Charter cable viewers could lose signal for WVEC-TV

SUFFOLK

Thousands of residents could soon lose their cable signal to WVEC-TV, Channel 13, because of failed negotiations between one cable provider and the television station.

A statement Monday suggested the two sides could still avoid a disruption in service before the Dec. 31 drop date.

"We remain hopeful that we can quickly resolve this issue with minimal disruption to our viewers," said Jim Berman, president and general manager of WVEC-TV.

The announcement follows years of negotiations between the station and Charter Communications, a WVEC release said. The ABC-network channel would still be available over the air to viewers with TVs that have digital tuners or older sets that have digital converter boxes.

The impasse would have the biggest impact in Suffolk, where Charter is the sole cable provider. The city is currently in its own negotiations with the cable company because its 25-year agreement with Charter expires Jan. 31.

Debbie George, Suffolk's director of media and community relations, called the news disturbing. A Charter representative told her the company is still negotiating with WVEC but could not guarantee a deal will be reached.

It's not clear how the development might affect Suffolk's negotiations with Charter. The city had already planned to extend its current agreement by six months so the two parties could continue to negotiate, George said.

The city had hoped to draw in competitors for Charter last month when it sought proposals from other TV service providers. However, a Dec. 16 deadline for applications passed without responses from Verizon Communications or Cox Communications.

Spokespeople for Verizon and Cox said their companies had no plans to enter Suffolk's TV market. Neither cited specific reasons, though Verizon spokesman Harry Mitchell said population density is one of the factors his company considers in such decisions.

Charter took over the city's cable system in 2000 when it bought out Falcon Cable Media. The transition was marred by complaints that Charter inherited from Falcon's service. The City Council threatened to revoke the company's franchise agreement, but Charter paid about $340,000 in fines and reduced complaints with improved service.

George said the most common complaint she hears now is the lack of service to sparsely populated rural areas, but those terms are governed by the city's agreement.

Tim Daniel has lobbied Charter and city officials - to no avail - for service to his rural neighborhood near the city's southern edge.

"I don't have any problem with their existing service because I don't have it," Daniel said.

It's not just cable TV. Daniel said his two teenagers sometimes have Internet-based assignments, and that can be a problem because their dial-up service is "just terrible."

Charter doesn't have to extend service to an area unless it has at least 30 occupied homes per street mile and touches the company's activated system. A state ordinance requires the same minimum standard, but cities can negotiate different requirements.

For example, Chesapeake has deals with Verizon and Cox that require them to serve areas with just 25 homes per street mile, said Mark Cox, a city spokesman.

Cities can negotiate other sweeteners as well. Verizon pays Chesapeake 22 cents per subscriber per month to support the local government TV station, and Cox Communications gave the city an $865,000 capital grant for the station, Mark Cox said. Cities typically request such franchise fees in exchange for the companies using public rights of way to deliver service.

Chesapeake also receives a standard 5 percent tax on its franchises. Suffolk receives the same tax through its arrangement with Charter, but nothing more. The tax provides about $250,000 a year to the city's general fund, George said.

The lack of a competitor for Charter likely will hurt Suffolk's leverage in negotiating better terms and could mean higher costs for residents, said Irene Leech, president of the Virginia Citizens Consumer Council.

Matt Favre, a Charter representative, said his company tries to minimize higher operational costs "regardless of competition or not." He said Suffolk residents do have choices, including satellite TV and other high-speed Internet providers, and many still choose Charter.

"I think that speaks volumes of the level of service provided by Charter and the activity the company has overtaken to improve service and move away from the early years when they purchased the systems from Falcon Cable," Favre said.

Pilot writer Carolyn Shapiro contributed to this article.

Dave Forster, (757) 222-5563, dave.forster@pilotonline.com