FCC Ignoring Ramifications of its LFA Order, NATOA, Cities Tell 6th Circuit
The FCC, in denying a policy shift in making local governments pay cable operators the fair market value for institutional network and public, educational and government channel obligations that had been free for decades, ignores sizable evidence of long-standing franchise…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
fee practices that conflict with last year's local franchise authority order. That's according to NATOA, New York City, the Florida League of Cities and individual Florida municipalities in a reply brief Thursday (in Pacer, docket 19-4161) to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. NATOA and the others are interveners in a consolidated challenge of the FCC's 2019 LFA order (see 2005150019). They said the LFA order will "eat away" at franchise fees and further the injury by requiring local governments to pay what likely will be sizable fair market value amounts, and the FCC's not acknowledging or addressing the implications of that policy shift makes the order arbitrary and capricious. The FCC didn't comment.