BILL ANALYSIS 1
SENATE ENERGY, UTILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE
DEBRA BOWEN, CHAIRWOMAN
SB 2012 - Speier Hearing
Date: April 25, 2000 S
As Introduced: February 25, 2000 FISCAL B
2
0
1
2
DESCRIPTION
Current federal law requires all television stations to
convert their broadcast signal from analog to digital by
2003.
This bill provides $25 million in matching grants to public
television and radio broadcast stations to purchase and
install digital broadcasting equipment. To be eligible for
this funding, the public broadcasting station must enter
into an agreement with the Office of Emergency Services
(OES) to dedicate, as necessary, a broadcast channel for
the provision of emergency information in a format which is
accessible by the deaf, hearing-impaired, and non-English
speaking populations.
This bill allocates 75% of the funding to public television
broadcasters and 25% of the funding to public radio
broadcasters. Within those categories, half of the funding
is divided equally between the stations and the other half
is divided in proportion to the non-federal funding each
station receives.
BACKGROUND
"Public broadcasting" includes both public television and
public radio, although the federal mandate to move from an
analog signal to a digital signal only applies to
television stations, not radio stations. There are 14
public television stations and 23 public radio stations in
California, none of which receive state support, and
according to the public broadcasters, California is one of
the few states in the nation that provides no public
support for public broadcasting.
Pursuant to an act of Congress, the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) has required that public television
stations change their broadcast signal from an analog
signal to a digital signal by 2003. Commercial television
stations also have to change to a digital signal, but they
have to accomplish the switch sooner than the public
television stations.
Digital television may well change the nature of
television, much as it changed the nature of
telecommunications, by providing clearer pictures,
increasing the number of channels, and providing data and
interactive features. The cost of this mandate is
significant, both for the broadcasters and for owners of
television sets. The Public Broadcasting Service estimates
the cost of complying with the mandate and upgrading its
production facilities to digital - which isn't required by
the mandate - will average $9 million per station, though
for large stations providing programming the cost could go
as high as $20 million. Some of these costs may be funded
by the federal government (though no federal money has yet
been made available), but most will be funded by other
public and private sources. A similar digital mandate for
public radio does not exist, but some speculate that such a
mandate will come soon. The total estimated digital
conversion costs for all of California's public
broadcasters, both television and radio, is estimated at
$140 million.
One of the significant benefits of the digital broadcast
mandate is that it creates additional broadcast capacity.
By broadcasting digitally, the broadcaster can use the
signal in different ways, such as to broadcast four
"regular-quality" signals or one high quality signal. This
bill encourages public television broadcasters to enter
into an agreement with OES to dedicate a channel for
emergency information by making state funding available for
the digital conversion to those stations that reach such an
agreement. This same incentive applies to public radio
broadcasters, although public radio broadcasters aren't
laboring under that same digital broadcast mandate. Public
broadcasters who do not enter into an agreement with OES
are not eligible for the grant.
KEY QUESTIONS
1.Should public radio stations, which aren't mandated by
federal law to switch to a digital signal, be eligible to
receive funding simply because they voluntarily decide to
make the switch?
2.Should eligibility for state funding be conditioned on an
agreement with OES to dedicate a broadcast channel to
provide emergency information in a specific format?
3.How long should the agreement between a station that
accepts funding and OES be required to last?
4.Who should be responsible for producing and funding the
programming to be aired over the emergency information
channel?
COMMENTS
1) Federal Mandate To Go Digital . The federal mandate for
television broadcasters to digitalize their signals by
2003 has galvanized the public broadcasting sector and
sent many stations in search of funding in an effort to
comply with the mandate. While the mandate only pertains
to the television signal broadcast function, public
television broadcasters foresee a need to digitalize the
production function in order to take full advantage of
the digital broadcast signal.
Public radio stations, which are under no mandate to
digitalize either their signals or their production
facilities, believe in the benefits of digitalization and
feel they may face a mandate to digitalize in the future.
In order to stretch the public dollars in the hope that
all of California's public television stations are able
to meet the federal mandate to move to a digital signal
by 2003, the author and Committee may wish to consider
conditioning the ability of public radio stations to
receive funding on those stations being placed under a
similar federal mandate.
2) How Long Should The OES Agreement Last ? The bill is
silent on the duration of the agreement between OES and
the public broadcasters. Under the terms of the bill,
the agreement could last anywhere from one day to
eternity. The author and Committee may wish to consider
specifying a minimum duration that the agreement must be
required to last.
3) Who Should Produce The Programs ? The bill is silent as
to who is responsible for producing and paying for the
programming to be carried over the dedicated public
broadcast channel in the event of an emergency. Clearly,
OES has the expertise in terms of what types of
information should be relayed to the public in the event
of an emergency, but public broadcasting stations may be
better equipped to produce higher quality programming
more rapidly.
The author and Committee may wish to consider whether the
production question should be resolved here or whether it
should be subject to negotiations between OES and the
public broadcasters.
4) Technically Speaking . The author may wish to consider
the following two technical amendments:
a)Page 4, Line 30 and Page 5, Line 26; changing the
word "available" to "accessible."
b)Page 5, Line 29; changing the word "section" to
"article."
5) Related Legislation . Last year, the Committee heard and
approved SB 844 (Schiff), which revised the membership of
the California Broadcasting Commission and stated
legislative intent that funding be made available through
the state budget to help public television broadcasters
convert to a digital broadcasting signal. SB 844 passed
this Committee 7-2, but was held on the Senate
Appropriations Committee suspense file.
POSITIONS
SPONSOR:
Author
Support:
California Institute of the Arts
California Public Radio
California State University, Chico
The J. Paul Getty Trust
KRCB TV & Radio
KVPT-TV
Daniel J. Lanahan, Board Member KCSM TV & Radio
Wells Fargo
10 individuals
Oppose:
None on File
Randy Chinn
SB 2012 Analysis
Hearing Date: April 25, 2000