Fred: After rereading my recent reply it was clear that I should more forcefully stated my concern was the absolute silence on odv given the criticism in January of ARPA/FCC Petition and the assertion by several board members they had a better approach. While I have questions about a state as opposed to federal approach, the fact you are actually doing something to address this serious concern is to be commended. “It is better to light a candle than curse the darkness.” 73, Jay, K0QB Sent from my iPad
On Apr 18, 2019, at 8:55 PM, Fred Hopengarten <k1vr@arrl.org> wrote:
Answers below, interspersed.
From: John Bellows [mailto:jbellows@skypoint.com] Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2019 4:17 PM To: hopengarten@post.harvard.edu Cc: arrl-odv Subject: Re: [arrl-odv:28124] Re: Visalia DX Convention Happenings Related to ARRL Activities
Fred:
Thank you for the update. it is good to see that some action is being taken even if limited to one or two states rather than the federal level.
You have undertaken an interesting approach. In the past we have used federal law, namely PRB1 as codified, as the basis for seeking state legislation. It will be interesting to see if Congress (House and Senate) is willing to look to state legislation or state model legislation, to the same extent that the states have been persuaded by the limited preemption of federal legislation.
Do you expect that Congress will want to wait to see the effects of any state legislation before considering new language regarding HOA’s.
K1VR: I expect that if the hams aren’t pushing a bill, Congress will do nothing. I do not believe that the CAI will push a bill without hams being active.
Do you have any reason to believe that HOA’s interests will be any more willing to accept more specific and restrictive language regarding antennas in covenant controlled communities than they were with regard to the Parity Act?
K1VR: I have but one reason. If a state or two passes language really anathema to CAI and HOAs, then CAI might realize they are better off with a less restrictive federal bill than with a series of more restrictive state bills. Think of it this way – the HOA argument that their world will come to an end if a bill that favors hams passes disintegrates if such bills have passed at the state level and their world did not come to an end.
Has anyone spoken with our supporters in the House or Senate as to the advisability of this approach?
K1VR: No. And I do not wish to do so. I’d prefer to let the issue lie untouched at the federal level until we have more results at the state level. Revealing our strategy to anyone on the hill is not my preferred course. There are no secrets up there.
K1VR: One more thing. A simultaneous effort to get more HOAs to accept a design rule permitting antennas that are either flag poles, comparable to already permitted systems (OTARD antennas –which can be VHF/UHF or microwave, and WISP antennas) may undercut the view of some HOAs that they can never accept any ham antenna at all. I’ll publish the Sun City Grand design rule as soon as it is formally adopted, around May 15.
But more than that, as no one else has a Plan B that I’ve heard about, this leaves my Plan B – the only Plan B visible – as the best Plan B. If there is only one horse, I intend to ride that horse, hoping to benefit our colleagues living in CC&R-restricted circumstances. Should someone come up with an alternative idea, we should examine it closely and adopt it, or what we can of it, insofar as we can. I welcome ideas.
Jay – if you have an idea that is other than a return to ARPA, please speak up. – Fred K1VR
73, Jay, K0QB
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 18, 2019, at 2:52 PM, Fred Hopengarten <k1vr@arrl.org> wrote:
In re HOA life – there is some news.
Bills have been introduced in NH and Maine by state reps who are hams. The drafts need further work, but they do not include the dangers I saw in ARPA.
In Maine, H 1099 (see attached). In NH, HB 417 (see attached). In TX, the legislative contact of N5AUS missed the filing deadline, but he has gone through the effort of drafting a Texas-style statute (attached).
In AZ, the HUGE Sun City Grand (population 14,037) has just (will be official mid-month in May) adopted a design guideline permitting flagpoles and wires (up to two antennas total). When it is formally adopted, I will release a copy. You’ll have to wait three weeks.
My own thinking is that we need to work on a few states to see what can, or cannot, be done, then consolidate lessons learned into a Model State Law (think National Commission on Uniform State Laws – which is how we got the Uniform Commercial Code, and many other uniform state laws).
On the HOA side, I’d like to collect more design guidelines and eventually issue one or more model HOA antenna design guidelines for adoption or modificiation as appropriate.
With a little more experience, I would then be ready to go back to the Congress.
Anyone who would like to help the drafting of model state laws or HOA design guidelines would be most welcome to contribute.
Fred Hopengarten, Esq. K1VR Six Willarch Road Lincoln, MA 01773 781.259.0088, k1vr@arrl.org
New England Director
Serving ME, NH, VT, MA, RI and CT
From: arrl-odv [mailto:arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org] On Behalf Of John Bellows Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2019 3:05 PM To: Richard J. Norton Cc: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:28124] Re: Visalia DX Convention Happenings Related to ARRL Activities
Dick:
Was there any inquiry or discussion as to the extent, capability or effectiveness of the “ on the air, somehow...” antennas or a breakdown of those antennas between HOA permitted antennas and stealth antennas erected in violation of HOA rules? I ask because the reported response significantly differs from my experience in dealing with amateurs in HOA restricted communities and the responses obtained several years ago from amateurs prior to proceeding with the Parity Act effort.
Sometimes, how the question is framed foretells the answer.
By the way, can anyone on ODV provide an update as to any new proposal to assist amateurs in HOA’s or CC&R communities? I have not seen anything on ODV or heard any scuttlebutt on this topic. Is there a group working on this offline?
I have the same question regarding the group tasked with looking into restructuring. I was appointed to that group/committee, but I haven’t heard anything since it was created at the January BOD meeting. The question seems timely since the next board meeting is in 90 days.
Since both of these efforts relate to motions adopted in January, I hope they will be the result of collaborative efforts and not a repetition of bringing in boxes of motions on the morning of the Board meeting that only some of the board members have seen prior to there distribution.
73, Jay, K0QB
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 18, 2019, at 6:01 AM, Richard J. Norton <richardjnorton@gmail.com> wrote:
A noticeable number of ARRL ODV members were present at last weekend's Visalia DX Convention. Included were Officers K5UR and W6RGG, Directors, K0BBC, K6JAT, N6AA, and W7VO, and Vice Directors K6WX and AA7A. The ARRL Forum, with 150 - 200 attendees, was moderated by K6JAT, with directors, officers, and W3IZ present on the stage.
Some items of possible interest to ODV include:
HOA Issues
1) At the ARRL Forum, the audience was asked, "How many live in HOA controlled communities?" About 15 raised their hands.
Then when asked, "How many of you in HOA areas are on the air somehow, with antenna agreements from HOA boards or with hidden or indoor antennas?" All but two or so raised their hands.
This mirrors my experience at most Forums, where all or mostly all HOA-located hams are on the air - somehow.
2) It was explained to the Forum audience that Amateurs in the Sun City Grand community in Surprise, Arizona, a community of 10,000 residences, just received permission from their HOA Board to erect verticals, flagpole-antennas, and wire antennas. In the words of their newsletter editor, "The Parity Act was not even used as selling point with the HOA Board, our campaigning focused on the value that Amateur Radio operators can provide to a community in the time of need."
I would like to see the League have an available kit of literature for hams to present to HOA boards for establishment of antenna permissions.
3) Little if any discussion took place regarding the N9NB or K0IDT proclamations on symbol-rate and proposed rule-makings.
4) In the possibly Rappaport-inspired discussion about digital signals taking over the ham bands, the news that Winlink has made the content of all their ham-radio (not DHS etc) messages passing through the Winlink system publicly available on the Winlink web-site was announced. Possibly this might slightly reduce the "effectively encrypted" rhetoric.
5) The audience was polled to see how many were impacted by power-line noise interference. I estimate 66 - 75% of the audience raised their hands!
This was a convention primarily attended by DXers and contesters, but the large percentage should be noted.
6) The return of QSL Bureaus to member benefits was widely applauded as might be expected from DXers and contesters.
It was announced by staff that that the effective date of the Outgoing Bureau cost change would be May 15, rather than immediately as requested at the A&F meeting. No explanation of the delay was proffered by Mr. Fusaro.
Although only the Outgoing Bureau rates were covered in the recent announcement to ODV, I hope staff also recognizes the intent of the Board to return the incoming bureau to its former QSL-encouraging status where a) incoming cards to Newington from foreign stations are simply sorted and passed to the regional bureaus and b) volunteer sorters are able to frank cards for those who help them sort, stations they act as managers for, and multi-op efforts they participate in.
I hope staff appreciates that QSL cards are to be treated as something that encourages activity, and that the League should not in any way attempt to resist helping QSL efforts.
7) There was significant interchange of ideas and happenings among the ARRL Foundation directors. An issue that impacts the full ARRL board is the question - is the ARRL and the ARRL Foundation an "us" and "them" situation? ... or is the Foundation essentially an arrangement to accomplish goals desired by the League? Keep in mind that the League's Board elects the Foundation Board. Also, note that recent League Board approval was given to allow donations to the Foundation to be recognized as components of the Maxim Society requirements.
We should clarify the relationship and goals.
Photos Available
N6TV's photos of Visalia are at
For the best viewing experience, click on the first photo (or any photo), then press the right arrow key on your keyboard to step through the photos quickly. Click the circled "i" for caption information (callsigns).
Summary - In My Opinion:
HOA's are not a big problem. Power-line noise is a big problem. Digital message handling is not a significant interference problem. There is little or no support of N9NB's proclamations of impending doom from what should be a group of supporters, his fellow contesters. QSL cards are good for ham radio. The Foundation should be treated as an arm of the League
Have others among you received input on these topics at the events you attend?”
73,
Dick Norton, N6AA
_______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
Virus-free. www.avast.com <2019 ME H 1099.doc> <NH Draft by K1VR v4 CLEAN.doc> <TX N5AUS HOA 2019 Amateur Radio Communications Bill v8.docx> _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
