• 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

This LPFM does not exist

Michi said:
30 days passes, no pleadings filed. Cancellation is finalized. Oops, it's November 17.. filing window already passed. I guess they will try again in 10 years in the Fourth Generation LPFM Window.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the timeline, I figured it might be close. It sounds like the only realistic avenue for legitimate, deserving organizations would be to present the larger problem to their elected representatives to get the window postponed.
 
Red Plume said:
Thank you for the timeline, I figured it might be close. It sounds like the only realistic avenue for legitimate, deserving organizations would be to present the larger problem to their elected representatives to get the window postponed.
Click to expand...
REC would staunchly object to the window being delayed for this reason and the FCC does listen to us. If we were to postpone the window, we may not be able to get it again for at least a few more years. We are also currently taking advantage of a period while the FCC has lost their statutory auction authority. While this window was scheduled sooner than I was expecting, I will not entertain a delay/postponement this late in the game.
 
Did a similar survey, except it was a physical inspection to see if the station existed and if it was on air as reported. Drove from Knoxville to Orlando five years ago right now and found about 30% of the actively licensed stations either were not on the air or the physical site didn't exist at all. Checked over 30 stations and found 10 that way - including several that had likely never existed. We are now 10 years since the last window and the financial reality of LPFM has long since taken its toll on many facilities, similar to what has happened to many AM stations, especially those stations in rural or sparsely populated areas. The translator window from six years ago has clogged the band in most areas with any reasonable population density, so now a combination of a clogged band and many non-existent stations will make for fairly slim pickings in this window.

Michi is right - it is too late for any effect on this window, but that doesn't mean a full cleansing should not occur. This can happen in several ways including purchasing/transferring the station and making it legal with new operators (yes I know the rules for LPFM transfers), reporting the station to the FCC and hoping something happens, and becoming a volunteer/partner in the station and fixing the issues. Many would be glad to get some or all of their investment back and get out at this point. May be a better way to obtain a license than filing in a window and getting out pointed by a church in a multiple app situation. Remember, the band is pretty full anywhere worthwhile, so you will likely be in a battle with other applicants who may be stronger than you point wise.
 
Michi said:
REC would staunchly object to the window being delayed for this reason and the FCC does listen to us. If we were to postpone the window, we may not be able to get it again for at least a few more years.
Click to expand...

I think a window postponement would unfortunately be justified if enough groups were being excluded, particularly if those groups were being excluded due to fraudulent circumstances. That would be an excessive and unfair burden for these groups.

It's also unfair for the legitimate groups that have been waiting for this window-- but that's not the fault of those who would be served by a postponement. That would be the fault of the fraudulent operators, and the operators who regrettably allowed their organizations to lapse.
 
Red Plume said:
I think a window postponement would unfortunately be justified if enough groups were being excluded, particularly if those groups were being excluded due to fraudulent circumstances. That would be an excessive and unfair burden for these groups.

It's also unfair for the legitimate groups that have been waiting for this window-- but that's not the fault of those who would be served by a postponement. That would be the fault of the fraudulent operators, and the operators who regrettably allowed their organizations to lapse.
Click to expand...
As I stated above, there are likely hundreds of LPFMs who either don't exist or are not legal organizations. It is easy to understand why MIchi would strongly object at this point as RECNET is now waist deep in the new filing window, but your concerns are completely valid. As Michi stated, the renewal window may have been the best time for this to occur as the license was in limbo during the window, but it isn't really that simple. Many worthwhile LPFM frequencies that would have been cancelled at renewal would have been gobbled up by FM translator frequency changes and power increases before the new LPFM window would have occurred, so just because it was cancelled at renewal doesn't mean it would survive until now. Having said that, there are other considerations before filing a massive complaint or involving your representatives.

Lets just say you file a complaint that evidences that 400 LPFMs had violations involving their corporate status when they applied for renewal, meaning that they lied on the application. Add in that another 400 don't even exist, which may actually not be that far off, and you ask for a delay in the window to investigate. Two things would likely occur as a result. The filing window may be delayed or more likely cancelled, and LPFM would be shown to be a failure. Over 3200 LPFM construction permits have been issued in the two windows, and we are now down to just over 1900 licensed LPFM stations. What if it was shown that 1900 is really only legally about 1000, or that almost 70% of the original permittees are either gone or not legal. How can that be called a success? It can't, and it gives significant ammo the NAB to try to squash LPFM ever getting another window.
 
During the entirety of the last renewal cycle, it was a reasonable expectation that the FCC would be opening a new filing window eventually.

Knowing that was probably coming, I was keeping an eye on LPFMs in several markets in with I had a direct Interest.

I am not a big believer in FCC "vigilante justice." If it doesn't directly affect me or a client, I don't have the time or energy to go chasing it down. But if it does affect me, I do something about it - and so the one LPFM licensee here who had moved several times without a CP found itself on the wrong side of a petition to deny its renewal, complete with years of photos and documentation.

I don't know how long it would have taken the FCC to act on my petition. The licensee checked with their consultant, who hadn't known about the several illegal moves and told them their only real move was to hand in the license, which they did.

Any competent consultant could have done the same thing for a client.

As long as LPFMs have to share a regulatory stage and spectrum with full-power licensees, there's going to be a need for people like Michi and Pete and me to help them navigate the complexity of dealing with the FCC.

But: none of us is getting rich off LPFM work. (Well, I'm not, anyway.) I charge my LPFM clients the lowest rates I can justify, and at least for me it's a pretty small part of a larger overall portfolio of work.
 
Several radio station owners in my state died from covid 19. I'm sure that some of them are not up to date with their filings. But the last thing on my mind is to cyber stalk them and bring them more grief with the FCC. So what god's work are we doing here?
I tend to mind my own business.
 
ok walters said:
...Many worthwhile LPFM frequencies that would have been cancelled at renewal would have been gobbled up by FM translator frequency changes and power increases before the new LPFM window would have occurred, so just because it was cancelled at renewal doesn't mean it would survive until now...

...and it gives significant ammo the NAB to try to squash LPFM ever getting another window....
Click to expand...

Those are both excellent points, and thanks for adding that to the discussion!
 
fybush said:
But: none of us is getting rich off LPFM work. (Well, I'm not, anyway.) I charge my LPFM clients the lowest rates I can justify, and at least for me it's a pretty small part of a larger overall portfolio of work.
Click to expand...

I agree with and understand what you say and I appreciate the positive impact that you and other consultants have on the LPFM community.

As a side note, I think we need to be careful with the phrase "FCC Vigilante Justice", in that it may unintentionally have the effect of demonizing those who are trying to prod an industry sector to police itself and make itself better. I'm aware of at least one consultant who, as a result of this thread, has blasted a note out to the organizations they serve to make sure their state papers are in order. That, to me, is a positive result of this thread.

The list in this thread is just an organization of already public information and inevitable. I believe presentation of such a list will have a much more meaningful and positive impact than a vague mention that says "33% of LPFM licensees in California are delinquent, revoked or otherwise out of order". The picture needs to be drawn with detail.
 
Time Warp said:
Several radio station owners in my state died from covid 19. I'm sure that some of them are not up to date with their filings. But the last thing on my mind is to cyber stalk them and bring them more grief with the FCC. So what god's work are we doing here?
I tend to mind my own business.
Click to expand...

LPFM stations do not have individuals as station owners, so the issue you bring up is outside the scope of this conversation. However, if there's an issue with cyberstalking of station owners, that's probably a good subject for a separate thread.
 
I would rather that people remember me as someone who helped people get radio stations with the FCC and helped them succeed. I'm not a cop. And, I won't spend my life stomping on other people's dreams.
 
Time Warp said:
I would rather that people remember me as someone who helped people get radio stations with the FCC and helped them succeed. I'm not a cop. And, I won't spend my life stomping on other people's dreams.
Click to expand...
Agreed. BUT...while I understand reporting someone for what is a paperwork violation in many cases might be petty, that is much different than a station that doesn't exist now or never did. There are no "dreams" involved in something that doesn't exist, and there are hundreds out there like that right now.
 
You must have funds on hand when you apply for any broadcast station. Check that box when you don't is lying. Licensing an unbuilt station is also lying. People who tie up frequencies by holding on to unbuilt licenses are a real problem because they cheat legit broadcasters who would be on the air. The FCC takes a dim view of this.

So you call the complaints division and tell them a licensed station was never built and they've tied up a channel for 10 years. You will get a call back from a nice attorney in the audio division. They tell you this is a real and common problem. You are then asked to go take pictures at the licensed transmitter site. You take your phone and a radio with a digital display. You tune the radio to the licensed frequency. Now you record audio and video. Static comes out of the radio and your video shows no tower or FM antenna.
You send the info to the FCC.

Now the FCC has the goods on the lying crook. The FCC then contacts the licensee asking for proof the station was built. The licensee will now send the license back because if they don't they face large fines and prosecution for lying on government forms
 
Time Warp said:
The FCC is looking for field agents. Some of these armchair self appointed enforcers need to apply. Maybe you could cite part 15 AM's for having a ground wire two inches to long. Wow! See the sour grapes.
Click to expand...
I've actually attended where Field Agents shut down a pirate. I originally DF'ed the pirate, confronted them that they were operating illegally, but was willing to give them a break if they would just shut down permanently. They shut down for about ten days. After that, the Commission, a Federal Marshal, and I showed up to ruin their day.
 
Kelly A said:
I've actually attended where Field Agents shut down a pirate. I originally DF'ed the pirate, confronted them that they were operating illegally, but was willing to give them a break if they would just shut down permanently. They shut down for about ten days. After that, the Commission, a Federal Marshal, and I showed up to ruin their day.
Click to expand...
Were they intefering with a station you worked for/with, or did you just stumble across their broadcast?
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom