[Top] [All Lists]

[TowerTalk] Is the FCC sharp? Is ARRL counsel swift?

To: <>
Subject: [TowerTalk] Is the FCC sharp? Is ARRL counsel swift?
From: (Pete Smith)
Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 11:57:09 -0500
At 09:20 AM 1/1/02 -0700, Stu Greene wrote:
>> >.  The right and in my opinion legally correct way to decide ARRL's
>> >petition would have been to say this. " CC&Rs are contracts between owners
>> >of property in a subdivision, and as such have created  property rights
>> >with which we cannot interfere."
And I wrote:

>>Stu, Congress was willing to direct the FCC to pre-empt all forms of local
>>prohibition against satellite TV antennas, including CC&Rs.  FCC wrote regs
>>doing just that and then enforced them in some pretty sweeping cases.  Why
>>do you dismiss the possibility of the same thing happening for ham towers?

Stu replied:
>Pete -- because satellite television is a business and employs people who 
>pay taxes as do their employers. That's clout
>   Weigh ham clout against the clout of property associations, and I think 
>we lose.

And I respond:

Oh, OK -- I thought you said earlier that the FCC should just take a
general stand against interfering in property rights.  I agree that we need
to apply some serious muscle, and trust that the ARRL will be doing so.  I,
for one, will back them strongly, even though I live in a county where
amateur towers are excluded from any regulation as "essential public

73, Pete N4ZR

The revised World Contest 
Station Database
is online at

This list is sponsored by the new Store.  When you buy products
like ICE filters, Array Solutions StackMatch, or M-Squared Antennas from
the eHam Store for the same price you pay direct, a portion of the sale
price goes to support this list.  Check it out at

FAQ on WWW:     
Administrative requests:

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>