The real key with Davis seems to be quid pro quo. Just prior to the last
election I was starting to get the feeling that Davis would sell you his
own mother if the contribution was big enough. If someone on the opposing
side of this legislation greased the governor with a big campaign
contribution then I suspect Davis will continue to take a pro "local
stance (kind of a surprising stance for a liberal democrat).
Maybe if we all write the governor and agree not to sign the "Recall Davis"
petition if he signs the bill, we might have a chance :) Another possible
would be to stress the homeland security aspect. The governor has been
giving Washington heat for not reimbursing the state for homeland security
costs. Signing this bill could be seen as demostrating Davis' commitment
to homeland security, an area where he has a desire to appear strong
(it helps take attention away from the enormity of the budget crisis).
73 de Mike, W4EF.......................................
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Farkaly" <email@example.com>
To: "'Hsu, Aaron'" <firstname.lastname@example.org>; <email@example.com>;
Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003 6:08 PM
Subject: [ham-law] Re: [TowerTalk] FW: HEARING SET ON CALIFORNIA AMATEUR
RADIO ANTENNA BILL
> The problem isn't the CA legislature. A similar bill passed 2 years ago
> only to be vetoed by the governor . . . the same guy that refused to
> discuss the state budget during last November's campaign and - surprise!
> - found a deficit of $35 Billion right after the election. He'll veto it
> again. Last time he said the veto was because local municipalities
> should have control over ham antennas. Same local officials who told me:
> "PRB-1 doesn't apply in Poway."
> 73, and apologies in advance for the run on.
> Bob, K9RHY
> -----Original Message-----
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org
> [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of Hsu, Aaron
> Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003 2:58 PM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com
> Subject: [TowerTalk] FW: HEARING SET ON CALIFORNIA AMATEUR RADIO ANTENNA
> This was posted today on the SCCC reflector...
> btw, the link at the bottom ends in "...introduced.html". It might get
> chopped by the e-mail gremlins, so make sure to paste it all together in
> your browser.
> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003 2:08 PM
> To: SCCC Reflector
> Subject: [SCCC] HEARING SET ON CALIFORNIA AMATEUR RADIO ANTENNA BILL
> HEARING SET ON CALIFORNIA AMATEUR RADIO ANTENNA BILL
> A legislative committee hearing has been set for March 26 on
> California's latest attempt to pass an Amateur Radio antenna bill,
> Assembly Bill 1228. The measure, introduced February 21 by Assemblyman
> Bob Dutton (R-63rd), has been referred to the Committee on Local
> ARRL Pacific Division Director Bob Vallio, W6RGG, and ARRL staffer and
> antenna expert Dean Straw, N6BV, are among those scheduled to testify on
> behalf of AB 1228 later this month before the committee.
> In 2000, the California Legislature passed a bill incorporating the
> essence of the limited federal preemption known as PRB-1, but Gov Gray
> Davis vetoed the measure. Davis said at the time that he turned down the
> bill, then known as SB-1714, because funds for required studies were not
> included in his budget and because he considered amateur antennas "a
> local rather than a state issue."
> ARRL Southwestern Division Director Art Goddard, W6XD, says AB 1228
> addresses Gov Davis' objection to the 2000 bill by eliminating the need
> for a study at taxpayer expense. Goddard says the committee also is
> addressing concerns already raised by The League of California Cities.
> Goddard said he and the late Pacific Division Director Jim Maxwell,
> W6CF, were involved in reviving the Amateur Radio antenna bill during
> the current legislative session. But he cited Mike Mitchell, W6RW, as
> "the sparkplug" of the 2003 PRB-1 bill committee. The committee is
> composed of Northern and Southern California hams, since California
> spans two ARRL divisions.
> The new bill would incorporate the language of PRB-1 into California's
> statutes. AB 1228 would require any ordinance regulating Amateur Radio
> antenna structures to not preclude Amateur Radio Service communications,
> to "reasonably accommodate" amateur communications, to allow amateur
> station antenna structures "at heights and dimensions sufficient to
> accommodate Amateur Radio Service communications," and to constitute
> "the minimum practicable regulation to accomplish the legitimate purpose
> of the city or county."
> So far, 16 states have incorporated the essence of PRB-1 into their
> laws. An Amateur Radio antenna bill awaits the governor's signature in
> Utah, and similar measures are pending in several other states.
> A copy of the proposed legislation is available on the California
> Legislature Web site
> See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless
> Weather Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with
> any questions and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
> TowerTalk mailing list
> The Ham-Law Mailing List. This list is for discussion and does not
> purport to give legal advice.
> Submissions: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subscribe and unsubscribe: email@example.com
> Use "(un)subscribe" on a new line in the text.