By Adam Pagnucco.
Council Member Kate Stewart recently made news by introducing a bill that would impose new requirements on “community media organizations.” The bill provoked pushback from a number of speakers at its hearing, with one of the board members of Montgomery Community Media (MCM) claiming that one of its provisions “structurally compromises our editorial freedom and turns a neutral community media center into an arm of county government.”
Are the opponents right? Is Stewart’s bill aimed at taking over an independent media outlet? Or is Stewart seeking appropriate accountability over public funding? And here is a bigger question – should the county be funding local media at all?
Let’s discuss the specifics of the bill before opining on it. Sec. 8-A3 of the county code defines community media organizations this way.
*****
Community media organization means a nonprofit corporation that provides services to:
(1) support the production of local programming or the operation of local access channels, or both;
(2) serve viewers as well as program producers; and
(3) promote high quality productions, responsible and diverse points of view, and balance in subject matters.
*****
In practice, MCM is the primary community media organization impacted by Stewart’s Bill 33-26E. The bill’s introduction memo imposes the following requirements on any community media organization in the county’s purview:
It must adopt a racial equity and social justice policy as defined in the bill.
It must include on its board “up to 7 voting members who must be residents of the County, including: (A) at least one member who is nominated by the County Council; and (B) at least one member who is nominated by the County Executive.” These board members must file financial disclosure statements with the county ethics commission.
It must adhere to the requirements of the Maryland Open Meetings Act and the Maryland Public Information Act.
Why does Council Member Stewart believe that the county can and should impose such requirements on a legally independent nonprofit, much less a news organization?
The answer is that MCM has been receiving millions of dollars in county funding each year for decades, which accounts for the vast majority of its budget. The bill responds to a 2023 report by the council’s Office of Legislative Oversight (OLO) finding that MCM’s funding structure “is most definitely not sustainable and does not align with the current state of technology, information dissemination, and customer preferences.” The report went even further, stating, “OLO suggests that the Council review the advantages and disadvantages of retaining or eliminating the Cable Television Special Fund and decide – one way or the other – how to proceed in future budgets.”
The Cable TV fund subsidizes MCM, so eliminating it opens the door to ending MCM’s public support. No wonder why MCM’s board and supporters are so interested in this bill and the report to which it responds. These are existential issues for the organization and its mission.
MCM has a long history with the county government and the cable subscribers who pay for it. We will explore that history next.