[HIham] Please support HB2773 & HB2774; FAQ
Kevin C. Bogan
[email protected]
Fri, 30 Apr 2004 22:34:28 -1000
Folks,
We have worked long and hard on these bills. Please ask your senator and =
representative to support these bills. =20
Please read the FAQ below. It will answer many of your questions. You =
may need to read it more than once. =20
On behalf of the team,
Kevin, AH6QO
FAQ on HB2773 and HB2774
=20
What's the current status?
The Conference committee has recommended that both HB2773 and HB2774 be =
passed with amendments as of 4/29/04. However, the texts of the bills =
are quite different from the original bills submitted.
=20
So, what's the text of the bills?
Bill 2773
Here's the main text of bill 2773 that was under discussion:
c) Notwithstanding any other provision to the contrary in this chapter, =
in the declarations of any project, or in the bylaws of any association:
(1) The board of directors of an association shall have the authority to =
permit owners to install antennas for amateur radios in their apartments =
or their limited common element without the consent of the owner or =
owners of the apartment or apartments for the use of which the limited =
common element is reserved;
(2) The installation of antennas for amateur radios approved by the =
board pursuant to subsection (c)(1) shall not be deemed to alter, =
impair, or diminish the common interest, elements, and easements =
appurtenant to each apartment or to be a structural alteration or =
addition to any building different in any material respect from the =
plans of the project filed in accordance with section 514A-12; provided =
that no such installation shall directly affect any nonconsenting =
apartment owner; and
(3) If a board of directors in its sole discretion denies an owner =
permission to install an antenna for amateur radio in the owner's =
apartment or limited common element, the board shall provide the reasons =
for the denial in writing.
=20
=20
For the complete bill language, see:
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/sessioncurrent/bills/hb2773_cd1_.htm
=20
For the Conference committee report, see:
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/sessioncurrent/commreports/hb2773_cd1_ccr87=
-04_.htm
=20
Bill 2774
Here's the main text of the bill that was under discussion:
=20
"=A7421J- Amateur radio antennas. (a) Notwithstanding any other =
provisions to the contrary in this chapter or in the association =
documents:
(1) The board of directors of an association shall have the authority to =
permit owners to install antennas for amateur radios in their units =
located in agricultural districts as defined in section 205-2; provided =
that no antenna shall be installed upon any common area without =
compliance with all the provisions of the association documents; and
(2) If a board of directors in its sole discretion denies an owner =
permission to install an antenna for amateur radio, the board shall =
provide the reason for the denial in writing.
(b) The board of directors may delegate its authority to a design review =
committee or such other committee provided for in the association =
documents.
(c) Nothing in this section shall prohibit the association from =
permitting other antennas otherwise permitted by the association =
documents."
=20
For the complete bill, see:
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/sessioncurrent/bills/hb2774_cd1_.htm
=20
For the Conference committee report, see:
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/sessioncurrent/commreports/hb2774_cd1_ccr88=
-04_.htm
=20
=20
So, what do these bills mean to the Condo owner?
If you live in a condo which prohibits antennas, Bill 2773 makes it =
possible
for you to work out something for an antenna with the board, without =
having
to change the CC&Rs (which usually requires a high percentage vote of =
the
whole body of owners).=20
=20
Why is section (c) (2) in there?=20
=20
(c) (2) reads, in part: "The installation of antennas for amateur radio =
. shall not be deemed to alter, impair, or diminish the common interest, =
elements, and easements appurtenant to each apartment or to be a =
structural alteration or addition to any building different in any =
material respect.."=20
=20
According to condo law, a change in the "common elements," such as =
adding a wall around the project or a gate to the entrance way or =
building a new fire escape, requires a vote (and approval) by the =
owners.=20
=20
The (c) (2) provision says adding an antenna does not change the common =
element, thus abrogating the necessity of going through the laborious =
process of getting a vote, which would probably be charged to the =
amateur radio antenna applicant.=20
=20
What do these bills mean to those living in subdivisions?
Bill 2774 applies only to the few who live in agricultural zoned lots =
under CC&Rs.
We declined the restrictive terms proposed for the rest of us.
=20
If you are among the fortunate few who can pass through the criteria for
2774, i.e., are in ag zoning where antennas are prohibited, a board
can grant permission for an antenna without having to change the CC&Rs.
=20
This was the only concession we could get without allowing a 10 foot =
height limitation put in. And, we would not accept that. The =
alternative was no Bill 2774 at all.
=20
With both bills you must receive a written explanation of any denial. =
This imposes some accountability. They will certainly have to take some =
care with their decisions. It will hopefully be a little back-up nudge =
towards reasonable accommodation.
=20
So the bills do not take away Board powers, but give the Boards some
pro-antenna powers otherwise denied to them by CC&Rs.
=20
So, how will it be any different from what we have now?
The Board of Directors will have the power to approve installations even =
if the association rules, By-laws, etc. say "no antennas."
They must give reasons for denial in writing. So, they are likely to be =
a little more careful in their deliberations.
=20
What was the reason that the original bills weren't passed (with just =
the technical changes needed)?
OR: How come we got THESE bills? They are so different from what we =
asked.
=20
Testimony at the Public Hearings from several condo associations were =
against the bills. Representatives of the condo associations =20
=B7 said that the bills generally were too broad;
=B7 were opposed to the government overriding private, recorded =
covenants (CC&Rs); and
=B7 required that the condo and subdivision associations should =
approve any antenna installation;
=B7 said that a few (hams) should not be able to impose on the =
many (owners of properties in CC&Rs) with unsightly antennas in order to =
accommodate what they perceived as a hobby;
=B7 said that people do have concerns about safety and what we =
might do is unknown to them.
=20
Senator Menor (Chair of the Senate's CPH committee) indicated to us that =
he would not pass out of committee any bills that did not allow the =
condo associations to have the right to approve an antenna installation. =
At his recommendation, we began working with Richard Ekimoto, Chair of =
the Hawaii Legislative Action Committee of the Community Associations =
Institute (CAI) to draft bills that would satisfy both the hams and the =
condo associations.=20
=20
Later, at Conference, Sen. Menor insisted that both the ham team and the =
condo association representatives come to a consensus on bill language =
before the committee would recommend passage of the bills. The ham team =
provided several drafts of possible language. This was not acceptable =
to the condo association representatives, so the two sides were sent =
back to again work on wording agreeable to both.
=20
On the day before the last decking day (Wed. April 28th) Senator Menor
put on the table bills drafted by the Community Associations Institute =
(CAI)
representative saying that we could accept or reject these bills and =
since the clock was running out, that would be it. =20
These bills included much new wording (which is now in the final text) =
of bill 2773 and complete new wording for Bill 2774 which included:
=B7 Antennas must be placed on the ground;
=B7 A ten foot height limitation on antennas; and
=B7 Antennas must not be visible from the adjacent street.
=20
None of these restrictions had been mentioned or discussed with us by =
CAI. Essentially it looked like we had to accept these conditions or no =
bills. In a flurry of last minute faxes, phone calls and meetings, we =
fought our way back from this position and maintained throughout that we =
would not accept any specific size limit for antennas. Being able to =
still get any bill on 2774 without the ten foot limit was an =
achievement.
=20
What happens now?
Now that the bills have passed out of Conference Committee, they must go =
to the full House and full Senate again in their modified form for =
votes. If they pass both houses in these votes, they go to the Governor =
to sign. The Governor has the power to veto them if she finds a reason =
to do so.
=20
I thought we were asking for "reasonable accommodation"? What happened?
Testimonies by condo associations at both the House and Senate Hearings =
were against any language that would not give the homeowner associations =
the final authorization in any antenna installation.=20
The associations were against the term "reasonable accommodation" as it =
is vague and not defined. Also, it is used by federal law to address =
the legitimate needs of disabled individuals.
They leveraged that the Congressional "reasonable accommodation" =
language is only a "resolution" (Congressional Public Law 103-408) and =
not law; that the FCC has repeatedly denied overriding CC&Rs; that we =
have no data or documentation/evidence of a negative impact on our =
operations caused by CC&Rs.=20
=20
What has occurred since the bills passed the Senate?
=B7 Once the bills passed third reading in the Senate (April 13, =
2004), they were sent to Conference committee to iron out the =
differences between the version passed by the House and that passed by =
the Senate. The House bills and the Senate bills differed only in their =
effective dates. No other changes had been made. (not even to correct =
the technical problems.) However, the bills were kept alive by this =
mechanism of changing the effective dates to facilitate the discussion =
on the wording as the bills were not yet ready for final passage.=20
=B7 The ham leadership team was told informally after the Senate =
hearing that, in order for the bills to pass, wording should give the =
condo associations the authority to approve all antenna requests.
=B7 The ham leadership team contacted the condo association =
group, led by Richard Ekimoto, Co-Chair of the Hawaii Legislative Action =
Committee of the Community Associations Institute (CAI), met with them =
and began a dialogue to find a mutually acceptable position. The condo =
association group is generally opposed to legislation that seeks to =
override recorded covenants (CC&Rs), was interested in fact-finding more =
than bill wording. =20
=B7 The hams submitted modified wording in response to the condo =
association's concerns while working to maintain our position of =
limiting the power the associations would have over antenna =
installations. We shared the modified wording with the ham community =
via the email reflectors.
=B7 Some members of the Conference committee were not on either =
the House or Senate committees that heard testimony on the bills, so =
were not familiar with some of the issues. So, the ham leadership team =
also met informally with them or members of their staff to educate them =
on the bills.
=20
What happened in the Conference committee?
=B7 The Conference committee, composed of representatives of =
both the House and the Senate met 5 times between Friday, April 23rd and =
Thursday, April 29th to consider these bills. Each time, members of =
the ham leadership team have been present to hear the comments and =
concerns of the Committee and be ready to answer any questions the =
legislators may have.=20
=B7 Senator Menor told both parties that there must be =
"consensus" for any bill to pass. Also, that the hams should work with =
the condo associations to find wording that both could accept before the =
bills would be considered for passage. =20
=B7 The ham leadership team met again with the condo association =
group and subsequently exchanged several letters and versions of =
possible bill wording. Several letters and bill versions were submitted =
to the Conference committee by both sides at each Conference committee =
meeting.=20
=B7 On Thursday, April 29th, consensus was reached on a very =
limited area of compromise by both the ham team and the condo =
association representatives on both bills. The bills were then passed =
by the Conference committee.
=20
=20
What did the ham team (as representatives of the ham radio community) =
do?
It's been a long and arduous couple of months for the small team who =
have been bird-dogging these bills and working to keep them alive and =
have them passed into law. At great expense of personal time - late =
nights and early mornings - (and even expenditure of personal funds), =
the team has worked diligently. From a group who only had one member =
with any legislative experience, learned quickly how the system worked. =
They
=B7 Lobbied all legislators in both the House and Senate by =
providing written information to them before full House and Senate votes =
educating them on the issues and asking for their support;
=B7 Met with members of the House Commerce, Consumer Affairs and =
Housing (CCH) Committee or their staff members and provided more =
detailed written information;
=B7 Met with members of the Senate Commerce, Consumer Protection =
and Housing (CPH) Committee or their staff members and provided more =
detailed written information (This information was researched, written, =
photocopied, collated and distributed by the team);
=B7 Rechecked numerous times (personally and with phone calls) =
with Committee staff to be sure the legislators had seen our written =
information and asked if they had any questions;
=B7 Attended all Committee hearings to testify and/or be ready =
to respond to questions from the legislators;=20
=B7 Asked hams in the community to submit testimony (written and =
oral) for the House and Senate committee hearings;
=B7 Asked hams in the community to write or call their =
Representative and Senator asking for their support;
=B7 Kept the ham community abreast of developments with =
announcements on reflectors, nets and by attending Club meetings and =
giving updates.
=B7 Kept ARRL abreast of our progress and asked for testimony =
and advice.
=20
=20
What about the future? Are you going to go back to get more =
"accommodation"?
=20
We have made a small gain under circumstances where no gain was to be
expected. =20
=20
The bills caught everyone off guard and unprepared. Through
much good will and courtesy, the legislators accommodated our requests =
and helped us. =20
They in essence "gave us a chance," when by the usual protocol they =
could well have told us to wait for
the inter-session to develop and state our case, do our homework, and =
win
public support. By giving us something with bills, they are again giving =
us
a chance--to evolve and move forward. It would certainly be very =
arrogant
of us to expect big results against established interests considering =
that
we have not built a base.
=20
We accepted incremental progress to achieve some accommodation for =
amateur radio antennas. We established a presence, and laid positive =
groundwork. If the bills pass, we
will have something to amend and build on instead of starting from =
scratch
again.=20
=20
We accepted small gains in the end in order to get a foothold for our =
case
and principles.
=20
Most importantly, the bills do no harm. Some hams might be helped, and =
others will
remain unaffected. The bills will require that associations put in =
writing
any denial of antenna requests. This will provide some empirical =
evidence
of the nature of the problem.
=20
Possibly the very existence of the legislation and the necessity to give
reasons for denials in writing will cause associations to be more =
thoughtful
in their processes and circumspect in their treatment of hams. If we
continue public education and raise awareness, and as these issues =
become
better understood, perhaps hams will achieve more "de facto" "reasonable
accommodation." It will be important for hams to be "reasonable" on =
their
side, so that people will see a good track record instead of having =
fears of
the unknown.=20
Please support the bills and ask the senators and representatives to =
vote yes on the bills.
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
or had an attachment. Attachments are not allowed. To learn how
to post in Plain-Text go to: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html ---