As the selectmen prepare to vote on a transfer of Harvard’s cable license from Charter Communications to Comcast Corporation, residents seem less concerned with the future of cable than the quality of their internet services, a matter over which the town has no authority.
That sentiment was on display at the public hearing conducted by the selectmen at Town Hall on Aug. 19. The meeting was attended by representatives of Comcast and Charter, as well as the town’s special cable counsel, William Solomon. A half-dozen citizens spoke during public comment, questioning the mechanics of the transfer and the services that would follow. The selectmen listened and asked questions, but did not deliberate. While their vote is scheduled for Oct. 7, it is unclear what impact it will have one way or the other.
A piece of a larger puzzle
The transfer of the town’s cable license is a part of a much bigger plan by Comcast, the nation’s largest cable provider, to merge with Time Warner Cable. By handing over 1.4 million Time Warner subscribers to Charter and exchanging another 1.6 million customers with the company, Comcast hopes to win the approval of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for a merger that would leave it with 30 percent of the U.S. cable market and make Charter the second largest provider in the country, according to a press release issued jointly by Comcast and Charter on April 28.
As explained by Charter representative Thomas Cohan at the hearing, though Charter operates in 29 states, “our New England system is by far our smallest.” Comcast operates in 237 towns of Massachusetts, he noted, while Charter operates in 53. “We’re kind of a hole in the donut in this area,” he said, and because the communities surrounding Harvard are served by Comcast, including Ayer, Devens, Shirley, Littleton, and Boxboro, Harvard is a donut hole of its own. If the transfers are approved, Charter will be “exiting New England.” Should the FCC turn down Comcast’s merger with Time Warner, company documents imply the transfers would not take place.
Internet worries
Residents at the meeting, however, seemed less interested in the future of town cable than in plans for continued Internet access and other services.
“I have no interest in cable and would never subscribe to it,” declared home business owner Linda Moulton of Old Littleton Road during public comment. “The only service I have from Charter is Internet,” she said, adding that she was concerned about what would replace it when Comcast came to town.
Robert Curran of Slough Road, founder of Nextdoor Harvard, agreed. As a small business operator, he said, “I wouldn’t want to lose the [Internet] service I’m getting from Charter.” Current Charter Internet users were confused, he said, and he asked Comcast to provide information on the kinds of Internet, phone, and other options it planned to offer for comparison with the present Charter menu.
Ben Myers of Wescott Road said that it was a statement of fact that, “We as citizens who are customers of a cable company are on our own in this transition.”
Town cable counsel Solomon, however, did not entirely agree. The hearing gave citizens a unique chance to speak directly to a large corporation like Comcast. Federal law, he agreed—“for better or worse”—gives Harvard no authority over Internet and other services offered by cable providers. “Internet is not cable,” he said, a distinction that was decided long ago by the Supreme Court. If the town tried to set criteria for Internet service, Comcast would object and “we would lose in an administrative agency [decision] or a court of law.”
It’s up to Comcast
But by virtue of there having been a public hearing, said Solomon, Comcast now knows the concerns of Harvard citizens. “It’s now up to Comcast to decide,” he said, “Is there a way, apart from this license transfer … that some of those questions can be answered or responded to in their public information, so that the public doesn’t have to wonder and worry about their businesses, about their personal email, about their equipment … during the transition process?” It would be a way to “build confidence,” he said.
There was no immediate comment from Comcast representative Gerry Buckley. But earlier he said the company prided itself “on being a local company, in maintaining open communications with the community, with local governments.” He said he thought small business in town would be “pleased” with the services it offered. “[W]e look forward to working for the residents of Harvard…”
Federal law does give the selectmen the right to reject the Charter-to-Comcast transfer on legal, technical, management, or financial grounds. But such a move would be highly unusual and would likely be immediately overturned, said BOS Chairman Stu Sklar.
Meantime, the town continues to negotiate with Charter for a renewal of its 10-year cable license with the town, which expires in Jan. 2015.
“For the time being,” Solomon said at last month’s hearing, “it’s business as usual … It will be the obligation of Comcast as the purchaser of the [Charter] system to abide by all the terms and conditions of that license.” They won’t have an opportunity to change its terms. “They will live by the terms negotiated essentially between myself and the cable committee and the Board of Selectmen.”
In an email to the Press, Cable Committee Chairman Bill Johnson said he was pleased with the progress of the negotiations. “We discussed not only Harvard’s local cable access needs for the next 10 years, but also its municipal data network needs,” he wrote. “Since we are using recent renewals in other towns as models to guide our thinking, I share [town cable counsel Bill Solomon’s] optimism that we may be able to offer the [selectmen] a tentative negotiated agreement … well ahead of the Jan. 15, 2015, license renewal date.”
John Osborn is a Charter cable and Internet subscriber.
