Hi all, I have grave concerns over the current wording of H.R. 555, also known as the Amateur Radio Parity Act.
(The bill is currently identical to the H.R. 1301, which was defeated in the Senate last year. The text of H.R. 555 is not yet available online, but H.R. 1301 is: https://www.congress.gov/bill /114th-congress/house-bill/1301/text) Specifically, I am concerned about Section 3(b)(1) which states that the FCC shall: "require any licensee in an amateur radio service to notify and obtain prior approval from a community association concerning installation of an outdoor antenna;" If this bill passes as written, I will be forced to contact my HOA and inform them of any outdoor antennas I have. I also must receive approval for them. I live in a very strict HOA area with the typical prohibition of outdoor antennas. The wording of the bill necessarily will force me -- and anyone else in the same situation -- into an very unbalanced and adversarial situation with an HOA. I do not have the time let alone the financial resources to engage with my HOA and educate them about the law. While, yes, the law would require HOAs to accommodate outside antennas, it will probably take years for the HOA to determine the aesthetic guidelines for them. During this period, I will be off the air on HF. As home-base HF operation is my primary means of enjoyment in ham radio, I might as well not have a license. However, in my opinion, this is not the most egregious part. If signed into law, H.R. 555 becomes, well, *a law*. If I were to have outdoor antennas at the time the bill is passed, I am required *by law* to not only inform my HOA of my antennas, but also gain approval for them and potentially for any changes to them. If I elect to not engage with my HOA, *I will be guilty of a federal crime. * The law takes an amateur radio operator with outdoor antennas in an HOA environment from a situation in which they are in a private contract dispute to a situation in which they are engaging in a criminal act and subject to fines and legal action from the FCC. This is absurd. Again, the current bill is very different than the original bill that was introduced in the first part of the last legislative session. I fear that the ARRL has not fully considered the implications of the additional wording the HOA lobby had them place in the bill. It is with great difficulty that I voice my criticisms of the League's efforts publicly. A great many volunteers have spent countless hours and a significant amount of money on the Parity Act efforts. I appreciate, applaud, and cherish the efforts the League has made on behalf of HOA hams such as myself. However, the particular wording of the current bill stands to do more harm than good from my perspective. I have contacted ARRL President Roderick and West Gulf Division Director Woolweaver and Vice Director Stratton and voiced my concerns. As of this writing, only Director Woolweaver has had the opportunity to respond and I am buoyed that he shares some of my concerns. Thank you for reading. 73, -- /*/-=[Michael / KT5MR]-=/*/
_______________________________________________ BVARC mailing list [email protected] http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org
