Cable LFA Challenge Intervenors Say FCC Order Jeopardizes Public Safety
Even if the Cable Act is ambiguous about what's meant by franchise fees, the FCC's cable TV local franchise authority (LFA) order ignored the reliance interests of state and local governments and the investments made in communications networks, assuming traditional…
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.
cable franchise fee practices would remain in place. That's according to New York City, NATOA and various Florida cities in an intervenor brief Monday (in Pacer, docket 19-4161) with the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. They're interveners in a consolidated challenge of the FCC's 2019 LFA order (see 2005150019). Important public safety infrastructure uses the public, educational and government channels and I-nets, and the order jeopardizes law enforcement and public safety functions, they said. If there must be some kind of compensation for franchise obligations, the FCC didn't explain why it should be set at market value or how to determine that amount, they said. The FCC didn't comment.