Television broadcasters, largely successful in milking the government's thirst for higher-quality digital pictures, are at it again - this time in an effort to gain federal pre-emption so cities can't indefinitely block digital TV tower construction.
In response to an industry petition, the Federal Communications Commission last week asked whether it should force cities to act on tower-siting requests within a set time period or give up their right to deny construction. The joint petition for the "notice of proposed rulemaking" came from the National Association of Broadcasters and the Association for Maximum Service Television.
Cities, which last year had to endure a controversial FCC pre-emption of local restrictions on TV antennas and small satellite dishes, aren't happy about this latest threat to their authority.
"They've identified a potential problem," Eileen Huggard, executive director of the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisers, said of the industry petition. "But there are better ways of tackling that problem."
Huggard, whose group represents city officials who regulate local telecom and cable companies, argues that broadcasters should have first raised their concerns with cities before going to the FCC. Now, she said, time that could have been spent deciding where to build digital towers will now be wasted waiting for FCC action. "If we all started early enough in the process - which means immediately - we could head off a number of the problems."
But the NAB is looking at the need to build digital towers as a way to press an age-old grievance against local permit processes. They have a good hole card going into the game, too, one they apparently drew when they cut a deal with FCC chairman Reed Hundt to begin early digital broadcasting in the 10 biggest US markets. In essence, the broadcasters have told the FCC: Beat down these pesky city bureaucrats, or take the public blame when we miss the agreed-upon deadline.
Already, broadcasters have started up the lobbying machine to make their case. Over the past few months, broadcasters have complained loudly about local hurdles to digital TV tower construction. NAB spokesman Dennis Wharton noted "one hell of a problem in New York City" where the immense height of buildings has limited tower-siting options and slowed the approval process. The NAB is also lining up troops nationwide in an attempt to build a public record that will convince the FCC that a major problem exists. "We've told our members to send in their horror stories," Wharton said.
The NAB-MSTV petition is very specific, suggesting that the FCC require state or local action on tower modification requests within 21 days; on tower relocation requests within 30 days; and on all other requests related to tower and land-use issues within 45 days. The petition said the only exception should be for health and safety issues. But because the federal government already has exclusive authority over regulation of radio-frequency radiation levels, the health question already isn't really a local issue. That leaves public safety, which is seldom a concern because towers are usually located in remote locations.
The real issue - and one that NAB and MSTV decidedly didn't bring up in their petition - is that broadcast towers are ugly monstrosities that most people don't want anywhere in the vicinity. As might be expected, the issue of aesthetics is a major reason that tower relocation requests are consigned to bureaucratic limbo. City councils simply don't approve eyesores like that amid the predictable outcry over ruining property values or destroying quality of life. The FCC appears to be sympathetic, noting in its rule-making notice that it will be sensitive to the "right of localities to maintain their aesthetic qualities."
