City Council 11-12-13 Councilor Penta's motion 13-738 Cable TV Subscribers' monies
2:29 pm posting on PATCH
NOTE FROM JV
Apologies, Patch readers, I had inadvertently posted this on a photo page by computer glitch. Here it is again, hope to see you all on Tuesday night.
http://medford.patch.com/groups/joe-vigliones-blog/p/city-council-111213-councilor-pentas-motion-13738-cable-tv-subscribers-monies
Public Access TV is for the community. It is something that Winchester, Stoneham, Woburn, Malden, Somerville, Arlington, Burlington, Boston and many other communities have. If this city had a true public access station this past election season there would have been microphones on the candidates for city council and for mayor. Medford citizens had to go to the educational channel for politics, and that is not what the channel is for. Candidates did not have microphones, were hard to hear, and the lighting was questionable. How can a candidate claim "leadership that works" when - clearly - it wasn't just not working, the leadership was a disaster.
The responsibility for this outrageous denial of the public's right to free speech, protected by the First Amendment, falls squarely on the shoulders of Michael J. McGlynn, the sole "issuing authority" under our form of government. City Solicitor Mark E. Rumley promised us that the city wouldn't "squelch" free speech, and he made that promise in front of retired justice Marie O. Jackson-Thompson on November 15, 2008, exactly 5 years ago this week. Leadership that was a disaster led to $15,000.00 in taxpayer funds wasted, untold millions in cable tv subscriber fees unaccounted for.
The Mayor received at least one offer (from me) and probably offers from people I have spoken with that we could have utilized channel 3 this past election season, even though the corporation that operated it dissolved on September 30. We could have had free expression on Channel 3 from October 1 right up to November 5, but it was a threat to McGlynn as his control of the media is air-tight and difficult to penetrate.
A plan was in place to get access up and running immediately. A temporary situation was - and still is - very possible, yet the "leader" who claims he offers "leadership that works" would rather cut ribbons than do the hard work necessary to provide cable tv subscribers with the services they are purchasing.
13-738-Offered by Councillor Penta
Be It Resolved that the Mayor as issuing authority by contract return all cable TV subscribers’ money (± $120,000) that he has held in escrow because of public access cable TV-3's failure to broadcast and offer community public access programming since January of 2013. This monthly fee taken from all Comcast and Verizon customers rightfully belongs to all cable TV subscribers who paid for a service they never received.
There are those of us - veterans of access TV - who can put a new situation together. This is NOT what Mike McGlynn wants as he has an obsession with controlling the media. He also uses some of the access monies for three salaries at the high school, and sixty percent of the monies - because of some antiquated home rule petition - for the "general fund." That leaves only 20 percent of the funds for the citizens paying the freight, and we were denied the opportunity to say what we want to say this past election cycle. No discussion of crosswalks, potholes, empty storefronts, public safety. No free speech that the City Solicitor Mark E. Rumley promised us the city would not stand in the way of.
Well, the city did stand in the way of it.
This one is on McGlynn. We pay for a service and the Mayor used over Fifteen Thousand Dollars of taxpayer funds, not ratepayer funds, not subscriber fees, but taxpayer funds for an audit and the judge's evaluation. To not use the information the mayor asked for - and received - was irresponsible. The citizens deserve to hear from the city leader how their money was spent. This discussion has now turned to the mayor's lack of leadership on how monies are obtained and spent.
Ignore the "hypotheticals" that "confuse the situation" as Ron Swanson notes on Patch. Fees were paid to Comcast and Verizon for public access during an election. The fees either get refunded or go to a new station. It's not about "people who never watched access TV" or the misinformation about the true use of the P/E/G access fees. The City Solicitor has the facts on this, as does the Department of Telecommunications and Cable. Interesting that those issuing information on Patch have not been seen at the DTC meetings I've been to, nor have they spent as much time in the City Solicitor's office as I have - or reading the February 2008 Mark Rumley report and the contracts, or discussing these issues with the cable TV providers as I have. Councilor Penta knows how important this issue is and that is why it is alive. There are many government agencies I am in touch with also interested in the information from my public records requests and from the city council meetings. This issue is alive and well and needs further study. It will get that study.
And if you aren't happy paying a franchise fee and getting nothing in return for your money, citizens can file a complaint with Comcast and with Verizon. That's the place to start. A Class Action suit against the city, if the right lawyers are found who can handle a case of such magnitude, may be the only solution to a very bad situation.
Please visit the City Council on Tuesday night, 7 PM, and demand the mayor of this community speak to all residents about his plans for the future of access tv. Leadership that works is a nice slogan, but an issuing authority who hides from his obligations to the consumers paying the freight, a Mayor too afraid to have his words on public record at a city councilor is leadership that doesn't work. That's Michael J. McGlynn - leadership that runs and hides from his obligations to the citizens.