My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-17-1986 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1986
>
11-17-1986 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/18/2024 10:06:35 AM
Creation date
1/18/2024 10:00:41 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
186
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
8Federal and local Interests can be accommodated without preempting local authority to regulate the Installation of amateur radio antennas. The APA <br />said that the TO should continue to leave the Issue of regulating amateur <br />antennas with the local government and with the state and Federal courts. <br />DIscugg fnn <br />20. When considering preemption, we must begin with two <br />constitutional provisions. The tenth amendment provides that any powers <br />which the constitution either does not delegate to the United States or <br />does not prohibit the states from exercising are reserved to the states <br />These are the police powers of the states. The Supremacy Clause, however, <br />provides that the constitution and the laws of the United States shall <br />supersede any state law to the contrary. Article III, Section 2. Given <br />these basic premises, state laws may be preempted In three ways: First, <br />Congress may expressly preempt the state law. See Jones v. Rath ParUnn <br />Cfl., 430 U.S. 519, 525 (1977). Or, Congress may Indlcate Its Intent to <br />complete y occupy a given field so that any state law encompassed within <br />that f eld would ImpIIcIty be preempted. Such Intent to preempt could be <br />found In a congressional regulatory scheme that was so pervasive that <br />ft would be reasonable to assume that Congress did not Intend to permit <br />the states to supplement It. See "Idellty Federal Snvinng a Acet» <br />ALujJfi la CufiStn, 458 U.S. 141, 153 (1982). Finally, preemption may be <br />warranted when state law conflicts with federal law. Such conflicts <br />may occur when "compliance with both Federal and state regulations Is <br />373 U.S. 132, 142, 143 (1963), or when state law "stands as an obstacle <br />to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives <br />of Congress," HJnes Y. DnyIdOtfItZ, 312 U.S. 52, 67 (1941). Furthermore, <br />federal regulations have the same preemptive effect as federal statutes. <br />Fidelity Federal Savings A Loan Assoelatlon v/. la supra. <br />before us requires us to determine the extent <br />to which state and local zoning regulations may conflict with federal <br />policies concerning amateur radio operatorse <br />t <br />22. Few matters coming before us present such a clear dichotomy <br />of viewpoint as does the Instant Issue. The cities, counties, local <br />communities and housing associations see an obligation to all of their <br />citizens and try to address their concerns. This Is accomplished <br />through regulations, ordinances or covenants oriented toward the health, <br />safety and general welfare of those they regulate. At the opposite <br />pole are the Individual amateur operators and their support groups who <br />are troubled by local regulations which may Inhibit the use of amateur <br />stations or. In some Instances, totally preclude amateur communications. <br />Aligned with the operators are such entitles as the Department of Defense, <br />the American Red Cross and local civil defense and emergency organizations <br />who have found In Amateur Radio a pool of skilled radio operators and a
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.