Okay. This may take a while. This week's FCC report contained this gem. KAMZ in Tahoka TX is requesting a change in COL and an increase to a C2. Simple enough, right? Wait. They have also applied for an ownership change to the Estate of Albert Benavides. Who died in 2012. His brother and daughter took over operations of the station after he died. And apparently never bothered to inform anyone. They got a license renewal in 2013. No mention of his passing. Now, they have a pending renewal from 2021, are asking for an upgrade, and admit they have no public files, and never filed ownership reports because they weren't aware they had to. I realize they may not have knowingly violated rules, but shouldn't someone have bothered to say "Oh, by the way, Albert died. What do we need to do?" They're not running this in a vacuum. I don't wish them any ill will, and their filing does admit they know they're probably going to get dinged badly for this. However, as we all know, ignorance of the law is no excuse. Should be interesting to see what happens in the next couple of months. Any thoughts?
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
KAMZ Tahoka TX - What?????
- Thread starter exdjted
- Start date
Someone at the FCC is sharpening the NOV & Forfeiture knives. Maybe even pulling a big "D" off the shelf to add to KAMZ.
But if the licensee name is 'Estate of Albert Benavides', that would seem to indicate an estate. There's nothing wrong with having an estate be the licensee, provided the dead guy's signature isn't on the paperwork.
Key term is Estate of.
Your concerns are a nothing-burger.
I'm glad you're not my FCC attorney. The death of a licensee isn't a "nothing-burger." It's an involuntary transfer of control and has to be promptly filed as such. There was just a case in New England where a medium-sized group owner (Steve Silberberg) died and his estate didn't do the filing, and they did get dinged with a substantial fine for the oversight.
Oh really? The FCC requires a transfer of control to be filed within 30 days if involuntary. The death occurred in January 2012. The transfer was just requested recently. 10 years later. Not quite a nothing-burger. I didn't copy and paste everything they filed since it would have taken up 10 pages, but he left no will according to their filing. The family just went about business as usual. Surely when the license renewal was filed the year AFTER his death, someone should have questioned if any significant events happened in the past 24 months??? This could have been caught then.
So, if I die while owning a station, can I tell my wife not to worry about calling my FCC attorney and letting them know? Should I tell her that what I've learned since 1980 about dealing with the FCC doesn't matter? Great!
The licensee is already listed as an Estate. The estate means Mr. Benavides is already dead. An estate can be a licensee. There's no requirement that a death must be reported. Let me put it this way: The corporate structure of the licensee would still be in place, even after Mr. Benavides passed. Eventually the estate, including whatever stocks or assets, would become the licensee. I could file to change the name of the licensee to Rubber Chicken. As long as the licensee remains the same basic management/corporate structure, you can file whenever. They're just making the change at the same time they file for a City of License move. Doesn't matter how long Mr. Benavides has been dead.
Last edited:
The FCC disagrees strongly with your interpretation of their rules, Kelly... in this case to the tune of a $25,000 consent decree.
www.fcc.gov
"Specifically, the Licensees should have filed applications for involuntary transfer of control within 30 days of January 13, 2021, when the then-controlling shareholder, Mr. Steven Silberberg, died, but did not do so.4 Also, following the death of Steven Silberberg, Jacob Silberberg assumed de facto control of the Licensees without obtaining prior Commission approval for the non pro forma transfer of control.5 Pursuant to the terms of the Consent Decree, the Licensees and the Transferee stipulate that they violated section 310(d) of the Act and sections 73.3540 and 73.3541 of the Rules."
Consent Decree for licensees formerly held by Steven A. Silberberg
The Media Bureau issues an Order adopting a Consent Decree with Jacob Silberberg, (Transferee), concerning licensees formerly controlled by Steven A. Silberberg (Deceased)(Transferor)
"Specifically, the Licensees should have filed applications for involuntary transfer of control within 30 days of January 13, 2021, when the then-controlling shareholder, Mr. Steven Silberberg, died, but did not do so.4 Also, following the death of Steven Silberberg, Jacob Silberberg assumed de facto control of the Licensees without obtaining prior Commission approval for the non pro forma transfer of control.5 Pursuant to the terms of the Consent Decree, the Licensees and the Transferee stipulate that they violated section 310(d) of the Act and sections 73.3540 and 73.3541 of the Rules."
I fail to see the whole interest in this particular application anyway. How and when the Estate chooses to file with the FCC is none of my, your, or exdjite's business. This whole radio nerd looking to find some dirt on a licensee-thing is petty and ridiculous. Trying to bust broadcast licensee's, isn't a hobby..
Do you have their corporate documents/structure filed that would show they are in violation?The FCC disagrees strongly with your interpretation of their rules, Kelly... in this case to the tune of a $25,000 consent decree.
Consent Decree for licensees formerly held by Steven A. Silberberg
The Media Bureau issues an Order adopting a Consent Decree with Jacob Silberberg, (Transferee), concerning licensees formerly controlled by Steven A. Silberberg (Deceased)(Transferor)
"Specifically, the Licensees should have filed applications for involuntary transfer of control within 30 days of January 13, 2021, when the then-controlling shareholder, Mr. Steven Silberberg, died, but did not do so.4 Also, following the death of Steven Silberberg, Jacob Silberberg assumed de facto control of the Licensees without obtaining prior Commission approval for the non pro forma transfer of control.5 Pursuant to the terms of the Consent Decree, the Licensees and the Transferee stipulate that they violated section 310(d) of the Act and sections 73.3540 and 73.3541 of the Rules."
There's no corporate structure. The license was held by Benavides as an individual, and FCC rules clearly required the filing of an involuntary transfer of control to the estate within 30 days of his death.
I have no interest in this particular case, just in making sure misinformation doesn't get spread about what the rules require.
I have no interest in this particular case, just in making sure misinformation doesn't get spread about what the rules require.
Why so defensive, Kelly? The airwaves are a public resource and these are public records from a government agency that our tax dollars fund, so of course it's our business. Besides, this concerns radio and we all have every right to discuss it. It's right in the name of the website.
To me it amounts to tabloid gawking. Surfing around applications trying out broadcasters is not a productive activity. Sometimes,, especially when it comes to assets around estates after a death, things slip through the cracks. So what? What difference does it make to you? Even if there is something, how is that adversely effecting your life? If something is uncovered during their city of license move and the Commission wants to pursue it, that's between the Commission and the licensee.
I know some radio nerds get a little shot of cortisol when they discover something they've interpreted as being in violation of the rules. How many TOH ID discussions have been on this board? How many accusations of over or under power?
Why am I so defensive? Because I've been on the receiving end, and dealt with these people making accusations with little to no knowledge of the situation, provided there actually is one.
Radio nerd? Is that what you think of me? Listen, you don't know me, so don't try to get in my head. I looked at this because I'm currently looking at a couple of groups in Texas, and I looked this up solely to see whether it was in the area I was looking at. I don't wish them any ill-will or want to rat them out; rather, I feel that this is a cautionary tale about what happens when a licensee dies and doesn't leave some sort of minimal instructions behind to help out the surviving family. I hope they come out of this with their license intact, and that someone helps them in the future to get things together.
I'm sorry that you've been attacked in the past. I posted this because it was interesting to me. Excuse the hell out of me for trying to point out something radio-related that doesn't have to do with format changes that drag out over several weeks. I certainly won't make this mistake again so I don't incur the wrath of Kelly A.
This is why I gave up on radio before and why I think I'll stop looking at getting back in this business. People like Kelly A who think they know me and my intentions better than I know myself.
Crocodile tears. One only needs to look no further than the title of your post.
Oh! So wounded...Not.
Talk about crocodile tears.
"Man who operates public business upset at interactions with public; film at 11"
Okay, Kelly A. You got me. I'm actually part of a secret organization committed to destabilizing Radio. There are 4 of us, Mr. X, Mr. Y and Ms. Z. I'm the biggest, so I'm known as Mr. XXL. I'll tell you how we do this. Ready?
Okay. See, we take information that is readily available to the public from this thing called the internet. Still following me? Then, we find things that may or may not be interesting, and we put it out there on a thing called a 'forum'. See, that's a message board where people can comment on different topics. Then we wait for someone who feels persecuted and just a wee bit paranoid, and we sit back and wait for the fallout. You can find the hidden message by taking every other letter reading left to right, unless it's Thursday, in which case, you start with the second letter in the third word, skipping any word that ends in p. Got it?
My cat Mr. Boots does agree with your legal opinion, but then, he licks his own butt, so...
IANAL - But this is definitely interesting. We have several stations in Northern CA that were recently sold by the "Thomas Huth Living Trust". It is true that a living trust provides for a much easier transition of assets to benefactors when somebody decides to leave this earthly realm. But it has to be specified as a trust. In the case of station ownership there has to be an individual or group of individuals (such as a board of directors) that is responsible. So I looked to see what they did. Not sure if this link works for everyone, but it shows "percentage vote" and "percentage total assets":
In this instance the filing of form 316 was done within 30 days of his death, and someone with the same surname (presumably a wife or daughter) now owns 100% of the vote, while the estate owns 100% of the assets. Despite the decision a few years ago where "corporations are people" I still think the commission still wants a "go-to" person or group of people to assume responsibility. With names. But the situation at KAMZ looks to be something where the commission might be more forgiving than the one pointed out by Scott. That one involved many licenses and presumably the owner should have known better, but who knows?
Dave B.
Great example and point. Depending on the estate assets, and how they relate to the ownership structure, plus the individual State involved, it takes time for the family/benefactors to work out all the structural details.
Exactly, only the family and lawyers hired to go through the process know. These are humans working through a process. Gawker's playing gotcha on some discussion board is nothing more than unseemly behavior.
- Status