Oct 2004
City Paper article: Please Stand By
Wed., Oct. 20, 2004 Filed in: public access
news
By Edward Ericson Jr.
A months-long campaign by advocates of public-access television bore fruit last week when the City Council agreed to delay action on a new cable-television contract with cable provider Comcast...(click here for rest of article on City Paper website)
A months-long campaign by advocates of public-access television bore fruit last week when the City Council agreed to delay action on a new cable-television contract with cable provider Comcast...(click here for rest of article on City Paper website)
Board of Estimates, Mayor to Consider Fate of Baltimore’s Public Access TV
Tue., Oct. 19, 2004 Filed in: BGM press
releases
Mayor O’Malley’s Own Cable Experts Say
Better PATV Provisions are Needed, but Comcast is a
Major Contributor
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Amanda Bowers: (410) 371-8218
WHAT: Public Hearing before the Board of Estimates on Proposed Contract with Comcast
WHEN: Wednesday, Oct. 20, 9:00 AM
WHERE: City Hall, 100 N. Holliday St.
BALTIMORE, MD—The Board of Estimates, in which Mayor O’Malley and his appointees hold the majority of the seats, is scheduled to consider the City’s proposed cable franchise agreement Wednesday morning. Under the agreement’s terms, Comcast, the nation’s largest cable company, would not dedicate any operating funds to public access television (PATV). Advocacy groups such as Baltimore Grassroots Media (BGM) and the Mayor’s own cable policy advisors are urging the City to hold out for better terms.
“The hearing will give the Mayor the opportunity to put the needs and interests of his constituents ahead of the interests of a cable giant that happens to contribute to his campaign,” said Amanda Bowers, a BGM spokesperson. “On Wednesday, we will learn who Mayor O’Malley really represents.”
The Sun reported on October 14 that “O’Malley’s administration supports the deal” with Comcast. However, Marilyn Harris-Davis, Executive Director of the Mayor’s Office of Cable & Communications, told The Baltimore Chronicle in September that it would be “a good thing” if the City required Comcast “to give us more money”—though officially the MOCC recommended approving the contract. Also, members of the Mayor’s own cable advisory commission said at their last public meeting that the contract should be rejected because of its inadequate cable access provisions.
The Baltimore Chronicle also reported that the City’s Law Department, acting on behalf of the Mayor’s Office, made no attempt to negotiate for PATV operating funds during the franchise negotiations with Comcast. (See http://baltimorechronicle.com/090904BradCarlton.html.) Yet the cable contracts in many other cities provide for public access operating expenses. Washington DC’s new contract with Comcast dedicates 1% of the local cable revenues specifically for public access operating costs, plus another third of a percent for capital costs. Montgomery County—whose County Executive, Doug Duncan, is Mayor O’Malley’s strongest potential challenger for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination—receives millions of dollars annually for public access operational expenses from the cable company.
“Why isn’t the City trying to build on the recent successful contracts in other cities to make Baltimore the new standard?” asked Mike Shea, a volunteer for public access Channel 5. “Does the Mayor ‘believe’ that the people of Baltimore deserve less from the cable company than the people of DC and other cities?”
O’Malley has received more than $8,000 in campaign contributions from Comcast and its executives. City Council President Sheila Dixon and City Comptroller Joan Pratt, who fill the seats on the Board of Estimates not appointed by the Mayor, have received more than $4,000 and $1,000, respectively, from Comcast and its executives.
One of the Mayor’s appointees to the Board of Estimates, City Solicitor Ralph S. Tyler, told the Sun that “if the bill fails, a federal regulatory board could force the city to adopt a contract that provides even less funding for cable access channels.”
That argument is a “red herring,” according to James Horwood, an attorney with the Spiegel & McDiarmid law firm and one of the nation’s foremost experts in telecommunications laws. “There’s no reason to rush into something that doesn’t seem to be good,” Horwood said. “Certainly if the City has a needs assessment showing community needs that aren’t met, then you shouldn't do worse. You should be able to do better.”
The City did in fact commission a Community Needs Assessment survey, which demonstrated that Baltimore’s cable needs include 10% of the digital bandwidth (unprovided for in the contract) and sustained funding for all three cable access entities, sometimes known as “PEG,” which includes the government cable access and education access. The “P” stands for “people,” or “public access.” Currently, only the government access station has sustained funding. Public access has no funding at all.
Members of the O’Malley administration have publicly stated that a public access operator could raise much of its budget through fundraising. However, according to Dr. Jonathan Shorr, chairman of the Mayor’s own Cable Advisory Commission, no public access station in the country has ever been able to rely on fundraising for more than 15% of their annual budget.
Not only does the proposed contract leave public access without operating funds, it allows the Mayor’s Office sole discretion for the dispersal of capital funds to all three PEG entities. Under the current agreement, the Mayor’s office directs all PEG money to the government access station (which has a $1.1 million annual budget) and zero dollars to public access, despite the money it receives for PEG from its Baltimore Harbor cable contract with Flight Systems and the leasing of another cable access channel.
The Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984 allows a local government to deny renewal of a cable franchise if the cable company does not “meet the future cable-related community needs and interests, taking into account the cost of meeting such needs and interests.”
Baltimore Grassroots Media believes that the proposed contract does not meet this standard and calls on the City to reject it because it:
does not allocate specific funding for public access TV
allocates an insufficient amount of capital funds for all of P,E, and G
provides no money for operating expenses
leaves cable subscribers to bear the cost of PEG rather than Comcast of Baltimore
reduces the number of PEG channels
would not be renegotiated for 12 years, too long a period in an era of rapid technology changes
Comcast can afford to do better for the people of Baltimore. Comcast of Baltimore has earned $270 million in gross revenue from cable services alone since July 2001. The company has made over $100 million during that time through its use of Baltimore’s public easements, and should be obligated to provide Baltimore’s communities full, yearly renewable PATV funding.
Public access television allows any citizen to exercise their free speech rights through access to channels devoted specifically for that purpose. It provides training and jobs for people interested in communications and technology fields, and it provides a healthy outlet for our youth to express themselves and learn valuable skills.
“Mayor O’Malley often says that the Baltimore is the ‘Greatest City in America,’ said Bowers. “Doesn’t the best city deserve the best public access resources opportunities for its constituents? We will find out Wednesday whether the Mayor thinks so.”
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Amanda Bowers: (410) 371-8218
WHAT: Public Hearing before the Board of Estimates on Proposed Contract with Comcast
WHEN: Wednesday, Oct. 20, 9:00 AM
WHERE: City Hall, 100 N. Holliday St.
BALTIMORE, MD—The Board of Estimates, in which Mayor O’Malley and his appointees hold the majority of the seats, is scheduled to consider the City’s proposed cable franchise agreement Wednesday morning. Under the agreement’s terms, Comcast, the nation’s largest cable company, would not dedicate any operating funds to public access television (PATV). Advocacy groups such as Baltimore Grassroots Media (BGM) and the Mayor’s own cable policy advisors are urging the City to hold out for better terms.
“The hearing will give the Mayor the opportunity to put the needs and interests of his constituents ahead of the interests of a cable giant that happens to contribute to his campaign,” said Amanda Bowers, a BGM spokesperson. “On Wednesday, we will learn who Mayor O’Malley really represents.”
The Sun reported on October 14 that “O’Malley’s administration supports the deal” with Comcast. However, Marilyn Harris-Davis, Executive Director of the Mayor’s Office of Cable & Communications, told The Baltimore Chronicle in September that it would be “a good thing” if the City required Comcast “to give us more money”—though officially the MOCC recommended approving the contract. Also, members of the Mayor’s own cable advisory commission said at their last public meeting that the contract should be rejected because of its inadequate cable access provisions.
The Baltimore Chronicle also reported that the City’s Law Department, acting on behalf of the Mayor’s Office, made no attempt to negotiate for PATV operating funds during the franchise negotiations with Comcast. (See http://baltimorechronicle.com/090904BradCarlton.html.) Yet the cable contracts in many other cities provide for public access operating expenses. Washington DC’s new contract with Comcast dedicates 1% of the local cable revenues specifically for public access operating costs, plus another third of a percent for capital costs. Montgomery County—whose County Executive, Doug Duncan, is Mayor O’Malley’s strongest potential challenger for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination—receives millions of dollars annually for public access operational expenses from the cable company.
“Why isn’t the City trying to build on the recent successful contracts in other cities to make Baltimore the new standard?” asked Mike Shea, a volunteer for public access Channel 5. “Does the Mayor ‘believe’ that the people of Baltimore deserve less from the cable company than the people of DC and other cities?”
O’Malley has received more than $8,000 in campaign contributions from Comcast and its executives. City Council President Sheila Dixon and City Comptroller Joan Pratt, who fill the seats on the Board of Estimates not appointed by the Mayor, have received more than $4,000 and $1,000, respectively, from Comcast and its executives.
One of the Mayor’s appointees to the Board of Estimates, City Solicitor Ralph S. Tyler, told the Sun that “if the bill fails, a federal regulatory board could force the city to adopt a contract that provides even less funding for cable access channels.”
That argument is a “red herring,” according to James Horwood, an attorney with the Spiegel & McDiarmid law firm and one of the nation’s foremost experts in telecommunications laws. “There’s no reason to rush into something that doesn’t seem to be good,” Horwood said. “Certainly if the City has a needs assessment showing community needs that aren’t met, then you shouldn't do worse. You should be able to do better.”
The City did in fact commission a Community Needs Assessment survey, which demonstrated that Baltimore’s cable needs include 10% of the digital bandwidth (unprovided for in the contract) and sustained funding for all three cable access entities, sometimes known as “PEG,” which includes the government cable access and education access. The “P” stands for “people,” or “public access.” Currently, only the government access station has sustained funding. Public access has no funding at all.
Members of the O’Malley administration have publicly stated that a public access operator could raise much of its budget through fundraising. However, according to Dr. Jonathan Shorr, chairman of the Mayor’s own Cable Advisory Commission, no public access station in the country has ever been able to rely on fundraising for more than 15% of their annual budget.
Not only does the proposed contract leave public access without operating funds, it allows the Mayor’s Office sole discretion for the dispersal of capital funds to all three PEG entities. Under the current agreement, the Mayor’s office directs all PEG money to the government access station (which has a $1.1 million annual budget) and zero dollars to public access, despite the money it receives for PEG from its Baltimore Harbor cable contract with Flight Systems and the leasing of another cable access channel.
The Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984 allows a local government to deny renewal of a cable franchise if the cable company does not “meet the future cable-related community needs and interests, taking into account the cost of meeting such needs and interests.”
Baltimore Grassroots Media believes that the proposed contract does not meet this standard and calls on the City to reject it because it:
does not allocate specific funding for public access TV
allocates an insufficient amount of capital funds for all of P,E, and G
provides no money for operating expenses
leaves cable subscribers to bear the cost of PEG rather than Comcast of Baltimore
reduces the number of PEG channels
would not be renegotiated for 12 years, too long a period in an era of rapid technology changes
Comcast can afford to do better for the people of Baltimore. Comcast of Baltimore has earned $270 million in gross revenue from cable services alone since July 2001. The company has made over $100 million during that time through its use of Baltimore’s public easements, and should be obligated to provide Baltimore’s communities full, yearly renewable PATV funding.
Public access television allows any citizen to exercise their free speech rights through access to channels devoted specifically for that purpose. It provides training and jobs for people interested in communications and technology fields, and it provides a healthy outlet for our youth to express themselves and learn valuable skills.
“Mayor O’Malley often says that the Baltimore is the ‘Greatest City in America,’ said Bowers. “Doesn’t the best city deserve the best public access resources opportunities for its constituents? We will find out Wednesday whether the Mayor thinks so.”
Thanks to all of you who came out to the Oct 13th Public Hearing!!
Sun., Oct. 17, 2004 Filed in: public access
news
Public hearing
regarding the Comcast franchise renewal
Over 40 people testified, most of whom made it clear that the "P" -- the People -- in PEG TV must be protected by including specifically allocated, yearly renewable funding for public access operating expenses.
Judy Lombardi, an enthusiastic public access supporter, wrote the following about what took place on 10/13:
"Baltimore Grassroots Media, as well as the majority of the people present and testifying at City Hall at the Public Hearing on Wednesday, Oct. 13th, made it clear that the "done deal" -- the new cable franchise contract that has been negotiated between the City of Baltimore and Comcast Corporation -- is not done yet!
The presentation of the facts by Baltimore Grassroots Media regarding what other jurisdictions have been able to negotiate in terms of funding for the "P" -- the People -- in PEG - was fantastic, and must continue to be a central focus of Baltimore Grassroots Media's position.
In addition we must demand -- yes demand! -- that specifically allocated funding for the "P" in PEG be part of the Comcast/City of Baltimore agreement. This is fundamental, since we know that without specifically allocated funds, public access television, which represents the People, is doomed to failure.
Democracy is dependent on access to social, political and economic facts. Yet in this age where, as so eloquently stated by Amy Goodman of Democracy Now!, "there is so much mass media and so little news," the facts are harder and harder to access. This is why the People -- including the people of Baltimore -- are demanding direct access to televised media, so that their voice will be heard. This is why the "P" in PEG must be fully and fairly funded. A decision to do anything less than this will hurt the City of Baltimore and its citizens, and they deserve much, much better."
Baltimore Sun coverage of the Oct. 13th Hearing
Baltimore Indymedia piece, "Oct 13: Final Hearing on Public Access TV" (many thanks to Jim George)
PowerPoint Presentation to the City Council at Oct 13th Public Hearing (requires MS PowerPoint)
Over 40 people testified, most of whom made it clear that the "P" -- the People -- in PEG TV must be protected by including specifically allocated, yearly renewable funding for public access operating expenses.
Judy Lombardi, an enthusiastic public access supporter, wrote the following about what took place on 10/13:
"Baltimore Grassroots Media, as well as the majority of the people present and testifying at City Hall at the Public Hearing on Wednesday, Oct. 13th, made it clear that the "done deal" -- the new cable franchise contract that has been negotiated between the City of Baltimore and Comcast Corporation -- is not done yet!
The presentation of the facts by Baltimore Grassroots Media regarding what other jurisdictions have been able to negotiate in terms of funding for the "P" -- the People -- in PEG - was fantastic, and must continue to be a central focus of Baltimore Grassroots Media's position.
In addition we must demand -- yes demand! -- that specifically allocated funding for the "P" in PEG be part of the Comcast/City of Baltimore agreement. This is fundamental, since we know that without specifically allocated funds, public access television, which represents the People, is doomed to failure.
Democracy is dependent on access to social, political and economic facts. Yet in this age where, as so eloquently stated by Amy Goodman of Democracy Now!, "there is so much mass media and so little news," the facts are harder and harder to access. This is why the People -- including the people of Baltimore -- are demanding direct access to televised media, so that their voice will be heard. This is why the "P" in PEG must be fully and fairly funded. A decision to do anything less than this will hurt the City of Baltimore and its citizens, and they deserve much, much better."
Baltimore Sun coverage of the Oct. 13th Hearing
Baltimore Indymedia piece, "Oct 13: Final Hearing on Public Access TV" (many thanks to Jim George)
PowerPoint Presentation to the City Council at Oct 13th Public Hearing (requires MS PowerPoint)
Rally/City Council Hearing
Wed., Oct. 13, 2004 Filed in: public access
news
When: 10/13/2004 4:00 PM - 10/13/2004 8:00 PM
Where: In front of City Hall (free food will be served)
Rally to Save Public Access TV followed by City Council Hearing on Cable Contract
The Baltimore City Council hearing on the proposed Comcast contract will follow the rally at 5 PM. At the hearing the city, Comcast and Public Access advocates will give presentations before the floor is opened for public comment.
After suffering a flawed 20-year cable contract, this is our opportunity to finally secure funding for non-commercial, non-governmental, free speech TV where we can create and show our own programs.
Come out to show that the people of Baltimore know how important Public Access is and that we won't be denied what other cities have.
The City's proposed contract does not provide any funding specifically for Public Access. The cable contracts of other cities provide millions of dollars for Public Access TV.
Since the City Council cannot modify the contract - they can only vote it up or down - they must reject it!
It's up us to educate and embolden our council members to do the right thing for their constituents.
Put the P in PEG! Support direct funding for Public Access TV!
More Info:
Public Access TV, cable channel 5, is the only channel covering the League of Women Voters City Council candidate forums, showing "Democracy Now!" and Baltimore's own "ROCing 'D' VOTE voter education show. It also shows local youth-produced programs, religious programs, music concerts, art exhibits, people fighting back to improve their communities, etc.
You may hear that there is funding for Public Access in the proposed contract, but this is not true. It is for Public, Education and Government Access (PEG). The Government Access (G) channel, which currently has a $1.1 million per year budget, will get to decide how the PEG money is divvied up, and are on record saying they will probably use most of it for the Government channel. In contrast, cable contracts in municipalities with vibrant public access facilities specify ongoing funding and facilities directly for the independent organizations that manage Public Access (P).
Some other problems with the proposed contract are that it reduces the number of channels available for public access and does not provide a percentage of digital bandwidth, there is no "signal input point" specified for the public access facility, and the length of the contract, though
reduced from 20 to 12 years, is still too long given the rapid changes in the cable industry.
Contact your City Council representatives (http://www.baltimorecitycouncil.com/members.htm) and ask them to vote NO to the proposed Comcast contract (Bill 04-1504).
For more info contact: 410-779-2184
Where: In front of City Hall (free food will be served)
Rally to Save Public Access TV followed by City Council Hearing on Cable Contract
The Baltimore City Council hearing on the proposed Comcast contract will follow the rally at 5 PM. At the hearing the city, Comcast and Public Access advocates will give presentations before the floor is opened for public comment.
After suffering a flawed 20-year cable contract, this is our opportunity to finally secure funding for non-commercial, non-governmental, free speech TV where we can create and show our own programs.
Come out to show that the people of Baltimore know how important Public Access is and that we won't be denied what other cities have.
The City's proposed contract does not provide any funding specifically for Public Access. The cable contracts of other cities provide millions of dollars for Public Access TV.
Since the City Council cannot modify the contract - they can only vote it up or down - they must reject it!
It's up us to educate and embolden our council members to do the right thing for their constituents.
Put the P in PEG! Support direct funding for Public Access TV!
More Info:
Public Access TV, cable channel 5, is the only channel covering the League of Women Voters City Council candidate forums, showing "Democracy Now!" and Baltimore's own "ROCing 'D' VOTE voter education show. It also shows local youth-produced programs, religious programs, music concerts, art exhibits, people fighting back to improve their communities, etc.
You may hear that there is funding for Public Access in the proposed contract, but this is not true. It is for Public, Education and Government Access (PEG). The Government Access (G) channel, which currently has a $1.1 million per year budget, will get to decide how the PEG money is divvied up, and are on record saying they will probably use most of it for the Government channel. In contrast, cable contracts in municipalities with vibrant public access facilities specify ongoing funding and facilities directly for the independent organizations that manage Public Access (P).
Some other problems with the proposed contract are that it reduces the number of channels available for public access and does not provide a percentage of digital bandwidth, there is no "signal input point" specified for the public access facility, and the length of the contract, though
reduced from 20 to 12 years, is still too long given the rapid changes in the cable industry.
Contact your City Council representatives (http://www.baltimorecitycouncil.com/members.htm) and ask them to vote NO to the proposed Comcast contract (Bill 04-1504).
For more info contact: 410-779-2184