Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] Here we go again

To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Here we go again
From: "Ed Sawyer" <sawyered@earthlink.net>
Reply-to: sawyered@earthlink.net
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 06:53:45 -0400
List-post: <mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
Roger,  From my experience in Vermont at least.  Before you get all cranked
up on the details, try going for the big picture.  If the rules you are
talking about are generic to all towers both commercial and ham towers,
don't go after the details, push for removing personal use structures from
the proposed rules.  PRB-1 gives most municpal lawyers the shakes.  Its got
fantastic State Supreme Court precedence and allows complete Federal
preemption on the hams behalf if the law is written wrong.  Many groups just
remove hams since its not the purpose of the ordinance and is way more
hassle than its worth.

 

Vermont has a very strong "tower ordinance" but its commercial in intent and
ham towers have been exempted.

 

73

 

Ed  NUR

_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

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