.org Subject: Info Hi Mike: I regret that you are resigning. Thank you for all of your help on the Board. I've really enjoyed working with you. Mike, do you want to tell the Board that you are resigning or do you want Tom to tell the Board? I feel like we owe it to the Board members to tell them something before any kind of announcement is made. What do you think? 73 Rick - K5UR ...

3 2

[arrl-odv:25613] Test
by Doug Rehman 26 Aug '16

26 Aug '16

Test only.

2 1

[arrl-odv:25614] Open Circuit
by Doug Rehman 25 Aug '16

25 Aug '16

As the Southeastern Division Director, I find it inappropriate that I learned that N4ZUW had been declared elected as the Southeastern Division Vice Director via an email from a badge maker contacting me to confirm that a badge order from N4ZUW was legit. I don't need a phone call, but I do expect the minimal common courtesy of notifying me via a one sentence email that N4ZUW was formally declared elected and notified of it. Doug K4AC

1 0

[arrl-odv:25611] Re: Info
by Shelley, Barry, N1VXY 25 Aug '16

25 Aug '16

Mike, Doug, et al: I became aware of this anomaly late today and will correct it first thing tomorrow morning. It should not have happened. 73, Barry, N1VXY Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE Droid On Aug 25, 2016 6:10 PM, "Lisenco, Mike (Dir, HU)" <mlisenco(a)arrl.org> wrote: OMG enough of this crap already. This issue belongs offline and handled by staff, not on ODV! Stop making a war over what is obviously a clerical mistake. Sent from my iPhone On Aug 25, 2016, at 6:02 PM, Doug Rehman <doug(a)k4ac.com<mailto:doug@k4ac.com>> wrote: I am utterly unimpressed with the lack of attention given to this by HQ. I just tested two former Vice Directors’ callsigns(a)arrl.org<mailto:callsigns@arrl.org> and found the mailboxes to be functioning. (In addition to what I had indicated about WA4AW’s .org address in my email below.) It is clear that the POLICY has been that Vice Directors do indeed retain their .org email addresses. Who made the decision to go against that policy and deactivate Mike’s .org email address and based upon what reason and authority? This makes it appear that Mike has done something wrong. Mike provided a parting statement to K5UR which Rick chose not to share with the Board. If anyone that hasn’t seen it in private email cares and would like a copy, email me privately and I will send it directly. Doug K4AC From: k5ur(a)aol.com<mailto:k5ur@aol.com> [mailto:k5ur@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2016 5:15 PM To: doug(a)k4ac.com<mailto:doug@k4ac.com>; mikelee0531(a)me.com<mailto:mikelee0531@me.com> Cc: ny2rf(a)arrl.org<mailto:ny2rf@arrl.org>; k4ac(a)arrl.org<mailto:k4ac@arrl.org> Subject: Re: Info I know that former Directors and Section Managers keep their .org addresses, is that not also true of Vice Directors? Doug, good question but I don't know the answer. Tom, can you check what our policy, if there is one, or practice has been and let us know, please? Thanks. Rick ... -----Original Message----- From: Doug Rehman <doug(a)k4ac.com<mailto:doug@k4ac.com>> To: k5ur <k5ur(a)aol.com<mailto:k5ur@aol.com>>; 'Michael Lee' <mikelee0531(a)me.com<mailto:mikelee0531@me.com>> Cc: ny2rf <ny2rf(a)arrl.org<mailto:ny2rf@arrl.org>>; k4ac <k4ac(a)arrl.org<mailto:k4ac@arrl.org>> Sent: Thu, Aug 25, 2016 6:26 am Subject: RE: Info Mike’s .org address has been deactivated, so he is probably already off of ODV as well. I’ll post a message from Mike if that’s his desire. I know that former Directors and Section Managers keep their .org addresses, is that not also true of Vice Directors? WA4AW maintained his .org address from being a Vice Director after losing an election. Has something changed? Doug From: k5ur(a)aol.com<mailto:k5ur@aol.com> [mailto:k5ur@aol.com<mailto:k5ur@aol.com?>] Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2016 1:30 AM To: aa6ml(a)arrl.org<mailto:aa6ml@arrl.org> Cc: ny2rf(a)arrl.org<mailto:ny2rf@arrl.org>; k4ac(a)arrl.org<mailto:k4ac@arrl.org> Subject: Info Hi Mike: I regret that you are resigning. Thank you for all of your help on the Board. I've really enjoyed working with you. Mike, do you want to tell the Board that you are resigning or do you want Tom to tell the Board? I feel like we owe it to the Board members to tell them something before any kind of announcement is made. What do you think? 73 Rick - K5UR ... _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv(a)reflector.arrl.org<mailto:arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org> https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv

2 1

[arrl-odv:25608] Vice Director Mike Lee Resignation
by Gallagher, Tom, NY2RF 25 Aug '16

25 Aug '16

ARRL Southeastern Division Vice Director Mike Lee, AA6ML, of Palm Coast, Florida, has resigned from office. He has also withdrawn his nomination for re-election. Lee was appointed in 2014 to fill a vacancy created by a resignation. He previously had served as Northern Florida Section Emergency Coordinator. I regret Mike's decision to resign as Vice Director. Mike made a significant contribution to the League's efforts in Emergency Communications, as well as serving on several important committees over the years. We all wish him well, and we will miss him. Tom Gallagher - NY2RF Chief Executive Officer ARRL Headquarters ARRL - The national association for Amateur Radio(tm) 860 594 0404 cell 704 907 7158 tgallagher(a)arrl.org<mailto:tgallagher@arrl.org>

1 0

[arrl-odv:25607] Ames v. American Radio Relay League, et al.
by Christopher Imlay 23 Aug '16

23 Aug '16

CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION Greetings. I am pleased to provide you with a copy of the Motion to Dismiss the complaint filed by Joe Ames, W3JY filed yesterday by our attorneys, Cozen O'Connor of Philadelphia. The motion asserts a series of reasons why the complaint filed on behalf of Ames fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted. If this motion is granted by the trial judge, the complaint will be dismissed and the case terminated. I think you will agree when you read this that it is exceptionally well-argued. It is my view, and that of our attorneys that Ames' complaint is fatally flawed in numerous respects, and very poorly drafted indeed. So we have a good deal of reason to be optimistic that the complaint will be dismissed. This motion triggers a pleading cycle and there will be oral argument at the Federal Court, however, which will probably not happen for a couple of months. While this document is publicly available, it would be best to not circulate it since there are those who erroneously relate this frivolous litigation to ARRL's NTS policy, which of course we should not encourage since one has nothing whatsoever to do with the other. 73, Chris W3KD -- Christopher D. Imlay Booth, Freret & Imlay, LLC 14356 Cape May Road Silver Spring, Maryland 20904-6011 (301) 384-5525 telephone (301) 384-6384 facsimile W3KD(a)ARRL.ORG

1 0