Hello – There have been major developments with respect to the Amateur Radio Parity Act in a very short period of time. I need to bring everyone up to date on the status of H.R.1301 / S.1685. We have continued our negotiations with CAI on and off over the past two and a half months because, in effect, we had no other choice. Not only did Senator Nelson of Florida have an absolute hold on the Bill, his opposition, unless withdrawn, would preclude consideration of our Bill on “unanimous consent” (the only way to get a Bill through the Senate that is not of great importance; we could not ever get Senate “floor time” for a small bill such as ours). And as we found out fairly recently from our friends in the House, the House Energy and Commerce Committee would not “mark up” our Bill (a prerequisite for the express procedure called “suspension” necessary to pass our Bill in the House) unless we had an agreement with CAI. On May 11, 2016 I announced to the Board that ARRL had reached an agreement in principle with CAI on language for a substitute amendment to the Bill. This came after we were quite sure that the negotiations with CAI had reached a permanent impasse. Indeed, after two months we had been told by CAI that our latest draft substitute amendment was in bad faith and they effectively cut off the talks. Because Dave Redl, Greg Walden’s Subcommittee Majority Counsel had spent a lot of time trying to facilitate a settlement with CAI, and because we knew that the massive effort that we made to pass this Bill this term would be very difficult to duplicate next term, we went to Dave and told him of our great surprise that CAI had cut off the discussions. Dave’s assumption, and the assumption of our friend Josh Baggett of Representative Kinzinger’s office was that CAI never really wanted a deal; that they had to look like they wanted to negotiate in good faith but that in fact, all they wanted to do was to kill time, in reliance on the opposition of Senator Nelson to the Bill. Dave, after hearing this from us, decided unilaterally to give it one last try. Dave (and Josh Baggett and Scott Wilson from Anna Eshoo’s office) met with CAI, and as Dave tells it, he presented ARRL’s latest substitute amendment draft to CAI and told them that we had assumed that that version represented agreement on both sides. He asked them what was wrong with ARRL’s latest substitute amendment. They gave him two, relatively minor edits and told him that was all they wanted. Because they were edits that were not at all critical to the utility of the preemption that would be created for hams that live or will live in deed-restricted communities, and because it represented a “global” settlement, upon the approval of the Executive Committee and members of the Legislative Advocacy Committee, we agreed to it. A copy of the final language is attached. A summary of the provisions of this Substitute Amendment are the following: 1. FCC will enact rules that prohibit the application to Amateur Radio stations of CC&Rs which preclude Amateur Radio communications on their face or as applied. 2. Also prohibited are those deed restrictions which do not permit an Amateur Radio operator living in a deed-restricted community to install and maintain an effective outdoor antenna on property under the exclusive use or control of the licensee. 3. Also prohibited are CC&Rs which do not constitute the minimum practicable restriction on Amateur communications to accomplish the lawful purposes of an HOA seeking to enforce the restriction. 4. Amateurs who wish to install an antenna in a deed restricted community where there is an HOA must notify and obtain prior approval of the HOA. 5. HOAs can preclude Amateur antennas in common areas. 6. HOAs can enact reasonable written rules governing height, location, size and aesthetic impact of, and installation requirements for, outdoor antennas and support structures for amateur communications. However, those rules are at all times subject to the “no preclusion of Amateur communications” requirement and the absolute entitlement of each Amateur living in a deed-restricted community to an effective outdoor antenna. Those are the essential elements of the substitute amendment as finally negotiated with CAI. However, there are, as you will see, some very helpful factual findings which carve in stone the strong Federal interest in Amateur Radio communications in residences of licensees. The factual findings are highly beneficial in many contexts, including spectrum protection advocacy in the future. Chris Imlay and I believe that this bill is far, far better than was the original language of the Bills, because it is far more objective and states unequivocally that every single radio Amateur living in a deed restricted community can install and maintain an effective outdoor antenna. This includes Amateurs living in condominiums and townhouses. That would be a huge accomplishment for thousands upon thousands of radio Amateurs if this language could be enacted. CAI insisted on eliminating the concept of reasonable accommodation because they were afraid of importing the zoning case law that interpreted it to the private land use regulation concept. It is important to us to leave that zoning case law alone and to not open up the concept of “reasonable accommodation” in the zoning context to reinterpretation in the CC&R context. This revised language does this too. In our view there is nothing not to like about the substitute amendment. The agreement with CAI was dependent upon the receipt of a letter from CAI which announced their support of the amended H.R. 1301 legislation. The letter was also necessary so that we could use it to lobby Senator Nelson to remove his objection to the Senate Bill and to inform him that CAI, the only entity representing HOAs on Capitol Hill, now supports the legislation. We received that letter on May 25th a few days after the Legislative Counsel released the proposed text of the Bill to Dave Redl. You received the letter immediately after it was received by ARRL. Another copy is attached. Please note the favorable language in that letter. On behalf of 68 million residents of deed restricted communities, they say in the first paragraph of the letter that they “express support for H.R. 1301, the Amateur Radio Parity Act, as it is proposed to be amended. At the end of the letter they refer to the substitute amendment as an “equitable and balanced compromise.” This is better than we hoped for. Our letter of acceptance is also attached. Our understanding is that the substitute bill will be taken up by the House Energy and Commerce Committee at the next mark-up session, with a summary vote on suspension soon thereafter. The House goes back into session on June 7th. We hope to see some movement shortly thereafter. We have every expectation that the Bill will pass the full Committee markup in June and that it will be passed by the House on an oral suspension vote. We have the full support of Anna Eshoo’s office for this substitute amendment, and that is likely the reason why CAI felt it necessary to agree to the substitute. In fact, Eshoo’s office participated with Redl and Baggett in the final negotiations with CAI. CAI needs Eshoo’s help with a bill she is sponsoring for them that would provide tax exempt status to HOAs. That will not pass this year in Congress but they want Eshoo to reintroduce it next year. On Tuesday, March 31st, Chris Imlay, Frank McCarthy (of TKG), and I visited the offices of Senators Thune, Wicker, and Blumenthal to discuss strategy for getting the bill passed in the Senate. Their staff all felt that it would be better to have the House pass the bill first, then send it to the Senate with Senators Wicker and Blumenthal deciding when to “Hotline” the bill (by having a summary vote on the Senate Floor that requires unanimous consent). Before that happens, we need to get to Senator Nelson to withdraw his objection. That is being worked on by Mr. Blumenthal’s office as well as through The Keelen Group. We also hope to elicit help from Rep. Eshoo as well in this endeavor. Changing the mind of Nelson is potentially a large problem, however. On Thursday, June 2nd, Chris and Frank had a meeting with Senator Nelson’s staff. They were brought up to date on the agreement between CAI and ARRL. Mr. Nelson’s staff was non-committal, and they were not optimistic that just because CAI and ARRL reached an agreement that Nelson would support the revised bill. They made some noise that indicated that they were looking for provisions in the substitute amendment that they could object to. It was not a positive meeting. As the bill continues to move on its course in the House, we will be intensifying our efforts in the Senate with the obvious goal of obtaining passage in that body as well. As CAI has already issued a statement in which they link to the as yet to be introduced amended bill, feel free to circulate it toy your members. However, the facts surrounding the negotiations as enumerated above are to be treated as “Confidential to the Board.” It would be appreciated if all were to honor that proviso. We will continue to keep you informed, and look forward to your comments. 73, Mike Lisenco N2YBB Chris Imlay W3KD