Save Access

from: Gresham Outlook

Community television weakened by FCC
By Rob Brading
Oct 5, 2007

When Congress didn’t enact telecommunications legislation in late 2006, local governments and advocates of media that’s less concentrated, more diverse and more local breathed a sigh of relief. Less than a year later, those same folks are wondering if they should have paid more heed to the old adage about being careful what you wish for.

Congress didn’t act on legislation that would have severely weakened or eliminated local video franchising for telephone companies, so those companies took their lobbying prowess to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The FCC, an appointed body that for the last several years has ignored overwhelming displays of public opinion on issues such as the concentration of media ownership and given media giants ever more power and reach, stepped in with a foot print that dwarfs Shaquille O’Neal’s size 23s.

Phone companies such as Verizon and Qwest want to provide the same video services as cable companies. Almost everyone welcomes the prospect of competition, but the telephone companies succeeded in tilting the playing field to their advantage by convincing the FCC to eliminate their need to negotiate with local governments for the use of public rights of way. This despite the fact that they can get a local franchise simply by agreeing to the terms of the existing cable company franchise.

Video franchise agreements between local governments and cable operators usually provide for an array of services to localities in exchange for the operator’s use of public property. Institutional networks (I-Nets) provide secure connections to municipal buildings, police and fire stations, courts and jails, schools, libraries, senior centers and hospitals. In many communities, these networks also serve as the linchpin of emergency communications. And here in East Metro, community television channels provide the only truly local television programming, whether it’s the Teddy Bear Parade, Troutdale’s SummerFest, performances by school bands and choirs, local candidate forums, local non-profit organizations talking about their work and mission or our local elected officials in action on city councils, commissions and school boards. The FCC’s order appears to eliminate crucial in-kind services as well as unilaterally reducing the fees paid to support community television channels.

The FCC is already being sued by the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors (NATOA), the National League of Cities and several organizations representing consumers, cities, towns, counties and non-profits because, in their view, the FCC action strips local governments of their authority to protect the public health, education, welfare and safety of local residents, in violation of federal law.

Once the FCC gave the telephone companies what they wanted, cable companies predictably and understandably were next in line. And the FCC is expected to give the cable companies what they want. But as damaging as the FCC’s dispensations were, their proposed largesse for cable companies promise chaos and pain for local governments and citizens across the country.

We hear frequently that a contract is a contract. But not when the FCC is involved. They appear determined to change the rules in the middle of the game by giving any video provider that currently has a contract with a local government the right to renegotiate that contract. And you can bet those companies will be looking to escape their public interest obligations, not enhance them. These renegotiations will put first-responder communications, community television channels, telecommunications infrastructure that serves our local governments and schools and millions of dollars of franchise fees at risk.

Far from simplifying or streamlining matters, the FCC will multiply the potential problems and disputes that cities have with land-line video providers. Here in the East Metro area, the new FCC order could cripple our local government’s emergency services communications, cost our local schools thousands and thousands of dollars in increased costs for Internet and telephone services, eliminate community television channels and deprive local governments of fair payment for the use of public rights of way.

These FCC rulings will create chaos and uncertainty for our communities and budget gaps that local governments will close by reducing critical local services or raising fees and taxes. It’s not surprising, given its bureaucratic nature, and self-imposed distance from the needs of local communities, that the FCC moves forward regardless of wishes of the public. But it’s unfortunate and unfair that our local residents will pay the price for the blunders of an out-of-touch agency.

Rob Brading is the chief executive officer of MetroEast Community Media.