[HIham] Re: [hamradiohawaii] More on fighting CCR restrictions at the Federal level

[Dan]

This is good stuff! Glad to see there are folks who are trying to make
progress, working hard for us behind the "scenes".

Even if we can't get any real movement/relaxations from existing ccrs, maybe
we can make it better for Hams in the future by not allowing more and new
restrictive covenants with regard to HAM antennas.

I mean ... when we had the quake, and everyone on my street here in Mililani
wanted to know what was going on with regards to when we were going to get
back our power, I could tell them the information I was getting from net
control on our 146.88 repeater, but I felt reluctant to have an antenna up
and showing, in order to do it. :)
 
73
KH6DAN
  

-----Original Message-----
From: hiham-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:hiham-bounces at mailman.qth.net]
On Behalf Of Ron Hashiro
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 6:28 PM
To: hamradiohawaii at yahoogroups.com
Cc: Hawaii Ham
Subject: [HIham] Re: [hamradiohawaii] More on fighting CCR restrictions at
the Federal level

ah6wx wrote:

> I did a Google search on the subject and uncovered some interesting 
> information. The ARRL national board has, as of Jan. 26 this year 
> adopted a goal to seek "legislation to extend the regulation for 
> 'reasonable accomodation' of amateur radio stations to all forms of 
> land use regulations." And not to worry they are also intending to 
> dilligently pursue the BPL issue. I am glad that ARRL has seen the 
> light. Hopefully there will be suggested letters to send our 
> Congresspersons on the new ARRL goal soon.
>
> There is also a national group of hams that is specifically working 
> for sensible antenna regulations. This group is Hams for Action. Their 
> site is www.hamsforaction.net. There is also information about this 
> group accessible from eham.net.
>
> Aloha, Vic, AH6WX
>













What ARRL has been leveraging over the past few years includes:

1)  A "reasonable accomodation" approach, rather than a blanket overturning
of the CC&Rs.  This middle of the road approach has a better chance of
getting traction.  ARRL's been working this at the staff and field level for
years.  The difference now is the Board has articulated it at the Board
level.

2)  Leveraging the Emergency Comunications aspect, especially since 1999 and
more so after 2001 and Katrina in Sept 2005.
The ARRL ARECC (Amateur Radio Emergency Comm Course) debuted in December
2000 -- well ahead of that dark 9/11 day.

3)  We are gaining more favorable mind share in the minds of the officials.
But, at this point, not yet enough to tip the scales.

4)  I'm sure ARRL will hear constructive ideas on how to better define the
legislative proposal in such a way as to be embraced by our officials.  In
one county, a group was able to define it and get it passed as "no more
restrictive antenna conditions in brand new CC&R's".  This is the kind of
idea, and promotional action that will get the CC&R aspects addressed to
make external antennas more palatable.

I'm not sure if we can get it up to a ten element beam up 200 ft in a CC&R,
but certainly, any progress is beneficial to the parties involved ---
especially when the next hurricane or terrorism event renders public
communications inoperable.  If anyone's seen the CBS Series "Jericho" about
a fictionalized series of simultaneous nuclear explosions around the nation,
plus an EMP strike, rendering the nation (and electrical communications) in
chaos, it gives you a tangible idea of what can be in store.

Ron H, AH6RH

P.s. If you want to be prepared for EMP with your radios in case the
international scene turns ugly, have plenty of aluminum foil in the kitchen
closet.  
http://www.aussurvivalist.com/nuclear/empprotection.htm
You can make a poor man's Faraday box out of cardboard boxes and aluminum
foil.





_______________________________________________
HIham mailing list
HIham at mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hiham

__________ NOD32 2062 (20070215) Information __________

This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com