Ok I missread it! Sorry guys!
- Original Message -
From: "Ken Arck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 12:56 PM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] State sites
> At 08:09 AM 1/31/2007, you wrote:
>
>>Hello Mike,
>>The American Civ
The State of Minnesota has not restricted amateur radio from its state owned
Department of Transportation (DOT) but has made the sites somewhat less
that ideal by what they will charge an amateur radio group to use them.
1) The DOT figures that only about 10% of the time you will be handling
"eme
That's what I said. Perhaps I missed something, but where does it say
that a tower owner HAS to allow anyone to use space on their tower?
Ken Arck wrote:
At 08:09 AM 1/31/2007, you wrote:
>Hello Mike,
>The American Civil Liberties Union sure would love this.
<--Huh???
--
At 08:09 AM 1/31/2007, you wrote:
>Hello Mike,
>The American Civil Liberties Union sure would love this.
<--Huh???
--
President and CTO - Arcom Communications
Makers of the world famous RC210 Repeater Contr
dnesday, January 31, 2007 10:03 AM
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] State sites
> Ha anybody ran across someone in there state that has threatened a state
> agency if they don't allow them to install there repeater. We have such an
> indvudel here in Oregon. Now that this indivudel has thr
, 2007 9:04 AM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] State sites
Has anybody ran across someone in their state that has threatened a state
agency if they don't allow them to install their repeater.
Ha anybody ran across someone in there state that has threatened a state
agency if they don't allow them to install there repeater. We have such an
indvudel here in Oregon. Now that this indivudel has threatened to sick the
media and governor on them for politely saying no, we don't allow amateur o
7 matches
Mail list logo
