• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

MINUTES CLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SCHOOL TRUSTEES KLVX COMMUNICATIONS GROUP 4210 CHANNEL 10 DRIVE, LAS VEGAS, NV 89119 Wednesday, April 26, 2006 8:00 a.m. Roll Call: Members Present Ruth L. Johnson, President Sheila Moulton, Vice President Susan C. Brager-Wellman, Clerk Larry P. Mason, Member Shirley Barber, Member Mary Beth Scow, Member Terri Janison, Member Dr. Walt Rulffes, Superintendent Also present were: Bill Hoffman, General Counsel, Legal Department; Todd Stansbury, Esquire, Wiley, Rein & Fielding; Thomas Axtell, General Manager, KLVX Communications Group; Ray Willis, Executive Producer, KLVX Communications Group; Cindy Krohn, Executive Assistant, Board Office; and Stephanie Gatlin, Transcriber/Recording Secretary, Board Office. ADOPT AGENDA Adopt agenda. Motion: Brager-Wellman Second: Moulton Vote: Unanimous Mrs. Janison was not present for the vote. PUBLIC HEARINGS ON AGENDA ITEMS/RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS None. APPROVE CCSD FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION (FCC) LEGAL COUNSEL, WILEY REIN & FIELDING Approval of rules and regulations affecting CCSD Board of School Trustees, as recommended in Reference A. Mr. Axtell spoke of the legal firm, Wiley, Rein & Fielding, and asked that Mr. Stansbury address the Board regarding review of duties as an FCC licensee of KLVX. Mr. Stansbury explained the communication assets of CCSD and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rules and regulations imposed on these assets and how they affect trustees acting as licensees of KLVX. KLVX 04-26-06 Page 1 of 6 BOARD MEMBER ARRIVES Mrs. Janison arrived at the Board meeting at 8:13 a.m. APPROVE CCSD FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION (FCC) LEGAL COUNSEL, WILEY REIN & FIELDING (continued) Mr. Stansbury stated that the district’s responsibility would be primarily to the City of Las Vegas, not Clark County. He explained that there is an obligation incumbent upon a licensee to serve the needs of the community, which is monitored through the FCC. Mr. Mason questioned why the Board is the licensee and not the district. Mr. Stansbury explained that the license must be held by an entity or in the name of an individual and stated that he could find out when in the 1960s, or thereabouts, it had been licensed to CCSD. He stated that the FCC would look to CCSD as the parties in control, and not an individual, with regard to legal issues. Mrs. Moulton questioned what would happen in the event the Board began giving a great deal of direction into programming and it was felt by KLVX that it was inappropriate. Mr. Axtell explained that KLVX would have freedom of expression with journalistic responsibility. Mr. Stansbury explained that the FCC gives CCSD broad discretion, but does impose limitations, and that each form of media carries with it different standards. He also discussed FCC rulings involving indecency and profanity. He then continued his presentation on FCC rules and regulations that would affect the trustees as licensees of KLVX, and also explained the use of broadcast time. Mrs. Johnson asked why the information given was different than was given months ago regarding the maintenance of a record of time usage by candidates. Mr. Axtell responded that KLVX did not understand the term “qualified candidate” as fully as they do now. Mrs. Brager-Wellman stated that Channel 4 is broadcast over public airways, but that it is not public because the county owns it, and that they can promote whomever they wish. Mr. Stansbury explained that a cable channel is not a broadcast service and one over which the cable operator has no editorial control, and that the law imposes different standards on that channel so that federal restrictions would not technically apply. Mr. Axtell stated that KLVX oversees educational access channels 70 and 71, and that those channels are shared with the university and community college, totaling 8 hours a day for school district time. Mr. Stansbury stated pay channels are subject to limitations and codes imposed by a franchise agreement between the franchising authority, which is the district, and cable operator. Mr. Axtell asked Mr. Hoffman to address State law and incurring expenses through certain channels. KLVX 04-26-06 Page 2 of 6 APPROVE CCSD FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION (FCC) LEGAL COUNSEL, WILEY REIN & FIELDING (continued) Mr. Hoffman stated that the legal department works very carefully to ensure funding efforts are promoted properly. Mrs. Moulton questioned how an ethics violation would be determined. Mr. Hoffman responded that it could either be determined by the State Commission on Ethics or it could go through court. Mr. Axtell explained some comparisons between Channels 2 and 4, and he said that the county utilizes a rotated schedule of shows and appearances by elected officials. Mrs. Johnson asked when the election period runs. Mr. Stansbury responded that the election period runs from when a candidate would become qualified under FCC guidelines until election, which can be broken into individual segments between primary and general election. Mr. Mason questioned whether an Educational Service Announcement (ESA) is journalistic. Mr. Stansbury stated that it may be journalistic, but that the FCC would consider that a use to trigger the equal time obligations. Mr. Mason posed the scenario that what if Inside Education wanted to do a journalistic approach and asked a trustee to do it and that trustee was up for election. Mr. Stansbury stated that if it occurs during an election it would be questionable whether the FCC would consider an ESA a newscast or a news interview for purposes of equal time requirements, but that before an election it would not be a problem. Mr. Axtell explained that the county and city have specific directives to their staff for face time for their elected officials. Mrs. Moulton questioned if this policy would go into effect on May 1, 2006. Mr. Axtell explained that this procedure was rewritten because the old procedure defined “candidacy” in terms of when people filed, and he stated if the Board requested that KLVX write a policy, they would be glad to do it. He also explained the limitations of using KLVX for fundraising purposes, and it was announced that Clark County would be filing its application to renew the license for KLVX in the summer of 2006, with a public comment period regarding this application. Mr. Mason questioned if other entities could bid for the license when the license is expired. Mr. Stansbury responded that no party can file for renewal, but that the FCC could revoke a license after investigation into egregious acts, and then other entities could bid for that license. KLVX 04-26-06 Page 3 of 6 APPROVE CCSD FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION (FCC) LEGAL COUNSEL, WILEY REIN & FIELDING (continued) Mrs. Johnson questioned if testimony that could be given about that issue on the application would be in support of testimony if there were a complaint filed. Mr. Stansbury responded that if someone were to file a complaint, there would be the opportunity to file an objection and response, and that the FCC usually resolves disputes solely on the basis of that paper record. He also stated that a license is valid for eight years. Mrs. Johnson questioned if KLVX’s planning program is for projections. Mr. Axtell explained that KLVX programming is based upon community issues. Mrs. Johnson asked about having a 50-second delay on live broadcasting. Mr. Axtell responded that KLVX does not have the delay equipment. He explained that KLVX only takes the most highly edited version of content that PBS gives them. Mr. Stansbury stated that the FCC determines which profanity may be used according to content in the telling of a story. Mrs. Johnson stated the school district should go in the direction of a more conservative approach. Mr. Mason questioned what the value of the license was. Mr. Stansbury responded that it would be hard to tell because the school district’s frequency is restricted to noncommercial use and the frequency could not be sold to any commercial operator, which would place a lower market value on the license. APPROVE KLVX DIGITAL CONVERSION AND UPDATE Approval of Federal Communications Commission (FCC) mandated digital television conversion, as recommended in Reference B. Mr. Axtell updated the Board about digital television conversion. He mentioned the three special Board meetings in 1988 and 1999 regarding costs of digital conversion and stated that the outcome of the meetings was that the trustees would maintain the license, would not use school district money to pay for digital equipment, and that it would be funded through private sources. He also stated that the target for KLVX’s capital campaign is $74,000,000.00 and explained what those funds would cover. He stated that the analogue camera equipment currently in use would be used until no longer operational, and then the new digital equipment would transition over. He also explained how the county and CCSD would share the microwave system to allow the rural police and fire departments access so that this funding would get leveraged through the county. Mrs. Moulton stated that she has heard that there would be a great surplus of 700 to 800 million dollars at the State level in 2006 and asked whether the district would seek discreet funding. KLVX 04-26-06 Page 4 of 6 APPROVE KLVX DIGITAL CONVERSION AND UPDATE (continued) Mr. Axtell stated the choice comes to the district every year with a lobbying request and the decision that was made with iNVest about four or five years prior meant that the district would not seek discreet funding for public television. He stated that one-shot money is easier to get, and that he would support the district if it chose to pursue that.

Load more

  6

Copy Link