Dear @ARRL, HR1301 is Hogwash
For a few years now, the ARRL has been promoting a House Bill from Illinois Representative Adam Kinzinger called the Amateur Radio Parity Act.
The goal of the legislation is to protect amateur radio operators from private land use restrictions, such as those of a Homeowners’ Association, much in the way FCC PRB-1 protects amateurs from overzealous zoning ordinances. The theory behind the rule is that hams can’t erect modest antennas in their retirement communities because of restrictions placed upon them by their community association.
Personally, I think the Amateur Radio Parity Act is much ado about nothing. Hams have successfully used indoor antennas since the earliest days of radio. If you buy a home with a homeowners association, you should read the CC&R beforehand and know what you are voluntarily committing yourself to do.
Listening to the supporters of the Act, though, you’d believe this new rule would trump any CC&R, bring new blood to the hobby, and correct a problem ARRL President Kay Craigie says exists in every city, suburb, and gated community in America.
But now comes the compromise.
The ARRL and the Community Association Institute reached consensus on the Act.
Here’s the text of the compromise bill.
If you believe the Amateur Radio Party Act is the PRB-1 of Homeowners Associations, read Section 3b, Paragraph 1.
In amending its rules as required by subsection (a), the Commission shall require any licensee in an amateur radio service to notify and obtain prior approval from a community association, if any, concerning installation of an outdoor antenna.
Your Homeowners Association can keep you from running a simple wire antenna.
You know the joke about how the name of legislation is opposite of what it actually does?
Well, the Amateur Radio Parity Act provides no parity to amateur radio operators.
I wonder if the ARRL plants to refund all the money they raised to lobby for this bill?
I am an avid ham but have really wondered about this so-called parity act. If you willingly entered into an HOA and agreed to its terms what right does the Gov have to change that? If we agree at this juncture because it suits ham radio what will be the next?
At my last home, there were very strict rules against pretty much any kind of outdoor antenna. I didn’t think anything of it, because I wasn’t a ham and didn’t have any plans for becoming one. However, when I ended up getting licensed, I suddenly realized that I was extremely limited in what I could do.
Like many things in life, it’s really a matter of where we draw the line. I think most people would agree that there are at least *some* things that HOA’s shouldn’t be able to prohibit. Some of those things may include American flags, small satellite dishes, TV antennas, decorative seasonal flags, etc. Should they also be required to allow “reasonable” (whatever that means) ham radio antennas? What about a few chickens (there’s a big movement to get the same kind of rights for suburban chickens as for ham radio antennas), or leaving a car in your driveway?
The point is that we already have things that once fell into the “what’s next?” category. Now it’s just a question of if ham radio antennas should be included in the protected class.
The way I understood it (and I’m not a lawyer) is that yes, you ask for permission but they have to make “reasonable” accommodations. This is progress as many HOAs would not even consider the possibility of an outdoor antenna. Now, how the “reasonable accommodation” is interpreted is a different thing. Whether you’ll be able to put up a 200′ tower or a wire from a tree is not as clear.
The nature of oppressive Government (an HOA is Governing you after all) is to CONTROL. So just asking the Government for something is tantamount to being denied – unless they can extract something from you. It is the repeated giving away of my rights without my consent why I do not support the ARRL.