[Mldxcc] [NCCC] [NCDXC Chat] The case against the revised Amateur Radio Parity Act

[Kelly Johnson]

I gave up fighting the city of San Jose.  The only way I was going to get a
permitted tower was if I took them to court.  I've got better things to do
with my money, so I moved to an accommodating city that gave me a tower
permit the day I walked into the planner's office.  My issue with PRB-1 is
that it leaves too much to the imagination.  I much prefer some of the
state regulations that make it clear that 70' is the minimum they must
allow.  This regulation appears to leave much more to the imagination than
PRB-1.  I don't think it will be very effective at all.  I don't know why
ARRL is championing it like a cheerleader.


On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Bruce M. Croskey <bruce at croskey.org> wrote:

> I tried the PRB-1 defense here in Pittsburg and can still hear the City
> Council laughing.... it took me a year and filing a Federal law suit under
> Title 18 for violating my civil rights to get my tower.... what really
> broke it lose was suing the members of the City Council as individuals not
> as a City so they could not hide behind the City attorney
>
> Bruce M. Croskey
> AH0U
>
> On Aug 7, 2017, at 11:56 PM, Alan Maenchen via Chat <chat at ncdxc.org>
> wrote:
>
> If I remember right, PRB-1 is also flaky in that it doesn't define what
> must be allowed and what can be not-allowed. Same thing here I think.  It's
> been a while but I fought the City of San Jose with PRB-1 and won. This was
> shortly after N6TV ran the gauntlet with San Jose and also won. Thanks Bob!
>
> Here in Maui, I have an HOA architectural rule that limits any antenna to
> no higher than 4 feet.
> I asked for, and was granted, a variance for a 70 foot tower.  It can be
> done, but you have to push and follow procedures..
>
> 73, Alan  AD6E
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 4:20 PM, Richard (Rick) Karlquist <
> richard at karlquist.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 8/7/2017 6:58 PM, Bob Wilson, N6TV wrote:
>>
>> HOAs more power than they ever had before, and no one wants that.  HOA
>>> residents will now have to get prior HOA permission to string up a wire or
>>> put a mobile whip on a tripod.
>>>
>>>
>> In the real world, the FCC is unlikely to put much effort into enforcing
>> this rule, if it were to be enacted.  Also, the wire or whip might be
>> considered in the "de minimus" legal category.
>>
>> Rick N6RK
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCCC mailing list
>> THIS EMAIL LIST IS A NO-FLAME ZONE! See guidelines at:
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/nccc
>> Post to: nccc at contesting.com (never publish this address)
>> Manage your subscription at: http://lists.contesting.com/ma
>> ilman/options/nccc
>> Archives at: http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/private/nccc/
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chat mailing list
> Chat at ncdxc.org
> http://mail.ncdxc.org/mailman/listinfo/chat_ncdxc.org
> Message delivered to ah0u at arrl.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCCC mailing list
> THIS EMAIL LIST IS A NO-FLAME ZONE! See guidelines at:
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/nccc
> Post to: nccc at contesting.com (never publish this address)
> Manage your subscription at: http://lists.contesting.com/
> mailman/options/nccc
> Archives at: http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/private/nccc/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.contesting.com/pipermail/mldxcc/attachments/20170808/c1adff8d/attachment.html>