Another dish question

I believe the FCC rule says that if painting the dish interferes with reception or results in unreasonable cost, then no, you cannot require someone to paint the dish. I won’t go into the technical details of how dishes work, but it’s entirely possible that some paints might interfere with reception. Furthermore, unless the paint is of the proper type and is properly applied, weathering might result in it flaking or wearing off, resulting in a dish that’s more unsightly that if you had left it alone.

Well, in our DOCS, we did tell people that they can have no more then 2 dishes, and they must place them mid to back of the home....did we break some sacred dish law?

Yup.

You need to read the FCC Fact Sheet. Not only can you NOT tell owners they MUST put the dish (or dishes) in a certain place, but you can't tell them they can have only so many. The FCC says thay can have as many as required to receive the programming they want. If I remember correctly, the FCC site also includes a link to actual case decisions and one of them dealt with a person who had, I think it was 6, dishes all mounted on masts in his back yard (what some folks call in the communication business, an "antenna farm." The HOA tried to get him to remove all but one or two, but the homeowner eventually won out, I believe.

Thanks for the info. We won't be enforcing that rule any time soon!

Thank you all for your comments. I must be learning! I was sure our association could not require the painting of the dish (as a past employee of a paint company, no way would I recommend painting it either).

When it comes time to add "satellite dish" to our guidelines, I'm thinking something along these lines might be suffice: ' while the regime would like to request only one dish per home and for it to be obscured from public viewing, we recognize and respect the federal laws prohibiting the association from..."

Anyone have anything from your docs that's really good at addressing this?

Bruce,

Does the info you posted regarding painting a satellite dish also apply to solar panels? I seem to recall reading somewhere they cannot be painted because they lose their effectiveness.

Mary,
My Husband is a Solar Outdoor Lighting designer that works with all kinds of panels for different applications. I asked him about painting the panels and he gave me "The Look", like what the heck would you do that for? I told him about the painting idea and he said that is ridiculous to even think about it and the effectiveness would be greatly compromised, and any warranty would be void. If that is some associations idea of making the panels less obvious, then they need to find some other way to keep themselves busy. Thank goodness some States are getting on the Solar bandwagon to save energy, just like clotheslines and recycling

An HOA can give guidelines as to the placement of the dish. Here is a portion of the FCC's Q&A:

Q: I'm a board member of a homeowners' association, and we want to revise our restrictions so that they will comply with the FCC rule. Do you have guidelines you can send me?

A: The Commission does not have sample guidelines because every community is different. We can provide you the rule and the relevant orders, which will give you general guidance. (See list of documents at the end of this Information Sheet. Some communities have written restrictions that provide a prioritized list of placement preferences so that residents can see where the association wants them to install the antenna. The residents should comply with the placement preferences provided the preferred placement does not impose unreasonable delay or expense or preclude reception of an acceptable quality signal.

Below is the entire FCC Q&A with links for your information.

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

INFORMATION SHEET
December 2007

Over-the-Air Reception Devices Rule
Preemption of Restrictions on Placement of Direct Broadcast Satellite, Broadband Radio Service, and Television Broadcast Antennas
Quick Links to Document Sections Below
• Questions and Answers
• Links to Relevant Orders and the Rule
• Guidance on Filing a Petition Where to Call for More Information
As directed by Congress in Section 207 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the Federal Communications Commission adopted the Over-the-Air Reception Devices (“OTARD”) rule concerning governmental and nongovernmental restrictions on viewers' ability to receive video programming signals from direct broadcast satellites ("DBS"), broadband radio service providers (formerly multichannel multipoint distribution service or MMDS), and television broadcast stations ("TVBS").
The rule (47 C.F.R. Section 1.4000) has been in effect since October 1996, and it prohibits restrictions that impair the installation, maintenance or use of antennas used to receive video programming. The rule applies to video antennas including direct-to-home satellite dishes that are less than one meter (39.37") in diameter (or of any size in Alaska), TV antennas, and wireless cable antennas. The rule prohibits most restrictions that: (1) unreasonably delay or prevent installation, maintenance or use; (2) unreasonably increase the cost of installation, maintenance or use; or (3) preclude reception of an acceptable quality signal.
Effective January 22, 1999, the Commission amended the rule so that it also applies to rental property where the renter has an exclusive use area, such as a balcony or patio.
On October 25, 2000, the Commission further amended the rule so that it applies to customer-end antennas that receive and transmit fixed wireless signals. This amendment became effective on May 25, 2001.
The rule applies to individuals who place antennas that meet size limitations on property that they own or rent and that is within their exclusive use or control, including condominium owners and cooperative owners, and tenants who have an area where they have exclusive use, such as a balcony or patio, in which to install the antenna. The rule applies to townhomes and manufactured homes, as well as to single family homes.
The rule allows local governments, community associations and landlords to enforce restrictions that do not impair the installation, maintenance or use of the types of antennas described above, as well as restrictions needed for safety or historic preservation. Under some circumstances where a central or common antenna is available, a community association or landlord may restrict the installation of individual antennas. The rule does not apply to common areas that are owned by a landlord, a community association, or jointly by condominium or cooperative owners where the antenna user does not have an exclusive use area. Such common areas may include the roof or exterior wall of a multiple dwelling unit. Therefore, restrictions on antennas installed in or on such common areas are enforceable.
This Information Sheet provides general answers to questions concerning implementation of the rule, but is not a substitute for the actual rule. For further information or a copy of the rule, contact the Federal Communications Commission at 888-CALLFCC (toll free) or (202) 418-7096. The rule is also available via the Internet by going to links to relevant Orders and the rule.
Q: What types of antennas are covered by the rule?
A: The rule applies to the following types of antennas:
(1) A "dish" antenna that is one meter (39.37") or less in diameter (or any size dish if located in Alaska) and is designed to receive direct broadcast satellite service, including direct-to-home satellite service, or to receive or transmit fixed wireless signals via satellite.
(2) An antenna that is one meter or less in diameter or diagonal measurement and is designed to receive video programming services via broadband radio service (wireless cable) or to receive or transmit fixed wireless signals other than via satellite.
(3) An antenna that is designed to receive local television broadcast signals. Masts higher than 12 feet above the roofline may be subject to local permitting requirements.
In addition, antennas covered by the rule may be mounted on "masts" to reach the height needed to receive or transmit an acceptable quality signal (e.g. maintain line-of-sight contact with the transmitter or view the satellite). Masts higher than 12 feet above the roofline may be subject to local permitting requirements for safety purposes. Further, masts that extend beyond an exclusive use area may not be covered by this rule.

Q: What are "fixed wireless signals"?
A: "Fixed wireless signals" are any commercial non-broadcast communications signals transmitted via wireless technology to and/or from a fixed customer location. Examples include wireless signals used to provide telephone service or high-speed Internet access to a fixed location. This definition does not include, among other things, AM/FM radio, amateur ("HAM") radio (but see 47 C.F.R. §97.15), Citizens Band ("CB") radio, and Digital Audio Radio Services ("DARS") signals.
Q: Does the rule apply to hub or relay antennas?
A: The rule applies to "customer-end antennas" which are antennas placed at a customer location for the purpose of providing service to customers at that location. The rule does not cover antennas used to transmit signals to and/or receive signals from multiple customer locations.
Q: What types of restrictions are prohibited?
A: The rule prohibits restrictions that impair a person's ability to install, maintain, or use an antenna covered by the rule. The rule applies to state or local laws or regulations, including zoning, land-use or building regulations, private covenants, homeowners' association rules, condominium or cooperative association restrictions, lease restrictions, or similar restrictions on property within the exclusive use or control of the antenna user where the user has an ownership or leasehold interest in the property. A restriction impairs if it: (1) unreasonably delays or prevents use of; (2) unreasonably increases the cost of; or (3) precludes a person from receiving or transmitting an acceptable quality signal from an antenna covered under the rule. The rule does not prohibit legitimate safety restrictions or restrictions designed to preserve designated or eligible historic or prehistoric properties, provided the restriction is no more burdensome than necessary to accomplish the safety or preservation purpose.
Q: What types of restrictions unreasonably delay or prevent viewers from using an antenna? Can an antenna user be required to obtain prior approval before installing his antenna?
A: A local restriction that prohibits all antennas would prevent viewers from receiving signals, and is prohibited by the Commission's rule. Procedural requirements can also unreasonably delay installation, maintenance or use of an antenna covered by this rule. For example, local regulations that require a person to obtain a permit or approval prior to installation create unreasonable delay and are generally prohibited. Permits or prior approval necessary to serve a legitimate safety or historic preservation purpose may be permissible. Although a simple notification process might be permissible, such a process cannot be used as a prior approval requirement and may not delay or increase the cost of installation. The burden is on the association to show that a notification process does not violate our rule.
Q: What is an unreasonable expense?
A: Any requirement to pay a fee to the local authority for a permit to be allowed to install an antenna would be unreasonable because such permits are generally prohibited. It may also be unreasonable for a local government, community association or landlord to require a viewer to incur additional costs associated with installation. Things to consider in determining the reasonableness of any costs imposed include: (1) the cost of the equipment and services, and (2) whether there are similar requirements for comparable objects, such as air conditioning units or trash receptacles. For example, restrictions cannot require that expensive landscaping screen relatively unobtrusive DBS antennas. A requirement to paint an antenna so that it blends into the background against which it is mounted would likely be acceptable, provided it will not interfere with reception or impose unreasonable costs.
Q: What restrictions prevent a viewer from receiving an acceptable quality signal? Can a homeowners association or other restricting entity establish enforceable preferences for antenna locations?
A: For antennas designed to receive analog signals, such as TVBS, a requirement that an antenna be located where reception would be impossible or substantially degraded is prohibited by the rule. However, a regulation requiring that antennas be placed where they are not visible from the street would be permissible if this placement does not prevent reception of an acceptable quality signal or impose unreasonable expense or delay. For example, if installing an antenna in the rear of the house costs significantly more than installation on the side of the house, then such a requirement would be prohibited. If, however, installation in the rear of the house does not impose unreasonable expense or delay or preclude reception of an acceptable quality signal, then the restriction is permissible and the viewer must comply.
The acceptable quality signal standard is different for devices designed to receive digital signals, such as DBS antennas, digital broadband radio service antennas, digital television ("DTV") antennas, and digital fixed wireless antennas. For a digital antenna to receive or transmit an acceptable quality signal, the antenna must be installed where it has an unobstructed, direct view of the satellite or other device from which signals are received or to which signals are to be transmitted. Unlike analog antennas, digital antennas, even in the presence of sufficient over-the-air signal strength, will at times provide no picture or sound unless they are placed and oriented properly.
Q: Can a restriction limit the number of antennas that may be installed at a particular location?
The Commission’s rule covers the antennas necessary to receive service. Therefore, a local rule may not, for example, allow only one antenna if more than one antenna is necessary to receive the desired service.

Q: Are all restrictions prohibited?
A: No. Clearly-defined, legitimate safety restrictions are permitted even if they impair installation, maintenance or use provided they are necessary to protect public safety and are no more burdensome than necessary to ensure safety. Examples of valid safety restrictions include fire codes preventing people from installing antennas on fire escapes; restrictions requiring that a person not place an antenna within a certain distance from a power line; and installation requirements that describe the proper method to secure an antenna. The safety reason for the restriction must be written in the text, preamble or legislative history of the restriction, or in a document that is readily available to antenna users, so that a person who wishes to install an antenna knows what restrictions apply. Safety restrictions cannot discriminate between objects that are comparable in size and weight and pose the same or a similar safety risk as the antenna that is being restricted.
Restrictions necessary for historic preservation also may be permitted even if they impair installation, maintenance or use of the antenna. To qualify for this exemption, the property may be any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure or object included in, or eligible for inclusion on, the National Register of Historic Places. In addition, restrictions necessary for historic preservation must be no more burdensome than necessary to accomplish the historic preservation goal. They also must be imposed and enforced in a non-discriminatory manner, as compared to other modern structures that are comparable in size and weight and to which local regulation would normally apply.
Q: How does the rule apply to restrictions on radiofrequency (RF) exposure from antennas that have the capability to transmit signals? Can a local restriction require professional installation of receive-only antennas?
A: All transmitters regulated by the Commission, including the customer-end fixed wireless antennas (either satellite or terrestrial) covered under the amended rule, are required to meet the applicable Commission guidelines regarding RF exposure limits. The limits established in the guidelines are designed to protect the public health with a large margin of safety. These limits have been endorsed by federal health and safety agencies, such as the Environmental Protection Agency and the Food and Drug Administration. The Commission requires that providers of fixed wireless service exercise reasonable care to protect users and the public from RF exposure in excess of the Commission's limits. In addition, as a condition of invoking protection under the rule from government, landlord, and association restrictions, a provider of fixed wireless service must ensure that customer-end antennas are labeled to give notice of potential RF safety hazards posed by these antennas.
It is recommended that antennas that both receive and transmit signals be installed by professional installers to maximize effectiveness and minimize the possibility that the antenna will be placed in a location that is likely to expose subscribers, their families, or others in the area to radiation from the transmit signal at close proximity and for an extended period of time. In general, associations, landlords, local governments and other restricting entities may not require professional installation for receive-only antennas, such as one-way DBS satellite dishes. However, local governments, associations, and property owners may require professional installation for transmitting antennas based on the safety exception to the rule. Such safety requirements must be: (1) clearly defined; (2) based on a legitimate safety objective (such as bona fide concerns about RF radiation) which is articulated in the restriction or readily available to antenna users; (3) applied in a non-discriminatory manner; and (4) no more burdensome than necessary to achieve the articulated objectives.
For additional information about the Commission's RF exposure limits, please visit http://www.fcc.gov/oet/rfsafety or call the RF Safety Information Line at 202-418-2464.
Q: Whose antenna restrictions are prohibited?
A: The rule applies to restrictions imposed by local governments, including zoning, land-use or building regulations; by homeowner, townhome, condominium or cooperative association rules, including deed restrictions, covenants, by-laws and similar restrictions; and by manufactured housing (mobile home) park owners and landlords, including lease restrictions. The rule only applies to restrictions on property where the viewer has an ownership or leasehold interest and exclusive use or control.
Q: If I live in a condominium or an apartment building, does this rule apply to me?
A: The rule applies to antenna users who live in a multiple dwelling unit building, such as a condominium or apartment building, if the antenna user has an exclusive use area in which to install the antenna. "Exclusive use" means an area of the property that only you, and persons you permit, may enter and use to the exclusion of other residents. For example, your condominium or apartment may include a balcony, terrace, deck or patio that only you can use, and the rule applies to these areas. The rule does not apply to common areas, such as the roof, the hallways, the walkways or the exterior walls of a condominium or apartment building. Restrictions on antennas installed in these common areas are not covered by the Commission's rule. For example, the rule would not apply to restrictions that prevent drilling through the exterior wall of a condominium or rental unit and thus restrictions may prohibit installation that requires such drilling.
Q: Does the rule apply to condominiums or apartment buildings if the antenna is installed so that it hangs over or protrudes beyond the balcony railing or patio wall?
A: No. The rule does not prohibit restrictions on antennas installed beyond the balcony or patio of a condominium or apartment unit if such installation is in, on, or over a common area. An antenna that extends out beyond the balcony or patio is usually considered to be in a common area that is not within the scope of the rule. Therefore, the rule does not apply to a condominium or rental apartment unit unless the antenna is installed wholly within the exclusive use area, such as the balcony or patio.
Q: Does the fact that management or the association has the right to enter these areas mean that the resident does not have exclusive use?
A: No. The fact that the building management or the association may enter an area for the purpose of inspection and/or repair does not mean that the resident does not have exclusive use of that area. Likewise, if the landlord or association regulates other uses of the exclusive use area (e.g., banning grills on balconies), that does not affect the viewer's rights under the Commission's rule. This rule permits persons to install antennas on property over which the person has either exclusive use or exclusive control. Note, too, that nothing in this rule changes the landlord's or association's right to regulate use of exclusive use areas for other purposes. For example, if the lease prohibits antennas and flags on balconies, only the prohibition of antennas is eliminated by this rule; flags would still be prohibited.
Q: Does the rule apply to residents of rental property?
A: Yes. Effective January 22, 1999, renters may install antennas within their leasehold, which means inside the dwelling or on outdoor areas that are part of the tenant's leased space and which are under the exclusive use or control of the tenant. Typically, for apartments, these areas include balconies, balcony railings, and terraces. For rented single family homes or manufactured homes which sit on rented property, these areas include the home itself and patios, yards, gardens or other similar areas. If renters do not have access to these outside areas, the tenant may install the antenna inside the rental unit. Renters are not required to obtain the consent of the landlord prior to installing an antenna in these areas. The rule does not apply to common areas, such as the roof or the exterior walls of an apartment building. Generally, balconies or patios that are shared with other people or are accessible from other units are not considered to be exclusive use areas.
Q: Are there restrictions that may be placed on residents of rental property?
A: Yes. A restriction necessary to prevent damage to leased property may be reasonable. For example, tenants could be prohibited from drilling holes through exterior walls or through the roof. However, a restriction designed to prevent ordinary wear and tear (e.g., marks, scratches, and minor damage to carpets, walls and draperies) would likely not be reasonable provided the antenna is installed wholly within the antenna user's own exclusive use area. In addition, rental property is subject to the same protection and exceptions to the rule as owned property. Thus, a landlord may impose other types of restrictions that do not impair installation, maintenance or use under the rule. The landlord may also impose restrictions necessary for safety or historic preservation.
Q: If I live in a condominium, cooperative, or other type of residence where certain areas have been designated as "common," do these rules apply to me?
A: The rules apply to residents of these types of buildings, but the rules do not permit you to install an antenna on a common area, such as a walkway, hallway, community garden, exterior wall or the roof. However, you may install the antenna wholly within a balcony, deck, patio, or other area where you have exclusive use.
Drilling through an exterior wall, e.g. to run the cable from the patio into the unit, is generally not within the protection of the rule because the exterior wall is generally a common element. You may wish to check with your retailer or installer for advice on how to install the antenna without drilling a hole. Alternatively, your landlord or association may grant permission for you to drill such a hole. The Commission's rules generally do not cover installations if you drill through a common element.
Q: If my association, building management, landlord, or property owner provides a central antenna, may I install an individual antenna?
A: Generally, the availability of a central antenna may allow the association, landlord, property owner, or other management entity to restrict the installation by individuals of antennas otherwise protected by the rule. Restrictions based on the availability of a central antenna will generally be permissible provided that: (1) the person receives the particular video programming or fixed wireless service that the person desires and could receive with an individual antenna covered under the rule (e.g., the person would be entitled to receive service from a specific provider, not simply a provider selected by the association); (2) the signal quality of transmission to and from the person's home using the central antenna is as good as, or better than, the quality the person could receive or transmit with an individual antenna covered by the rule; (3) the costs associated with the use of the central antenna are not greater than the costs of installation, maintenance and use of an individual antenna covered under the rule; and (4) the requirement to use the central antenna instead of an individual antenna does not unreasonably delay the viewer's ability to receive video programming or fixed wireless services.
Q: May the association, landlord, building management or property owner restrict the installation of an individual antenna because a central antenna will be available in the future?
A: It is not the intent of the Commission to deter or unreasonably delay the installation of individual antennas because a central antenna may become available. However, persons could be required to remove individual antennas once a central antenna is available if the cost of removal is paid by the landlord or association and the user is reimbursed for the value of the antenna. Further, an individual who wants video programming or fixed wireless services other than what is available through the central antenna should not be unreasonably delayed in obtaining the desired programming or services either through modifications to the central antenna, installation of an additional central antenna, or by using an individual antenna.
Q: I live in a townhome community. Am I covered by the FCC rule?
A: Yes. If you own the whole townhouse, including the walls and the roof and the land under the building, then the rule applies just as it does for a single family home, and you may be able to put the antenna on the roof, the exterior wall, the backyard or any other place that is part of what you own. If the townhouse is a condominium, then the rule applies as it does for any other type of condominium, which means it applies only where you have an exclusive use area. If it is a condominium townhouse, you probably cannot use the roof, the chimney, or the exterior walls unless the condominium association gives you permission. You may want to check your ownership documents to determine what areas are owned by you or are reserved for your exclusive use.
Q: I live in a condominium with a balcony, but I cannot receive a signal from the satellite because my balcony faces north. Can I use the roof?
A: No. The roof of a condominium is generally a common area, not an area reserved for an individual's exclusive use. If the roof is a common area, you may not use it unless the condominium association gives you permission. The condominium is not obligated to provide a place for you to install an antenna if you do not have an exclusive use area.
Q: I live in a mobile home that I own but it is located in a park where I rent the lot. Am I covered by the FCC rule?
A: Yes. The rule applies if you install the antenna anywhere on the mobile or manufactured home that is owned by you. The rule also applies to antennas installed on the lot or pad that you rent, as well as to other areas that are under your exclusive use and control. However, the rule does not apply if you want to install the antenna in a common area or other area outside of what you rent.
Q: I want a conventional "stick" antenna to receive a distant over-the air television signal. Does the rule apply to me?
A: No. The rule does not apply to television antennas used to receive a distant signal.
Q: I want to install an antenna for broadcast radio or amateur radio. Does the rule apply to me?
A: No. The rule does not apply to antennas used for AM/FM radio, amateur ("ham") radio (see 47 C.F.R. §97.15), Citizen's Band ("CB") radio or Digital Audio Radio Services ("DARS").
Q: I want to install an antenna to access the Internet. Does the rule apply to me?
A: Yes. Antennas designed to receive and/or transmit data services, including Internet access, are included in the rule.

Q: Does this mean that I can install an antenna that will be used for voice and data services even though it does not provide video transmissions?
A: Yes. The most recent amendment expands the rule and permits you to install an antenna that will be used to transmit and/or receive voice and data services, except as noted above. The rule will also continue to cover antennas used to receive video programming.
Q: I'm a board member of a homeowners' association, and we want to revise our restrictions so that they will comply with the FCC rule. Do you have guidelines you can send me?
A: The Commission does not have sample guidelines because every community is different. We can provide you the rule and the relevant orders, which will give you general guidance. (See list of documents at the end of this Information Sheet. Some communities have written restrictions that provide a prioritized list of placement preferences so that residents can see where the association wants them to install the antenna. The residents should comply with the placement preferences provided the preferred placement does not impose unreasonable delay or expense or preclude reception of an acceptable quality signal.
Q: What restrictions are permitted if the antenna must be on a very tall mast to get a signal?
A: If you have an exclusive use area that is covered by the rule and need to put your antenna on a mast, the local government, community association or landlord may require you to apply for a permit for safety reasons if the mast extends more than 12 feet above the roofline. If you meet the safety requirements, the permit should be granted. Note that the Commission's rule only applies to antennas and masts installed wholly within the antenna user's exclusive use area. Masts that extend beyond the exclusive use area are outside the scope of the rule. For installations on single family homes, the "exclusive use area" generally would be anywhere on the home or lot and the mast height provision is usually most relevant in these situations. For example, if a homeowner needs to install an antenna on a mast that is more than 12 feet taller than the roof of the home, the homeowners' association or local zoning authority may require a permit to ensure the safety of such an installation, but may not prohibit the installation unless there is no way to install it safely. On the other hand, if the owner of a condominium in a building with multiple dwelling units needs to put the antenna on a mast that extends beyond the balcony boundaries, such installation would generally be outside the scope and protection of the rule, and the condominium association may impose any restrictions it wishes (including an outright prohibition) because the Commission rule does not apply in this situation.

Q: Does the rule apply to commercial property or only residential property?
A: Nothing in the rule excludes antennas installed on commercial property. The rule applies to property used for commercial purposes in the same way it applies to residential property.
Q: What can a local government, association, or consumer do if there is a dispute over whether a particular restriction is valid?
A: Restrictions that impair installation, maintenance or use of the antennas covered by the rule are preempted (unenforceable) unless they are needed for safety or historic preservation and are no more burdensome than necessary to accomplish the articulated legitimate safety purpose or for preservation of a designated or eligible historic site or district. If a person believes a restriction is preempted, but the local government, community association, or landlord disagrees, either the person or the restricting entity may file a Petition for Declaratory Ruling with the FCC or a court of competent jurisdiction. We encourage parties to attempt to resolve disputes prior to filing a petition. Often contacting the FCC for information about how the rule works and applies in a particular situation can help to resolve the dispute. If a local government, community association, or landlord acknowledges that its restriction impairs installation, maintenance, or use and is preempted under the rule but believes it can demonstrate "highly specialized or unusual" concerns, the restricting entity may apply to the Commission for a waiver of the rule.
Q: How do I file a petition or request a waiver at the Commission?
A: See Guidance on Filing a Petition at the end of this document.
Q: Can I continue to use my antenna while the petition or waiver request is pending?
A: Yes, unless the restriction being challenged or for which a waiver is sought is necessary for reasons of safety or historic preservation. Otherwise, the restriction cannot be enforced while the petition is pending.
Q: Who is responsible for showing that a restriction is enforceable?
A: When a conflict arises about whether a restriction is valid, the local government, community association, property owner, or management entity that is trying to enforce the restriction has the burden of proving that the restriction is valid. This means that no matter who questions the validity of the restriction, the burden will always be on the entity seeking to enforce the restriction to prove that the restriction is permitted under the rule or that it qualifies for a waiver.

Q: Can I be fined and required to remove my antenna immediately if the Commission determines that a restriction is valid?
A: If the Commission determines that the restriction is valid, you will have a minimum of 21 days to comply with this ruling. If you remove your antenna during this period, in most cases you cannot be fined. However, this 21-day grace period does not apply if the FCC rule does not apply to your installation (for example, if the antenna is installed on a condominium general common element or hanging outside beyond an apartment balcony. If the FCC rule does not apply at all in your case, the 21-day grace period does not apply.
Q: Who do I call if my town, community association or landlord is enforcing an invalid restriction?
A: Call the Federal Communications Commission at (888) CALLFCC (888-225-5322), which is a toll-free number, or 202-418-7096, which is not toll-free. Some assistance may also be available from the direct broadcast satellite company, broadband radio service provider, television broadcast station, or fixed wireless company whose service is desired.

Links to Relevant Orders and the Rule
• (First) Report and Order, FCC 96-328, released August 6, 1996: [ Text Version | WordPerfect Version ]
• Declaratory Ruling, Star Lambert, DA 97-1554, released July 27, 1997: [ Text ]
• Declaratory Ruling, Jay Lubliner, DA 97-2188, released October 14, 1997: [ Text ]
• Declaratory Ruling, Michael MacDonald, DA 97-2189, released October 14, 1997: [ Text ]
• Declaratory Ruling, Omnivision, DA 97-2187, released October 14, 1997: [ Text ]
• Declaratory Ruling, Wireless Broadcasting Systems (WBSS), DA 97-2506, released November 28, 1997: [ WordPerfect | Text ]
• Declaratory Ruling, Victor Frankfurt, DA 97-2305, released December 31, 1997: [ Text ]
• Declaratory Ruling, Jason Peterson, DA 98-0188, released February 4, 1998: [Text ]
• Declaratory Ruling, Jordan Lourie, DA 98-1170, released June 17, 1998: [WordPerfect | Text ]
• Declaratory Ruling, James Sadler, DA 98-1284, released July 1, 1998: [WordPerfect | Text ]
• Memorandum Opinion and Order, Denial of Application of Review of Declaratory Ruling for Jay Lubliner (above), FCC 98-201, released August 21, 1998: [ WordPerfect | Text ]
• Order on Reconsideration, FCC 98-214, released September 25, 1998: [WordPerfect | Text ]
• Second Report and Order, FCC 98-273, released November 20, 1998: [ Text |WordPerfect | Acrobat | News Release and Statements ]
• Declaratory Ruling, Stanley and Vera Holliday, DA 99-2132, released October 8, 1999: [ MSWord | Acrobat ]
• Second Order on Reconsideration, FCC 99-360, released November 24, 1999: [ Text | MSWord ]
• Declaratory Ruling, Bell Atlantic Video, DA 00-927, released April 26, 2000: [ MSWord | Acrobat ]
• Competitive Networks Report and Order, FCC 00-366, released October 25, 2000: [ Text | MSWord | Acrobat | News Release and Statements ]
• Declaratory Ruling, Victor Frankfurt, DA 01-0153, released February 7, 2001: [ MSWord | Acrobat ]
• Declaratory Ruling, Corey Roberts, DA 01-1276, released May 24, 2001: [ MSWord | Acrobat ]
• Memorandum Opinion and Order, Denial of Application of Review of Declaratory Ruling for Victor Frankfurt (above), FCC 03-210, released August 27, 2003 : [ MSWord | Acrobat ]
• Memorandum Opinion and Order, Philip Wojcikewicz, DA 03-2971, released September 29, 2003: [ MSWord | Acrobat ]
• Declaratory Ruling, Michael and Alexandra Pinter, DA 04-2839, released September 1, 2004: [ MSWord | Acrobat ]
• Shadow Wood Condominium Association. Denied the petition for waiver of the Commission's OTARD Rules, 47 C.F.R. 1.4000. (By MO&O [DA 06-100] adopted January 19, 2006 by the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau. [ Word | Acrobat | Text ]
• OTARD Rule, 47 C.F.R. Section 1.4000.
• Petition for Declaratory Ruling Regarding the Over-the-Air Reception Devices (OTARD) Rules, released November 1, 2006.
[ Order: Word | Acrobat; Copps Statement: Word | Acrobat; Adelstein Statement: Word | Acrobat ]
• Memorandum Opinion and Order, Philip Wojcikewicz, FCC 07-98, released May 25, 2007: [ MSWord | Acrobat | Text ]

GUIDANCE ON FILING A PETITION
Q: How do I file a petition or request a waiver at the Commission?
A: There is no special form for a petition. You may simply describe the facts, including the specific restriction(s) that you wish to challenge. If possible, include contact information such as telephone numbers for all parties involved, if available, and attach a copy of the restriction(s) and any relevant correspondence. If this is not possible, be sure to include the exact language of the restriction in question with the petition. General or hypothetical questions about the application or interpretation of the rule cannot be accepted as petitions. To file a Petition for Waiver, follow the requirements in Section 1.4000(c) of the rule. The local government, community association or landlord requesting the waiver must demonstrate "local concerns of a highly specialized or unusual nature."
Petitions for declaratory rulings and waivers must be served on all interested parties. For example, if a homeowners' association files a petition seeking a declaratory ruling that its restriction is not preempted and is seeking to enforce the restriction against a specific resident, service must be made on that specific resident. The homeowners' association will not be required to serve all other members of the association, but must provide reasonable, constructive notice of the proceeding to other residents whose interests foreseeably may be affected. This may be accomplished, for example, by placing notices in residents' mailboxes, by placing a notice on a community bulletin board, or by placing the notice in an association newsletter. If a local government seeks a declaratory ruling or a waiver from the Commission, the local government must take steps to afford reasonable, constructive notice to residents in its jurisdiction (e.g., by placing a notice in a local newspaper of general circulation). Proof of constructive notice must be provided with a petition. In this regard, the petitioner should provide a copy of the notice and an explanation of where the notice was placed and how many people the notice reasonably might have reached.
Finally, if a person files a petition or lawsuit challenging a local government's ordinance, an association's restriction, or a landlord's lease, the person must serve the local government, association or landlord, as appropriate. You must include a "proof of service" with your petition. Generally, the "proof of service" is a statement indicating that on the same day that your petition was sent to the Commission, you provided a copy of your petition (and any attachments) to the person or entity that is seeking to enforce the antenna restriction. The proof of service should give the name and address of the parties served, the date served, and the method of service used (e.g., regular mail, personal service, certified mail).
All allegations of fact contained in petitions and related pleadings before the Commission must be supported by an affidavit signed by one or more persons who have actual knowledge of such facts. You must send an original and two copies of the petition and all attachments to:
Secretary, Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20554
Attention: Media Bureau

- FCC -

Gloria,

Cut and paste at its finest.

But, wouldn't the following link to the FCC Fact Sheet worked nearly as well?

http://www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/otard.html

also posted by Glen in an earlier post.

:-)

Kirk - are you sure that Ham antennas aren't protected? I was under the impression that they had their own special protections as part of a national emergency communications system or something like that. Of course I'm not an operator and I'm just going on hearsay on that, so I may have to do some checking with the person who told me that.

Kirk & Dwight,

In the FCC's ruling asserting a limited pre-emption to local and state governments on ham radio antennas, they went on to say: "the Commission did NOT (my emphasis) extend the limited preemption to covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&Rs) in deeds and in condominium by-laws because they are contractual agreements between private parties." In view of this, HOAs can continue to ban ham radio antennas. There is no Fed law preventing them from doing this!

Ham radio operators have been fighting to get CC&R preemption for years. We have gotten close a couple times in congress. The FCC so far has held to the "you choose to live in an HOA.." line. I have issues with that since congress specifically told the FCC to do something to protect broadcasters. Funny what a little money does isn't it?

At some point I would like to introduce some exemption from the antenna rules for ham radios in our neighborhood. Perhaps I can put a good friend (who is also a ham) up to the act of suggesting it. And in spite of some reports to the contrary, we do still provide the most reliable backup communications for emergencies. All of this is done at our own expense. We are fortunate enough to have many cities donate space for some equipment though.

Wow, so many questions that are with no real pat answers. First, let me explain that ham radio is a very vast hobby with many forms.

The form of space donation that cities often donate is for a repeater. Repeaters simultaneously receive a signal and transmit the same. This is what allow police and business radios to cover large areas. We operate with similar and this is the most common form of communication used for minor emergencies. Because people spend their own time and money with these many areas are covered by repeaters in more locations and with backup power allowing continued communication when other organizations have been wiped out. Also, some even have some they keep ready to be deployed as needed.

There are many other forms including the "short wave" modes that most people think of that allow a radio signal to literally travel the world. These often use the very large antennas that are associated with ham radio. One can also use a very discrete wire that you wouldn't notice. It can also use a flag pole.

Many hams are quite adept at hiding their antennas. This has become an art form. There are antennas for repeater use that appear to be long vent pipes on the roof.

The thing is that there is a very wide variety of antennas. And I can understand you don't want a huge antenna tower near you. But how about a thin white antenna that is barely noticeable? You may have a couple and not realize it.

Unfortunately, many believe that these are responsible for any TV, cable, cell phone interference that is ever experienced. I don't advocate that everyone wants a huge antenna tower in their area. But many are just not interested in any accommodation.

Between almost everyone having cable and now with the digital and fiber optics, i'll bet that the Ham Radios do not interfere at all. Kirk?

By the way, this is what my husband did to our satellite dish:

http://www.vowles-home.demon.co.uk/Sat/images/sat_dish_hide.jpg

(this is not our dish, but this is exactly what he did to ours, only with lighter bricks. . .)

Absolutely no interference with reception.

He used a variety of spray paints.

I didn't really pay attention.

He was working on it in what we here lovingly refer to as "Dexter's Laboratory."

One day he went downstairs with a few bags full of spray paints and his dish, and a few days later he was outside on a ladder re-installing it!

I'll ask him and see what he used.

Bridgette,

Since you're jumping in on a thread that's been going on for awhile, I suggest you start at the beginning. Make note of the FCC website posted and take a look at the FCC ruling regarding satellite dishes. It could be your assn is in violation! Although the assn can place restrictions on placement, to do so may delay the installation which is in direct violation of the FCC ruling. This is a Fed. law which must be upheld by the HOA regardless of what the bylaws say!

Not covenants be damned - the covenant is invalid and therefore unenforceable except at great expense to the HOA to PROVE it would not have cost more, delayed installation and resulted in just as good of a picture if it were placed where the HOA wanted it. This is for single family detached; condos, townhomes and apartments can have stricter rules.

Basic installation price: Not having a dish, I don't know what the installation cost would be, and I can only guess that a service call to move a dish would start at about $79 to $100.

Specific location: That's right. But our covenant does not prescribe where antennas must be located, rather where they may NOT be located, namely,

1) not higher than the highest part of the building (wonder if that includes the top of swamp coolers and/or the top of vent pipes, some of which stick up ridiculously high), and,

2) not in front of the fence line.

I think in my case it is a moot point, because it has been 18 months since the offending installations were identified by the BOD. Although "friendly reminders" have been sent out (and with some success), no firm action has been taken for those who continue to break the covenant.

As an aside, I've seen several situations wherein antennas are practically invisible, and certainly not intrusive in any way, but are nevertheless not located in compliance with the CCRs. And many dishes are in compliance but still stand out sharply against the skyline.

Oh well, it keeps life interesting.

These are all unenforceable.

You can't specify where antennas CANNOT be located. You can ask, but you can't force compliance.

As to #1, FEDERAL LAW says dishes can be mounted on a mast attached to the roof as long as the total height (mast + antenna) does not exceed 12 feet from the highest point on the roof itself.

#2 is unenforceable if the area in front of the fence line is for the exclusive use of the homeowner or under the control of the homeowner.

I continue to be amazed that there are still several HOA board members out there that have never even heard of the otard rules. They've been around long enough.

One other thing I might add. Trying to enforce these covenants can be costly to the association (and thus, to the homeowners). You will most likely have to engage an attorney (at a fee), assuming one will even agree to take the case. D&O insurance won't cover it because that's in case the BOD gets sued, not the other way around. As for the homeowner, all that has to be done is file a complaint with the FCC and request a hearing. That costs the homeowner nothing. The burden of proof that the covenant should be enforced is then upon the HOA.

I highly doubt most members know the covenant is invalid because I would bet most don't even know one exists. The company installing it knows of the ruling but I also highly doubt they advise the clients of that. Instead they suggest the spot for maximum efficiency and clients seeing that other homeowners have done it go ahead and do it.

I think your state is a little more HOA progressive than mine...that has never been something a contractor has discussed with me.

I guess you could copy and paste it into a text document in whatever word processing software you use.

Mary,

I asked my husband about the paint he used to make the brick pattern on our satellite dish.

He said basically any FLAT spray paint will work, but it has to be FLAT, glossy will NOT work well.