|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Feature
|
|
News :: Media |
|
Champaign City Staff Aims to Torpedo New Public Access TV Channel |
Current rating: 0 |
by Randall Cotton
Email: recotton (nospam) earthlink.net (unverified!)
Phone: 217-722-8470 |
07 May 2006
|
|
This Tuesday, May 9th at 7PM, the Champaign City Council will consider the future of Public Access Cable TV in our community. And although there has been considerable community support building over the past two years for the creation of a new, dedicated Public Access Cable TV channel, the Champaign city administration is mounting a surprise 11th-hour effort to dissuade the Champaign City Council from providing any support for Public Access Cable TV for perhaps the next 15 years. Instead, they are proposing a substantial funding increase to equip and staff the government-only cable channel they already run, which has no public access. A strong public turnout will be necessary at Tuesday's meeting in order to ensure community efforts to establish a new Public Access TV channel are not dashed by Champaign's city staff. |
Summary:
This Tuesday, May 9th at 7PM, the Champaign City Council will consider the future of Public Access Cable TV in our community. And although there has been considerable community support building over the past two years for the creation of a new, dedicated Public Access Cable TV channel, the Champaign city administration is mounting a surprise 11th-hour effort to dissuade the Champaign City Council from providing any support for Public Access Cable TV for perhaps the next 15 years. Instead, they are proposing a substantial funding increase to equip and staff the government-only cable channel they already run, which has no public access. A strong public turnout will be necessary at Tuesday's meeting in order to ensure community efforts to establish a new Public Access TV channel are not dashed by Champaign's city staff.
What’s at stake:
This is the single most critical moment, to date, in the effort to win the kind of Public Access Cable TV facilities our community deserves. Strong community turnout at the City Council Chambers (ground floor, city of Champaign building, 102 N. Neil St.) for the 7PM "study session" meeting of the Council will be decisive in convincing them to reject the city staff's recommendation to completely forego support for Public Access Cable TV. The Champaign City Council is the last governmental entity that would need to sign on in support of this new channel. Support has already been provided by all other relevant governmental bodies, including:
1. Champaign-Urbana Cable Television & Telecommunications Commission (January 18, 2005)
2. Urbana Public Television Commission (Dec. 12, 2005)
3. Urbana City Council (March 6, 2006 City Council Resolution 2006-02-007R)
These bodies have all supported the recommendation to create a new, dedicated Public Access cable TV channel managed by a non-profit Community Media Center and funded by our cable provider, Insight Communications (as part of a new cable franchise contract). But if the Champaign City Council chooses to reject supporting Public Access Cable TV, this will destroy the community's chances (for many years) to obtain the community-building, democracy-vitalizing free speech public platform that Champaign/Urbana deserves. The duration of the current cable franchise contract is 15 years. If the renewal is just as long, our community won't have a chance to improve our Public Access facilities until after the year 2020! Here's a summary of the envisioned facilities at stake in the recommendations (which would be funded by cable company revenues, not local taxes):
1. A cable channel just for Public Access, managed by an independent, non-profit Community Media Center governed by a Board of Directors including public-access media enthusiasts from the community.
2. Dedicated live, interactive call-in, and production TV studios for community use.
3. Media production training and support services from hired professional staff.
4. Affordable services to assist with or perform video production for local non-profit organizations.
5. Live broadcast capability from anywhere in the community using a portable production unit and remote location van.
6. Video-on-demand technology which will allow viewers to choose what Public Access programming to view at their convenience with pause, fast-forward and reverse functions.
The current state of affairs:
Currently, our community's limited Public Access service available through Urbana Public Television (UPTV - cable channel 6) is controlled by the City of Urbana bureaucracy, which yields service that is less responsive and accountable to the public than a Community Media Center management model. Since UPTV isn't even funded at all by Champaign, its resources are limited. UPTV does not feature the facilities described above (though some informal training is provided). In addition, the complete control of UPTV by the municipal government has led to repeated instances of political tampering with the station's programming (e.g. Democracy Now!, VEYA/Miller/Thompson cop-watch video, etc.). A separate, independent, fully-funded non-profit organization managing its own public access channel is the preferred and recommended model that will provide our community's diverse array of community groups, non-profit organizations, schools, social clubs, churches, neighborhood associations, action groups, children's centers, adult education facilities and area citizens with the quality of Public Access Cable TV we deserve.
What we could have if we only insist on it:
A high level of Public Access TV services surrounding a vibrant Public Access Cable TV channel (something we've never really had in Champaign/Urbana) will foster a greater sense of community and enhance our quality of life:
Non-profit organizations would have excellent new opportunities to create video programming that will allow them to publicize the work they do, attract new volunteers, request financial support and in some cases even provide training videos to instruct their own organizations or provide public-service instruction to the community at large.
Community discussion and debate in the form of live call-in talk shows, interactive televised political debates and town meetings will encourage and assist local residents to become more informed and involved in their community's schools, government, churches and other institutions.
Local community events such as public concerts and performances, speaking engagements or school events such as high school athletic games could be broadcast live and then rebroadcast later as well.
Also, providing a true "free-speech" forum will allow our local community to express ideas and opinions outside the increasingly narrow range available on commercial media. As commercial media becomes increasingly homogenized and consolidated into fewer and fewer very large corporations, programming that touches on local news, issues and events is gradually fading away in the interest of greater profits. As media channels become increasingly owned by national corporate behemoths that are progressively being influenced more and more by large corporate advertisers and even the federal government, community-controlled, locally-originated programming and channels will become increasingly valued over time.
And with emerging video-on-demand technology already being implemented elsewhere in the country (e.g. Shrewsbury, Massachusetts), public-access programming can be played on demand at the touch of a button on a subscriber's remote control, greatly magnifying all these benefits.
Vital and vibrant Public Access Cable TV has great potential to bind our community tighter, encouraging folks to become more involved and connected within our community and increasing our qualify of life. And it could be entirely funded not by tax revenues, but by the cable company itself from their millions of dollars of revenue. Cable franchises are guaranteed money-making monopolies. Profit margins in the cable industry are estimated to be as high as 40% (according to Sue Buske of The Buske Group - www.buskegroup.com , who was consulted by the Champaign-Urbana Cable Television & Telecommunications Commission). And with new digital video tiers, Internet access and telephone services coming on-line nationwide, cable company revenues are projected to more than double in the next 10 years (Kagan Research, LLC, 2005). The funding of local public access facilities can be easily absorbed by the cable company - it's just a matter of the cities negotiating it into the cable franchise contract (which is currently up for renewal).
The surprise road-block:
However, the City of Champaign management staff (and potentially the City Council, which is strongly influenced by the staff) intends to stand in the way of all this. A staff report to be presented by City Manager Steve Carter at this Tuesday's City Council study session declares on page 6 that "Staff recommends Council not support the establishment and funding of a new public access channel." The full staff report, which was published just yesterday (Friday, May 5) is available on-line at:
archive.ci.champaign.il.us/archive/dsweb/Get/Document-3975/SS%202006-029.pdf
(note: this is a very large download - 10MB)
The primary argument the staff uses to justify disregarding the recommendations of the three other government bodies supporting a new channel is "City staff does not believe there is sufficient public interest in a new public access channel" (again, page 6). Yet that same staff report includes, as an attachment, a Public Access Study Committee report (to which I contributed as a member of that committee) that describes how "The Committee finds there is a high level of interest in Public Access in this community" (on page 15 in Chapter 9). That same chapter ("Assessment of Local Interest in Public Access") also describes how:
1. over 500 community members signed a petition in favor of a "fully-funded, independent non-profit community Public Access Television Center with dedicated public-access cable channels" (page 21)
2. there has been a recent "dramatic growth" in use of the existing (somewhat limited) Public Access cable facility (UPTV), having grown from 12 members in 2002 to around 200 now in 2006 and forecast to grow to nearly 500 by 2009, when the current cable franchise contract ends (page 21). Interestingly, about half of all UPTV members are actually residents of Champaign.
3. in response to a survey of community organizations (76 organizations responding), 95% of the respondents said their organization has a need to communicate with the public, 91% indicated that if staff from a Public Access center could be used to make videos for their organization, they would use this service. 93% said they would make use of a low-cost community camera crew or community video production service (pages 15 through 17).
There is a clear disconnect between the findings above and City staff's statement that they do not "believe there is sufficient public interest in a new public access channel".
Ironically, immediately after recommending against any funding of public access facilities, the city staff recommended (page 6) increasing the franchise-related fees charged to the cable-company by 66% (from 3% of cable company revenues to 5% - about $225,000 annually) to fund the government-only cable channel that they already operate (CGTV - cable channel 5) . That is, they are recommending a dramatic new increase in funding for equipment and staffing at their own cable channel, but none for public access.
In this way, their recommendation appears to disregard the clear public interest in improved Public Access Cable TV in favor of self-serving funding increases for their own existing operations.
Another curious justification the City staff puts forth as a "disadvantage" to supporting a public access channel is that "Though supported by City dollars, programming content on Public Access has First Amendment protections and could not be controlled" (page 7). Of course, that statement misrepresents where the funding would originate (cable company revenues), but more seriously it seems to represent an unsettling contempt for free speech.
The time to act is now!
Our community will likely have only one chance to speak out in opposition to these developments. The best way for our representatives on the Champaign City Council to learn of the true public interest in Public Access cable TV (and the free-speech forum it provides) is to have a strong public turnout at this week's Champaign City Council meeting (again, 7PM Tuesday, May 9th, in the City Council Chambers, ground floor, 102 N. Neil St.) This is a crucial and defining moment in the effort by our community and parts of our government to finally establish the forward-looking, community-building Public Access Cable TV facilities that our towns deserve. Our Public Access resources have fallen behind other similar municipalities around the country. If our community doesn't mobilize now and speak out on Tuesday, we may have to live with feeble and increasingly inadequate Public Access resources for more than a decade. Our community deserves better. |
Related stories on this site:
Point-by-point response to Champaign City Staff recommendation against cable-company funding of Public Access Cable TV
| 
This work is in the public domain. |
Comments
|
Re: Champaign City Staff Aims to Torpedo New Public Access TV Channel |
by an answer
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
08 May 2006
|
Madison has WYOU with its own center. It is very active and popular.
Chicago has WYOU - also a stand alone channel. Extremely active and popular.
See dozens listed here: http://www.communitymedia.se/cat/linksca.htm
In short, public access does not work with coupled with a government channel - it gets controlled and squeezed out. So lots of communities are moving towards stand alone channels.
The cable commissions proposal is for a Community TV station - not an Independent Media Center (which is volunteer run, dedicated to social justice, and part of the IMC network).
The Community TV station would have paid staff and largely serve the non-profit and church community as well as providing a venue for community folks to host call in shows and rebroadcast independent documentaries of interest to them. It would be run by a community board representing the broad spectrum (from left to right) in our community. |
|
Champaign Staff - Original Memo |
by Champaign Staff repost
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
08 May 2006
|
FROM: Steven C. Carter, City Manager
DATE: May 5, 2006
SUBJECT: CABLE FRANCHISE RENEWAL PROCESS SS 2006-029
A. Introduction: The purpose of this report is to inform Council about the upcoming cable television franchise renewal, seek guidance on the renegotiations, and seek Council’s direction on negotiating for a new public access channel.
B. Recommended Action: The Administration asks that Council provide staff with direction on the two issues identified below:
• Issue One. Staff recommends Alternative 1, that Council direct staff to work with the City of Urbana to jointly renegotiate the cable franchise with the assistance of a qualified cable consultant.
• Issue Two. Staff recommends Alternative 2, that Council not support the creation and funding of a new public access channel.
C. Prior Council Action
• February 1994: Council approved a 15-year cable television franchise agreement with Time Warner Entertainment Company, L.P.
• May 1999: Council approved the transfer of the cable television franchise from Time Warner to TCI of Racine, Inc.
• December 2000: Council approved the transfer of the cable television franchise from TCI of Racine, Inc. to Insight Midwest, LLC.
ISSUE 1. FRANCHISE RENEWAL PROCESS
D. Background
1. Cable Franchise Agreement. The cable franchise agreement allows the cable operator to provide cable television service to subscribers in the City of Champaign. In return for use of the City’s right-of-way, the City requires a number of contracted terms from the cable operator, including the payment of a franchise fee. The City’s current 15-year cable franchise agreement expires on February 28, 2009.
2. Champaign-Urbana Cable Commission. The Champaign-Urbana Cable Television and Telecommunications Commission was created by City Ordinance to act as an advisory body to both Champaign and Urbana City Councils, administer the cable franchise, and monitor telecommunications legislation and policy. The Cable Commission also has responsibilities to hold public hearings and hear testimony related to cable franchise renewals and recommend contracting for consultant services. The Cable Commission has been actively discussing and preparing for the franchise renegotiation for the past few years. The Cable Commission’s report and recommendations pertaining to the renegotiations is attached to this Council memorandum (Attachment A).
3. Cable Franchise Renewal Process. The cable television franchise is currently held by Insight Midwest. A number of federal laws dictate statutory requirements for the franchise renewal process. As required by these laws, Insight Midwest is expected to formally petition the City for franchise renewal any time before September 1, 2006. Once notified, the City has six months to begin the renewal process. The cable franchise renewal process can be a time consuming process involving community needs assessments, public hearings, a technical analysis of the existing cable system, and contract negotiations. The renewal process takes two to three years to complete. Accordingly, the City anticipates entering into the renewal process later this year. Since Insight Midwest does not have an exclusive franchise, the City is not restricted from entering into additional franchises with other cable television providers at any time.
4. Last Franchise Renewal. The existing franchise agreement was negotiated jointly by the cities of Champaign and Urbana, with the guidance of two cable franchise consultants; one a technical consultant to assess the system and the other an expert in negotiating agreements. These consultants were jointly contracted by both cities and directed staff through the complicated renewal process. The consultants' fees were split by both cities – one-third paid by Urbana and two-thirds paid by Champaign. During the last renewal process, the cable operator agreed to reimburse the cities a total of $36,000, covering most to all of the fees of the cable consultants who assisted in negotiations. Staff feels a fair agreement was negotiated, securing many valuable terms for both cities, including, but not limited to:
• Up to 5 percent of the cable operator’s gross revenues paid to the City as a franchise fee.
• Allocation of 4 local access channels to Champaign-Urbana.
• Option to collect an additional 2 percent to support the community’s access channels.
• Implementation of extensive customer service standards and safeguards.
• Free cable service to municipal facilities and public schools.
5. Upcoming Franchise Renewal. The franchise renewal is the City’s opportunity to renew existing contract terms and obtain more valuable benefits and services for our community. A few of the items which the City may consider negotiating for include:
• Free high-speed institutional network connectivity between municipal facilities, public schools, and local government entities.
• Capital and recurring funding for local access channels.
• Increased customer service standards and safeguards.
• Additional access channels for the use of the community.
• Reimbursement of cable consultant fees.
However, staff would note two things. First, all current and future benefits or services would be negotiable items. Second, the consultant hired should have additional recommendations to share with staff and Council during the negotiations process.
6. Federal Franchising Legislation. Efforts to nationalize cable franchising continue to be debated by the U.S. Congress and some state governments. Last year, the Cable Commission and staff notified Council of a number of Congressional bills that threaten to take away the City’s ability to enter into and enforce cable franchises in the community. These bills are largely the result of intense lobbying on the part of the nation’s largest telephone companies. These companies would like to get into the cable television business, but insist on bypassing the local franchising process. A number of new bills have been introduced this year which the Cable Commission and staff continue to monitor. It is unknown if any of these bills will ever successfully become law. The City will follow the existing federal statutes regarding the cable franchise renewal unless new legislation is passed.
7. Staff Recommendation. The cities of Champaign and Urbana often jointly negotiate franchise agreements with local utility providers. By unifying at the negotiating table, both cities have more leverage to renew favorable contract terms and obtain new concessions and community services from the cable operator. Staff recommends joining with Urbana again in renegotiating the cable franchise agreement.
Because of the long contract term (traditionally 15 years) it is critical the City look far down the road at the future of cable television and communication technologies, and determine how best to secure those technologies for our community. The services of an experienced cable consultant would be invaluable in forecasting and securing access to these future technologies. Accordingly, staff also recommends an experienced cable franchise consultant be obtained to guide the City through the complicated franchise renewal process. A consultant’s fees could range from $70,000-$100,000+ and would be shared with the City of Urbana. If Council approves the use of a consultant, management from both cities have agreed to split the fees - one-third paid by Urbana, two-thirds paid by Champaign. Funds to hire a consultant are currently not identified in the budget. If directed by Council, staff would come back with funding recommendations prior to hiring a consultant.
These recommendations are shared by the Cable Commission and the City of Urbana. On March 6, 2006, the Urbana City Council adopted Resolution 2006-02-007R, directing Urbana staff to negotiate the cable franchise jointly with the City of Champaign and to secure the services of a cable franchise renewal consultant (Attachment C).
E. Alternatives
1. Direct staff to work with the City of Urbana and jointly share costs to renegotiate the cable franchise with the assistance of a qualified consultant.
2. Provide other guidance to staff pertaining to the cable franchise renegotiation process.
F. Discussion of Alternatives
Alternative 1: Renegotiate the cable franchise jointly with the City of Urbana; utilizing the services of an experienced cable franchise consultant.
a. Advantages
• Working jointly with the City of Urbana will allow the pooling of staffing and funding resources.
• Directs staff to identify funding for and secure the services of a qualified cable franchise consultant to guide the negotiations for both cities.
• Use of a consultant should help the cities secure the best possible contract terms and services for our community.
• Negotiating jointly with Urbana will maximize the leverage both cities have at the negotiating table, leading to more favorable contract terms.
• Follows the Cable Commission’s recommendations.
• The Urbana City Council has already agreed to negotiate jointly with the City of Champaign and to secure the services of a cable consultant.
b. Disadvantages
• Both city staffs will have to mutually agree on the negotiation process and desired contract terms and outcomes.
• Funding will be needed to secure the services of an experienced consultant.
Alternative 2: Provide other direction to staff pertaining to the cable franchise renegotiation process.
a. Advantages
• Could save funding if Council directs staff to proceed without the services of a cable consultant.
• If directed by Council, the Cities of Champaign and Urbana would negotiate separately, foregoing the need for agreement on process and contract terms.
b. Disadvantages
• City staff lacks the expertise and time to renegotiate a favorable cable franchise agreement without the assistance of a cable consultant.
• By not pooling resources with the City of Urbana, the cost of a consultant (if so directed) would be born solely by the City of Champaign.
• More staff time will be required to complete the negotiations if staffing resources are not pooled with the City of Urbana.
• Significantly more staff time will be required if a consultant is not obtained to guide the process.
ISSUE 2: NEW PUBLIC ACCESS CHANNEL
G. Background
1. A New Public Access Channel. This issue is raised to obtain Council’s direction regarding pursuit of a new public access channel during the cable franchise renegotiations. A new public access channel would likely require significant recurring funding and operational support from the cities to be viable.
2. Existing Cable Access Channels. Our existing franchise requires the cable operator to provide our community with four Public, Educational, and Government (PEG) channels. They are currently allocated as follows:
• CGTV (Channel 5) is the City of Champaign’s government access channel.
• UPTV (Channel 6) is the City of Urbana’s public and government access channel.
• UI-7 (Channel 7) is the University of Illinois’ educational access channel.
• PCETV (Channel 9) is Parkland College’s educational access channel.
Only UPTV provides public access and telecasts programming provided by members of the general public. UPTV currently provides this service free of charge to all area residents, including those living in Champaign. According to Urbana staff, UPTV’s active membership currently includes 53 individuals and 122 organizations, half of which reside in Champaign.
3. Public Access Study Committee. In anticipation of the upcoming franchise renewal, the Cable Commission established the Public Access Study Committee in January 2005. This Committee was charged with researching the possibilities and gauging public support for a new public access channel. After a series of public meetings, forums, and a community survey, the Committee prepared their report and recommendations. The Cable Commission formally accepted the Committee’s report and its recommendations in January 2006. A copy of the Public Access Study Committee Report was provided to Council in November 2005 and is also attached to this report (Attachment B).
4. Public Access Study Committee Recommendations. The Committee states that adequate community support exists to warrant the creation of at least one additional PEG channel, to be used solely for public access. Accordingly, the Committee recommends another PEG channel be obtained during the cable franchise renegotiations for this purpose. The Committee also recommends the creation of a non-profit Community Media Center to manage this new channel. The Committee further recommends the Cities of Champaign and Urbana provide recurring funding to setup and operate the channel. The Committee’s recommendations were adopted by the Cable Commission, which in turn is recommending them to Council (Attachment A). On March 6, 2006, the Urbana City Council adopted a Resolution, endorsing most of the Cable Commission’s recommendations (Attachment C).
5. Possible Funding Sources. One of the Cable Commission’s recommendations is to designate recurring funds from the Cities of Champaign and Urbana, to operate the new public access channel. While the exact amount of funding was not specified by the Commission, staff estimates more than $100,000 would be needed from the cities annually to operate the channel, plus significant capital startup costs. Staff has identified a few possible sources of funding that Council could consider to fund a new public access channel. They are:
a. Cable Operator Grants. In recent renegotiations, some communities have successfully obtained one-time capital payments and/or recurring operating funds from the cable operator to fund PEG channels. Information provided by the Public Access Study Commission shows an average of $161,000 has been received annually in communities similar in size to Champaign-Urbana. These same communities report one-time capital payments averaging $700,000 to purchase equipment for PEG. Securing these cable operator grants could be one of several negotiable items during the refranchising process, which may or may not be successfully obtained.
b. Cable Franchise Fee. The City currently collects 3 percent of the cable operator’s gross revenues in the form of a franchise fee; contributing an average of $338,000 to the General Fund annually. The franchise fee could be raised to a maximum 5 percent, with some funds used for public access. The additional 2 percent would generate approximately $225,000 in additional revenues annually. Though payment is received from the cable operator, this fee is ultimately borne by Champaign’s cable subscribers, as a line item on their cable bills. If passed, new federal legislation could cut or eliminate the ability to collect the cable franchise fee. The City of Urbana currently collects the maximum 5 percent cable franchise fee.
c. PEG Fee. The current franchise agreement also provides the City the option to assess a PEG fee and collect up to an additional 2 percent of the annual gross revenues of the cable operator. If collected, the 2 percent PEG fee would generate approximately $225,000 in revenues annually. These funds could only be used for equipping and/or operating the PEG channels. The City of Champaign has never assessed the PEG fee. With proper notice, the City can require the cable operator to collect and submit PEG fee revenues to the City. These funds could be set aside for future funding of public access or immediately used to operate and expand programming on CGTV.
Like the franchise fee, if collected, the PEG fee would be borne by Champaign cable subscribers as a line item on their cable bills. It is important to note that the ability to collect the PEG fee is a term of our existing cable franchise agreement and may or may not be successfully renegotiated into the next agreement. If passed, new federal legislation could cut or eliminate the ability to collect PEG fees. The City of Urbana currently collects the 2 percent PEG fee and uses the funds to operate UPTV.
6. Staff Recommendation. City staff does not believe there is sufficient public interest in a new public access channel, to justify the considerable costs. Public access is already available to Champaign residents through UPTV, but it is underutilized. Those interested in producing public access programming have access to professional video equipment, a mini-studio, one-on-one training, and programming airtime; but these are all underused by the public.
The exact funding needed from the Cities to operate a new channel is unknown, but will be a considerable, recurring amount. Staff feels this money would be better spent on products and services that would benefit more members of our community. In the past, Council has directed staff to better inform our residents about City services and events by producing more programming for CGTV. Budgetary constraints have limited staff’s efforts in this regard. If Council were to direct the 2% PEG fee be collected and used to fund CGTV, staff could meet this objective. Without increased funding, a large increase in City-produced programming will not be possible.
Staff recommends Council not support the establishment and funding of a new public access channel. Furthermore, staff asks Council to consider collecting the 2% PEG Fee and use the funds to support CGTV.
H. Alternatives
1. Support the creation and future funding of a new public access channel for Champaign-Urbana.
2. Do not support the creation and funding of a new public access channel, and provide other direction to staff.
I. Discussion of Alternatives
Alternative 1: Support negotiating for and funding a new public access channel.
a. Advantages
• Follows the Cable Commission’s recommendations.
• Gives staff clear direction to pursue a new public access channel during the cable franchise negotiations.
• Recognizes that the Cities’ financial support of the channel is necessary to ensure its viability.
• Shows City support of public access television and the opportunities it can provide to our community.
b. Disadvantages
• Recurring financial support from the Cities will likely be necessary to ensure the channel’s viability.
• There has been limited public interest and support for creating the new channel.
• By requiring another access channel during negotiations, attempts to negotiate for other high-priority services or contract terms may be less successful.
• Uncertain future of all identified public access funding sources.
• Though supported by City dollars, programming content on Public Access has First Amendment protections and could not be controlled.
• If collected, Champaign resident cable subscribers will bear the expense of the PEG fee.
• Significant staff time will be required to define the City’s role in and oversee creation of a new public access channel; and non-profit entity to operate it.
Alternative 2: Do not support the creation and funding of a new public access channel and provide other direction to staff. One directive would be to use all or part the 2% or reduced percentage PEG fee to support the government access channel. Another alternative would be to do nothing on this issue, in which case, there would be no support for the public access channel, no collection of a PEG Fee, no increase in cable bills, no additional revenues or programming for CGTV.
a. Advantages
• By not pursuing a new access channel during the renegotiations, attempts to negotiate for other higher-priority services or contract terms may be more successful.
• Not establishing a new public access channel and non-profit entity will save considerable staff time.
• Council could elect to collect the PEG Fee but use the funds to increase City-produced content on CGTV.
• If the PEG Fee were collected, it could be used in place of General Funds for some existing City expenses, like Council Chambers audio-visual equipment and staff.
b. Disadvantages
• Does not follow the Cable Commission’s recommendations.
• If a new PEG channel is not pursued during the upcoming franchise negotiations, the City would not have another opportunity until the next refranchising.
• Collection of the PEG fee is only available thru February 2009, unless successfully renegotiated into the next franchise agreement or legislative change.
• If collected, Champaign resident cable subscribers will bear the expense of the PEG fee.
J. Community Input
Issue 1. The Cable Commission and the Public Access Study Committee both recommend a cable consultant be used by the cities of Champaign and Urbana as they jointly renegotiate the cable franchise. A few members of the public spoke in support of these recommendations during recent Cable Commission meetings.
Issue 2. Community input was received regarding a new public access channel at various Cable Commission and Public Access Study Committee meetings over the past few years. As part of their report, the Public Access Study Committee collected more than 500 signatures on a petition supporting a new public access channel. The Committee also surveyed local community organizations in Champaign-Urbana. Surveys show most of the organizations want better media exposure and are largely supportive of public access.
K. Budget Impact
Issue 1. A cable consultant’s fees can range from $70,000-$100,000 and up, depending upon the scope of services and the consultant’s qualifications. If the City were to jointly negotiate with the City of Urbana, these costs would be shared (two-thirds paid by Champaign, one-third paid by Urbana). It is common practice to negotiate terms requiring the cable operator to reimburse the City for its consultant’s fees. At this point, no funds have been identified in the budget to pay for a consultant. Staff would come back with recommendations on how to fund this before entering into a contractual relationship with a consultant.
Issue 2. The amount of money required to operate an independent public access station is not addressed by the Cable Commission, however, sample budget information is included in Appendix B of the Public Access Study Committee’s report. After reviewing this information, staff determined the annual operating budget of a quality public access station is approximately $359,000, of which approximately $119,000 is funded by the municipalities. These operating costs could likely be shared with the City of Urbana. This does not include significant upfront capital funding for studio and broadcasting equipment.
L. Staffing Impact
Issue 1. By negotiating the franchise jointly and pooling staff resources with the City of Urbana, the amount of work required of Champaign’s Information Technologies and Legal Departments should decrease. Securing the services of a cable consultant should also decrease the work load on staff as an experienced professional would lead the cities through this important process.
Issue 2. Significant staff time would be required to negotiate for, define the City’s role in, and oversee creation of a new public access channel. This work would likely be shared with Urbana staff. Implementing a new revenue source, like the PEG fee, would also require additional staff time. |
|
CHAMPAIGN VOTES YES (5-3) FOR PURSUING PUBLIC ACCESS |
by citizen reporter
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
10 May 2006
|
---------------------------------
PUBLIC ACCESS DISCUSSION
CHAMPAIGN COUNCIL
May 9, 2006
---------------------------------
Summary:
Champaign Council voted 5-3 to support pursuing a community operated, public access Community TV Station in the next franchise agreement with the cable company. That franchise process begins this year.
Over 50 supporters of public access packed council chambers. What follows is close to a transcript of the different speakers.
---------------------------------
CITY STAFF REPORT
---------------------------------
- Concerns about an independent access channel:
COST
LEGISLATIVE UNCERTAINTY
CONTROL/ACCOUNTABILITY
accountability - govt can't control what goes on the air
rely on govt or subscriber fees - all become subscriber fees
concerns of start up costs - can be neg in franchise
we could sacrifice something else if we go for public access
pending legislation - BITS: no funding, COPE: cap of 1%
PEG fee
- some legislation may limit to 4
- who gives up a channel for PA?
---------------------------------
PUBLIC INPUT
---------------------------------
Dennis Roberts - Urbana City Council member, served on Public Access Study Committee
- UPTV now has 181 members - overwhelming recent growth
- current public access facilities are grossly inadequate for a city of this size and vitality.
- people need to feel comfortable coming to the center, not affiliated with govt.
- Tuscon, AZ - 2 story + basement warehouse fully staffed. Equipment to check out.
- why would you not want to have a public access facility funded through the franchise
Dave Monk - Champaign Resident
- I use the UPTV facility - it is wonderful.
Randall Cotton - Champaign resident
- Benefits of public access - seeing live broadcasts of games, community events, townhall meetings with our reps, debates leading up to elections. Can call these up with Video on Demand.
- Can help non-profits who can't afford commercial advertising.
- Can help people be more involved in their community
- Commercial media doesn't allow space for local voices
- This requires a funded PA station with call in studio.
- Profit margins of cable companies are typically 40%
Bob McChesney - UIUC Professor and Media Expert
- Research the affect of media on local communities and Do journalism for 25 years and head of Free Press on issues such as this - we are leading the lobbying effort on COPE bill
- Can't predict the legislation - probably won't get through this session - the longer it goes the better things will be for municipalities
- "Cities have had their underpants taken from them by cable companies in franchising"
- Cities have much better leverage then you think - you can't ask for too much - they can pay for what they want - other cities are winning.
- Cities with same market size as us have great community TV stations.
- Extraordinary opportunity to inexpensively create something other communities love to have. It is a tremendous civic resource.
- Community TV can bring localism back to our community.
- It is "reckless" not to take advantage of it.
Leigh Estabrook - UIUC Library Dept Dean, Champaign resident
- PA channel will not take away parking, will not compete with businesses. It will create a "virtual community plaza"
Angela Clark - UI of African American Cultural Program, Champaign resident
- we have partnered with UPTV to bring our programs to the community - what stands in the way of us doing more is limited resources.
- many who can't attend community events, can do so through the TV
Will Patterson - Youth Media Workshop
- work with young people to create responsible media.
- there has to be balance to the commercial programming.
- Working on documentary of Douglas Center Drum Corps with middle school boys - sense of pride of what they do - boys know they will be seen by the community - one boy said "That means I get to be a leader"
Colleen Cook - videographer, Champaign resident
- I get more requests than I can handle to teach videography
- Cultural development of our community
- Videographers were highlighted in the Boneyard Arts Fest.
Al Kagan - Librarian
- On UPTV, it was hard to get Democracy Now on UPTV - that shows one of the problems with combining it with the government channel.
- What we have now, is not professional.
- We need an alternative place for free speech b/c we have go few places in the age of corporate media
- I am seeing the Urbana library take advantage of UPTV - I would like to see more of this - including programming from Champaign library
- This is the same as a downtown plaza - a vibrant public place
Will Hawkins - Urban League, Technical Coordinator,
Champaign Resident
- Internet Radio Academy - after school program to teach kids about technology
- Our youth produce 3 shows for UPTV - constraints in resources so we have not got them on yet so we stream over the web.
- There are LOTS of people who want to create to public TV, but we don't have the resources to provide for them.
Dave Powers - Videographer, Champaign Resident
- Why sell community short before we even start negotiating.
- I train video for free. UPTV doesn't have the resources to help with editing - more money is needed.
Jack Brighton - Asst Director of Broadcasting at WILL, Champaign Resident
- I produce lots of video and train lots of students.
- I see the creative energy unleashed when the barriers to access to removed.
- Media is about showing each other about each others lives - "sharing our culture"
- Go into the negotiations with a vision of mind.
- We should be setting a standard - setting a vision.
Robert Manaster - Champaign resident
- Consider the interest generated from people receiving this programming.
- Help create more of a cohesiveness in our community.
- More open, public space outside and on the airwaves are needed.
Durl Kruse - serves on Telecom Commission
- think of the value we put in our public libraries and all the money we put in them - they are our literary community treasures.
- How much time do our residents spent watching TV instead of reading books? TV is a major, preferred medium?
- If TV is so popular, why is there no PUBLIC TV supported by the city?
- The challenge is up to you
- This is an opportunity to create a new community treasure.
---------------------------------
COUNCIL COMMENTS (votes for/against public access are in ())
---------------------------------
Kathy Ennen - Councilmember - YES
- It is not often I disagree with staff - the reports are detailed and provide me with the info I need
- We are being very short sighted on this.
- I can't make decisions based on what may or may not happen in Washington DC - they won't move on this in an election year anyway.
- Even if something does happen, we can recover
- The public access report was detailed and appropriate
- We should pursue another channel and operate it by an independent board - this protects the cities from the naysayers
- We live in a democracy - free speech is important - we need to hear all sides and it is hard to find diverse voices out there
- We need to be visionary and think about what we want
- If we are going to be a vibrant community - we need to take some risks - and this - public access - is fairly risk free
- Let's not close the door on a 10-15 year agreement before even getting to the table
- Insight is a monopoly - they are not going to walk away from the table - we can push them on this.
- Our other priorities are not going to be pushed out by this
- Public access gives fire and police another channel
- Health education will benefit
Tom Bruno - Councilmember - YES
- petition in support is great - but if you ask people whether they want to raise their cable franchise fee from 3-5%, you would have gotten lots of signatures as well
- cable franchise fee is being paid by customers
- this is not FREE for the community
- I am troubled by funding this by increasing the tax
- we should engage the services of an aggressive negotiator
- Let's try for the additional cable channel and keep a 3% franchise fee
Ken Pirok - Councilmember - NO
- We can already have debates, boil orders, etc on our current channels
- What we are talking about is community-created programming.
- This is not FREE - this is a very expensive proposition.
- I have heard from very few CHAMPAIGN cable subscribers who want to pay for this or would watch it.
Marci Dodds - NO
- Can we have a cable channel without a media center?
- I support a cable channel but NOT a media center.
- No accountability - non profit with a board of directors with money collected by the government. It is not like a library which are
- WEFT is accountable to its listeners
- The buck doesn't stop anywhere.
- Will vote NO.
Gina Jackson - NO
- Troubling the cost will be passed on to subscribers.
- Want to see the 2% to help our current channel, but can't support additional taxes.
Giraldo Rosales - YES
- Can we up the ante by bringing in a challenger like Comcast?
--> They don't have the infrastructure to provide like Insight who own the cable in the ground
--> Perhaps technology will bring more competition - through the phone companies
- We just had a 6% increase in cable subscription costs - and there is no limit to it.
LaDue - YES
(didn't say anything)
Schweighart - YES
- we should not remove a bargaining chop before
VOTE TOTAL:
5 YES
3 NO |
|
More than a "Bargaining Chip" |
by resident
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
10 May 2006
|
I thank the mayor for his vote in favor, but I hope that vibrant community access TV doesn't get thrown aside somewhere down the road.
As for the cost, these people on the council are sitting on a $5 million surplus. Community access TV is something like a couple of hundred thousand a year and has its own funding mechanism. So all the crocodile tears about the cost are somewhat misplaced and seem like they may be motivated by fear of doing something the council doesn't entirely control than anything of real signficance.
I guess free speech is risky, but there is less and less space for it these days, at least at the level where ordinary citizens have access to it. Somewhat ironically for all the fla-waving we see from certain media, no one in the private sector is stepping up to the plate to meet this need in our community and government is the place to meet the need.
I think it's obvious the pressure needs to be kept up so city staff doesn't lose track of this "bargaining chip", but thanks to everyone who has worked so far on this issue. |
|
