Joe,
Glad to hear you prevailed without needing to fight it yourself. I stand
corrected on that point.
However, it is also city ordinances that seem to become the tough battle in
many cases with no HOA restrictions. Our limit is 43 ft -9 inches including
the antenna. Several years ago in Omaha, a group of hams including one lawyer
tried working with the city planning dept. in a good faith effort to change
this limit even slightly only to be blind-sided by the same people opposing the
change when it finally came up for a vote in the city council. After the
debate, where one councilman stated that technology should soon create
"underground antennas" that work, we were lucky they didn't lower the allowed
height. PRB-1 and a technical presentation didn't matter at all to people like
that. So anyone wanting a higher tower height must go thru the Zoning Board
for special approvals. Ironically, it was the Zoning Board that sent the group
of hams to Planning to change the ordinance so they don't have to deal with it.
73, de ed -K0iL
-----Original Message-----
From: RFI [mailto:rfi-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Joe - W7RKN
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 8:35 PM
To: RFI Contesting
Subject: Re: [RFI] VDSL (very-high-bit-rate digital subscriber line)
Slight correction.....
A newly formed HOA *cannot* impose its new rules on an existing property
owner. The laws expressly prohibit backwards enforcement.
We had a lady here in my neck of the woods trying to start an HOA,
specifically because she felt my antennas devalued her property. She was
not a happy camper to learn that anything she started, if she was successful
in forming an HOA (she failed BTW) excluded my antennas, as I would have
been grandfathered in, per law.
Joe - W7RKN
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ed K0iL" <eddieedwards@centurylink.net>
Subject: Re: [RFI] VDSL (very-high-bit-rate digital subscriber line)
> Rob,
>
> I agree with you 100%! We all need to keep operating or we will
> eventually
> lose our privileges and our bands.
>
> The mindset our society is moving toward is minority group rights trump
> the
> majority individual (property) rights. Don't like what your neighbor is
> doing on his property? Form a Home Owners Association and run him out.
> Over the last 30 years they have perfected this by putting HOA contracts
> place before the first houses are even sold.
>
> Our numbers of active HF operators continues to shrink and the average age
> of licensed hams continues to climb mostly because of limitations on their
> homes blocking activity. Nearly all the people I've recruited to get a
> ham
> license in last 20 years have never operated HF from their home because
> they
> live in restrictive neighborhoods.
>
> With property rights becoming a thing of the past, it's only going to get
> worse if we don't operate on the air.
>
> 73, de ed -K0iL
>
> TV is just entertainment. Amateur Radio is a licensed Radio Service.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: RFI [mailto:rfi-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Rob Atkinson
> Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 4:40 PM
> To: rfi@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [RFI] VDSL (very-high-bit-rate digital subscriber line)
>
> All well and good working with ARRL and neighbors but hams need to grow
> spines and quit tucking their tails between their legs and capitulating to
> neighbors who due to irrational psychology, seem to think watching TV or
> some other appliance use is a birthright, but ham radio is just an
> optional
> play-time activity with some toys.
>
> This comes out for example with antennas, and the deplorable use of hidden
> "stealth" antennas to appease neighbors, as if the ham is in the
> Resistance
> in WW2 or is engaged in some illegal activity, or has a
> spy station. It is exceedingly disappointing that the use of these
> antennas is promoted in ham magazines such as CQ and QST, complete with
> glowing reports of satisfied owners, as if these are excellent and
> satisfactory antennas in the fullest sense. If I were counsel
> representing
> plaintiffs against a ham, all I would need to do is round up dozens of
> these
> articles and present them to a jury and I'd easily win. I am absolutely
> nonplussed every time QST or CQ hands municipalities yet another article
> to
> use against us. Every one of those articles should carry a prominent
> disclaimer to the effect that these antennas are most unsatisfactory and
> are
> only presented to be used as a temporary measure in the belief that any
> antenna is better than none at all.
>
> But, as for RFI, a ham curtailing his mode/power/hours in any way makes as
> much sense as the neighbor curtailing his TV watching.
>
> 73
>
> Rob
> K5UJ
> _______________________________________________
> RFI mailing list
> RFI@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
>
> _______________________________________________
> RFI mailing list
> RFI@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This e-mail contains Omaha Public Power District's confidential and proprietary
information and is for use only by the intended recipient. Unless explicitly
stated otherwise, this e-mail is not a contract offer, amendment, or
acceptance. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that
disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the
contents of this information is strictly prohibited.
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
|