The key issue regarding TV8”s eligibility for a PUC 5870(n) pass through is its status as a PEG Channel. Only full PEG channels qualify for a pass through as “PEG” is the only type of channel mentioned in 5870. Many former local franchisers in the State only have a government channel for their meetings and designated programming. Those former franchisers do not qualify for a pass through.
The distinction of a PEG channel is that it submits itself to forum analysis as defined by the Supreme Court, notably as described in Perry Education Association v. Perry Local Educators Association (1983). The 1996 case attached above was the last unsuccessful attempt to have PEG channels declared non public forums.
In public forums, only illegal activity can be outright prohibited. Non content based rationing of a limited public resource is allowed. In the special case of PEG programming, a safe harbor for indecent programming is allowed between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. (FCC v. Pacifica Foundation 1978). No other content restrictions for the public access part of a PEG channel are legal.
The LCPTV website boldly announces a new content restriction approved by the PEG Board in August 2014. This goes beyond any content restriction I”ve found for a PEG channel in the country. The closest I”ve found are attempts to ban content from “political candidates.” I have not found any PEG channels with a policy banning “producers” with a point of view concerning candidates and ballot issues. In essence, the PEG Board has converted TV8 into a stand alone government channel. Therefore, it is ineligible for a pass through.
The fact that the PEG Board has abandoned its responsibility to Mediacom to fulfill its PEG obligations under the State Franchise Law does not relieve Mediacom of its responsibility under PUC 5870(a) to provide PEG capacity for the local entity with franchise PEG provisions as of Jan. 1, 2007. This means the city limits of Clearlake. Mediacom has no PEG obligations to Lake County as a whole.
Dante DeAmicis, Clearlake
