The Honorable Julius Genachowski
Chairman
United States Federal Communications Commission
445 12'h Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20554
JOHN D. DINGELL
15TH DISTRICT, MICHIGAN
CHAIRMAN EMERITUS
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND COMMERCE
CO-CHAIR
HOUSE GREAT LAKES
TASK FORCE
MEMBER
MIGRATORY BIRD
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
(i:ongress of the iinited~mtEs
i!tOUSE of'REprESwtatiuEs
fl)ashingron, i)Q: 20515-2215
November 3, 2009
WASHINGTON OFFICE:
ROOM 2328
RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
WASHINGTON, DC 20515-2215
(2021 225-4071
DISTRICT OFFICES:
19855 WEST OUTER DRIVE
SUITE 103-E
DEARBORN, MI48124
(3l3) 278-2936
23 EAST FRONT STREET
SUITE 103
MONROE, MI48161
(734) 243-1849
301 WEST MICHIGAN AVENUE
SUITE 305
YPSILANTI, MI48197
(734) 481-1100
RE: In the Matter ofPetitions for Declaratory Ruling Regarding Public,
Educations, and Governmental Programming MB Docket No. 09-13 CSR-8126,
CSR-8127, CSR 8128
Dear Chairman Genachowski:
I write to express my concern with the protracted period oftime the Federal
Communications Commission ("Commission") has taken to address the challenges faced
by the City ofDearborn, Michigan, and other communities across the country,
concerning public, educational, and governmental (PEG) channels. The Commission has
been aware ofthese issues since December 21, 2007, when I sent a letter to Comcast and
former Chairman Kevin Martin, among others, expressing my concerns with Comcast's
plan to digitize PEG channels in the 15
th
District ofMichigan, as well as treat PEG
channels differently from other channels.
l
In addition, I am particularly displeased by the
Commission's inaction in resolving the above-referenced Petitions for Declaratory
Orders, the first ofwhich was prompted by an order from the Honorable Victoria A.
Roberts ofthe United States District Court for the Eastern District ofMichigan.
2
For some time, the Commission has been aware ofthe concerns raised in these
petitions. They show that cable operators are exercising inappropriate control over PEG
channels to make them less accessible and are claiming the right to provide PEG channels
at an effectively higher price than, for example, broadcast channels carried on the basic
service tier. As you are no doubt aware, 47 U.S.C. 531 provides that PEG channels are
under the control oflocal franchising authorities, not cable operators. Additionally,
Congress intended that PEG channels be viewable by every cable subscriber without the
1 Additionally, the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet
held a hearing on these issues on January 28, 2008, and a second hearing was held on September 17, 2008,
by the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government.
2 The petitions were filed on December 9,2008, January 27, 2009, and January 20, 2009, respectively.
Judge Roberts's order sought the Commission's expert input on seven specific questions related to the
litigation brought by the City ofDearborn and. several other Michigan communities against Comcast.
THIS MAILING WAS PREPARED. PUBLISHED, AND MAILED AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE
THIS STATIONERY PRINTED ON PAPER MADE OF RECYCLED FIBERS
$~11
1812
The Honorable Julius Genachowski
Page 2
need for costly equipment.
3
In short, Congress did not intend for operators to
discriminate against PEG channels and therefore required under 47 U.S.C. 531(e) that a
cable operator may not exercise editorial control over such channels.
Consequently, the purpose ofthis letter is to remind you that the Commission's
delay in acting on the aforementioned petitions has resulted in damage to the PEG
community, which, in addition to local governments, has borne the burden ofprosecuting
claims, which I believe should be championed by the Commission. In view ofthis, I urge
you to act as expeditiously as possible on these petitions, so as to alleviate further
financial and other hardship incurred by the PEG community.
Thank you for your kind attention to this matter, and please know I very much
look forward to your response. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact
me directly or have your staffcontact Andrew Woelfling in my office at 202-225-4071.
With every good wish,
cc: The Honorable Michael Copps
The Honorable Robert McDowell
The Honorable Mignon Clyburn
The Honorable Meredith Atwell Baker
3 "PEG programming is delivered on channels set aside for community use in many cable systems, and
these channels are available to all community members on a non-discriminatory basis [...]" H.R. Rep. No.
102-628, l02
nd
Cong., 2
nd
Sess. 1992 at 85.