[HIham] Re: [hamradiohawaii] Re Please support HB2773 & HB2774; FAQ

[Kimo Chun]

Hi Jim,

Thank you for your input and support.

If I may respond as one of the team...

I believe that attempts at the federal level have carefully avoided =
setting height standards. I have to agree that setting standards that =
future opponents might reference as "acceptable" could hurt our chances =
of achieving standards (though restrictive by most accounts) =
contextualized by the individual situation each ham resides in.

Those restrictions would have precluded wire or other antennas that are =
not ground mounted and in our opinion limit the effectiveness of even =
vertical antennas on the lower bands unless you live in an optimal =
location. Realizing (and confirming) that the other side would not budge =
from the aesthetic impact issue it was felt that "Antennas must not be =
visible from an adjacent street.", was sufficient to cover a 10 foot =
rule and would allow a degree of situational context without setting a =
number. Though quite restrictive it would allow an applicant to plead =
their case as to what was acceptable as "not visible" to their board. =
That was our last position. They gave in on "ground mounted" but =
wouldn't accept the removal of 10 feet even with our best arguments that =
the "not visible" limit superceded it and made it redundant. Some places =
already enjoy the 10 foot allowance and more. We did not want to codify =
a reason for associations to reduce their "accommodation". For laws to =
be most effective they must be straight forward in their guidance and =
easy to understand so most people interpret them the same way. It is =
difficult to accomplish this with a highly technical subject yet =
minimize oversight.

We were willing to accept no passage of HB2774 rather than accept rigid =
references. Chair Menor offered that he could support a test in areas =
that wouldn't be so impactful as on Oahu. Thus he suggested the =
implementation of this bill without those three limitations in the =
agriculturally zoned areas that are under CC&R's. We believe this will =
provide, along with any written feedback (denials), proof that we can =
use to satisfy our opponents demand for empirical evidence of the extent =
of any problem and make our case for "reasonable accommodation". This =
provided a way to possibly help some people, however small, and =
establish on the books that there is a need for legislative oversight =
as, in our case, we claim that association contract law and regulation =
is not working or unfair. Until we can prove there is a problem we =
cannot look to the majority to seek compromise.

There is truth in the saying, "No legislation is better than bad =
legislation." I know that the original bills would not have gotten past =
first base. Nothing on Earth would have moved the political will of the =
majority. I believe that due to our reputation for public service, past =
record, careful education and pointing out the need for disbursed =
resources in all communities, helped us to get our points heard. =
However, it was perhaps concurrent legislation regarding associations =
and CC&R's that provided the groundswell of sentiment amongst the =
legislature that there was a problem. Unfortunately, other political =
realities were likely in play. By most accounts, we shouldn't have been =
able to get anything passed on the first try. The people at the "big =
square building" were pleasantly surprised. It is easier to get laws =
modified versus starting from scratch. We are not satisfied with the =
outcome but are confident it lays the groundwork for future efforts.

There are serious underlying principles were are seeking to overturn. If =
any ham doesn't realize or appreciate this fact they are kidding =
themselves.
I think many of those who live in CC&R controlled places can see their =
neighbor's point of view and even agree (in other areas). After all, =
they DID sign and agree to the controlled nature of their home =
environment. It may prove impossible to overturn these long held =
principles of contract law, property rights and our system of =
coexistence. We have to work hard to educate and create a fair process =
within the system and may have to accept the will of the majority or =
move elsewhere. It may or may not be that simple but we are open to =
rational suggestions and help.

Perhaps ALL of us can agree that we've made the first move and that it =
is incumbent upon us to play this chess game carefully in the future. We =
will continue to build upon what we've started. Our strategy is being =
laid out and we will seek input and participation by all.

I will analogize with an unwritten precept that many who work to "pull =
off" successful DXpeditions try to live by as their primary rule. "Don't =
screw things up for those who will follow you." I think we have done =
that. Individual points are always debatable. Choices are made and are =
not always right for everyone but I think as a whole we got all we could =
have hoped for and keep to the rule. Things may have been better under a =
different political environment and if we had been able to educate the =
public (and our opponents) before an attempt at legislation. This one =
caught everyone by surprise and all we could do was run with the ball.

To succeed at the Legislature you must join and work within the system. =
A serious commitment of time and resources IN PERSON is required. That =
is why lobbyists exist. That is why we stepped up to do it as there =
didn't appear to be anyone else to do it. Hey, why should I care? I do, =
even though I made the conscious choice and was fortunate to be able to =
live in an area without CC&R's. And, YES, I do sometimes have to put up =
with things that a CC&R neighborhood might not. But I made my choice. I =
live with it and work it out.

Thank you to ALL who provided input and support. Everything was given =
serious consideration and most was incorporated into our several =
versions of language as we worked the problem. Please support these =
bills if you think they have at least not set anyone back and have =
provided a means for some to try where previously they could not and =
provide us a tool to work for future change. Thank you.

Aloha,

Kimo Chun, KH7U

kimo@lava.net
wk: 808-836-2134
hm: 808-595-6137

From: Jim Reid=20
  To: hiham@mailman.qth.net ; hamradiohawaii ; karc-l@pilikia.net=20
  Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2004 2:41 PM
  Subject: [hamradiohawaii] Re Please support HB2773 & HB2774; FAQ


  Hi Kevin,

  In your FAQ section,  you wrote,  in part:

  "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.

  ".......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."

  I believe it would have been a good idea to have accepted the above =
for ALL
  CC&R controlled subdivisions,  except those in ag districts.  Why?

  Because a gound mounted,  properly loaded 10 foot vertical can provide =
a LOT
  of communictions;  e.g. all the mobile whips of that and shorter =
lengths which
  work even DX about the globe!!  As does KH6DX over on the mainland =
from
  his pickup!

  And for the prime purpose of these bills,  to ensure a network of =
amateur
  radio communications nodes to serve the needs of the neighboring area =
to
  each node station during/after times of emergencies which occur from
  time to time here in Hawaii.  This need was demonstated, satisfied, =
and
  appreciated after Iniki here on Kauai.

  Well,  these are a start,  and thank you for your efforts and all of =
those
  who walked the halls of the "Big Square" building in Honolulu!!

  73,  Jim Reid  KH7M


--- 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  ---