[HoustonHam] FW: [SETXHam] FW: Repeater Councils - Response

Chris Boone Cboone at earthlink.net
Wed Nov 16 04:26:12 EST 2011


From: SETXHam at yahoogroups.com [mailto:SETXHam at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Chris Boone
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 2:09 AM
To: 'William Pasternak'
Cc: SETXHAM at YAHOOGROUPS.COM;; HoustonHam at yahoogroups.com; HOUSTONSCAN at YAHOOGROUPS.COM
Subject: [SETXHam] FW: Repeater Councils - Response
Importance: High

  
HMM it aint only Texas with idiots it seems..I removed the info from my friend’s (in Florida) reply as he sent it to me in private email…but felt the comments should be heard…..so be it!
 
Enjoy!
Chris
WB5ITT
 
 
See my comments below in -->
 
G******,
The Society changed hands in August…but the new bunch are idiots who expect the membership to bow down to them…
one case in point: no more mailing of ANYTHING from the Society…they expect all members to have email, etc…HMMM IIRC Texas state statues requires a corporation to keep in touch with the membership by means the MEMBER request…not the other way around; I DO know special meetings, etc must be notified to members in person or US Mail…Email is NOT allowed…as one local club has tried to do….the State Attorney General was also notified about that!
 
-->The FRC adopted a no mail policy several years ago. They now expect everyone to renew their 2-year coordination by e-mail using their on-line form. The form does not allow for you to make a copy of your filing for your own records.  If they wont to de-coordinate you they just fail to update their database and claim that you did not do your update in a timely manner.   When I served as a coordinator, the council had a rule in place that required them to send a registered letter to the holder of the coordination before they could act on the de-coordination.  If they received no response within 60 days, then they could go ahead and process the de-coordination.  This method protected both the member and the FRC.  Due to their current policy a number of repeater owners were de-coordinated without any knowledge of what was happening.  One in particular was an old gentlemen that had a repeater up for years.  he just did not have a computer and no e-mail.  In another case they coordinated a new user to a frequency that another repeater operator had used for years.  The original operator on the frequency filed a complaint with the FCC.  The FCC ruled that the FRC had caused malicious interference by placing another repeater on a frequency that was already in use and they had previously coordinated.
 
I have a complaint against the Society filed with the Texas State Attorney General..these jokers forget they are a legal non profit Corp and thus have to FOLLOW the rules and law..or else (along with another club)  

-->Several years ago the FRC changed their bylaws such that everything is governed by a board of district representatives.  The change in itself was suppose to bring better representation at the local lever.  The problem is that now this current group all think they are God Almaty and do not need to respond to any wishes of the general membership.  Every year at their annual meeting they continue to vote each other in with no chance of filling a slot from the general membership.  In fact, if you attend one of their quarterly meetings the president says that the meeting is closed and that only board members can vote on an issue.  When a discussion comes up on how to accommodate new technology, they institute a committee made up of board members only. The new committee studies the problem and then dictates the new policy, never mind considering any technical input from the general membership. They think the general membership is just there to financially support the board.  I know of one case where a ham requested coordination but did not get it since he was not a dues paying member of the FRC.  They have fail to represent all spectrum users in a fair and equitable manner. You just gave me an idea.... I need to look into their non profit corporation status as it pertains to Florida law! 
 
I made a motion in August to put DSTAR and other NB digital system on 10kHz splinters between the analog FM channels (20k across the board). 

-->You see Florida is still backwards since we still have 15 KHz channels on 2-meters.  If we had adopted 20 KHz channels as I suggested a number of years ago then putting narrow band systems on 10 KHz splits would be no problem today. Instead the opted to split the 146 and 147 segments into 7-1/2 KHz channels.
If they had at least considered 12.5 KHz channels most repeaters in the state would have only needed to plus or minus 5 KHz to accommodate the new plan.
In fact, every fourth or fifth repeater would not even need to move.  This would allowed for P25 boxes as well.  Now we have a mess with D-STAR, P25, Mototurbo, NDXN and IDAS repeaters all looking for space
 
Under the ByLaws, that was tabled and the membership to be polled…HMMM where is the POLL?? 
-->What poll? The general membership in Florida does not get a say!

MEANTIME, the new BoD is doing back door politics to move 145.11-145.25 rptrs in N Texas to other freqs to make room for ALL NB systems..YEAH NB FM?? WHO is going to talk on that??? 

-->We currently have a few NBFM systems on the air. Most of the newer radios will do NBFM. Check out the Yaesu 8900, the Icom IC-800, IC-880, IC-2820, some of the Yasue hand-helds and the Chinese radios.

MOST ham gear out there WONT do it! As if the RF stops at the county line…it’s a joke…I was Zone 2 220-up coordinator until I challenged the State Coordinator allowing DSTAR on ANALOG FM channels….and there is NO provision for such….in fact the CP application has NO DSTAR on it..only FM or ATV..thats all the Society can coordinate, but these idiots are saying if it fits in the spectrum mask…WHO CARES?? FM stations wanting to run IBOC/HD MUST get permission from the FCC 1st…P25 systems MUST be licensed 1st….so much for the spectral mask crap!!....  

-->Not sure P25 is legal on the Ham bands yet.  I know that recently the ARRL filed a request for a waver to allow the existing systems to continue to operate while they study the new modes.  I really question MotoTurbo and Nexege/IDAS  since TDMA and 4QSK are currently not authorized modes under PART 97.  It is still a very gray area.
 
Yes P25 as well as any digital mode in the public domain is legal on the amateur bands….but that doesn’t make DSTAR a defacto mode to be able to coordinate!
 
I am sick of it…have asked the ARRL to get involved since the Society is an affiliated club….  

-->The local ARRL wont address the problem publicly but will do something!
 
I have been approached by several about starting a new coordination group…WHY??? The Society only needs cleaning house..and if members are unwilling to show up for voting the b***** out, then what makes them think a new group will do better????  

-->I agree with your first statement. Too much apathy and not enough doers.  I remember the old days when an individual ham would drive across Texas to help put up a new antenna system for the old TIRS network.
Today’s hams are just not what we used to be.

GEESH you really CANT fix stupid! 

-->Amen!  I am retired again and am self employed doing some consulting and special project work from time to time.
 
Chris
 
BTW check out my 444.5 rptr…600ft with a GE MSTR II and ARR Preamp and RLC 3 controller with an ICOM 706MKII remote base ☺ 50mile radius mobile coverage with a 30w mobile….HT coverage is about 27 miles radius!!
(picture deleted)

-->Looks Good! Recently we were offered a space on a Clear Channel tower to install a D-STAR system.  I have about 15K invested in the repeaters, duplexers, combiners and such for a full-stack system. Still need to spend another 3K for antennas.  We are granted only one antenna space with existing 1-5/8 inch line in place. Commercial quality triband antennas are just non exsistant however we have devised a system that will work by mounting one dual-band antenna up on the bracket and a single band antenna mounted down from the bracket.  The manufacture has already quoted building the antennas for this configuration.
The problem is that we still don’t have a signed agreement with Clear Channel yet.  We only have the verbal say so from the local engineer.
Right now I don’t feel comfortable in spending more money on a system that could get kicked off of the tower tomorrow.  With all of the crap we had to go through with the hospitals and subsequent lock out, I need some written approval from Clear Channel corporate maybe you can put me on to a good contact there.
 
 ------------------------------------------------------
 Original Message below:

 
Hey Chris,
 
I just saw your post on the 902 MHz board.  Based upon your closing comments, it appears that we in Florida are not the only ones that are plagued with dumb ass’s in the state repeater council.  They choose to coordinate more based on politics rather then sound technical parameters.
 
With the advent of D-STAR and other narrow-band technologies currently on the seen, we have a bunch of idiots that want to divide 2-meters into 
7-1/2 KHz. channels in the 146 and 147 range. Most of the current radios won’t even program to the frequency.  At least at 145 MHz they do a little better with 10 KHz channels.  The FRC does not even look at deviation, frequency stability, or noise floor.

 
Here in Florida it is a sin for an individual to own several repeaters on different bands. Don’t expect some help with normal own-going expenses....
ie.  Internet service charges, yearly insurance cost and God forbid...... Help with repairs after a lightening strike.  We are constantly accused by some members of the FRC board of charging for use of our repeaters. If you don’t believe me... just go to the Florida Repeater Council site and click on the link for the new coordination form.  Look down towards the bottom and note the question about charging for use of your D-STAR repeater.
 
We used to support a number of repeaters installed on hospitals in a four county area.  We had over 20K invested in equipment.  We had an MOU in place that was signed by the hospital corporations  CEO.  Our cooperative was made up of individual trustee’s.  One jealous ass hole from another club started messing with our equipment. When we protested to the Director of Facilities we were then locked out with no access to our own equipment.
Now we are being accused  of not being team players since we would not let the non-technical ass hole join our co-op. With all of his crying to the hospital administrators, we had to eventually move everything out.  At one point we had to threatened legal action to recover our own equipment.
 
We have since relocated most of the repeaters and began rebuilding the network.  Now this ass hole has convinced FRC board members that they should pull our coordination's since we are individuals and not some big ass club full of idiots. The FRC’s excuse is that since open frequencies are 
generally not available for re-coordination that they should only coordinate large groups that represents the greatest number of idiots.
 
When I got my Extra license.... I don’t seem to remember anything in Part 97 that assigns exclusive rights to a group over an individual the use of any frequency that our license class entitles us to use.
 
So Chris.... I am with you!   Repeater Councils are irrelevant when they don’t support all users in a equitable manner.   
 
It seems to me this type of s**t occurred in California some years ago. That is the reason they now have several frequency coordinating body's.
Maybe it is time to form the “Florida Spectrum Management Association”  Hi Hi.... 
 
Keep up the fight!
 



More information about the HoustonHAM mailing list