WBRW is a public access cable station operated for the benefit of Bruce, Romeo, and Washington residents. WBRW offers an opportunity for our township government to provide an important public service, build improved relations with surrounding communities and develop a model for joint sharing of costs for the benefit of all taxpayers. Unfortunately, Mr. Kirsh has failed to take advantage of these opportunities and has raised questions about whether the township keeps its word.

Residents in Bruce, Romeo and Washington pay fees on their cable bills to fund public access cable. Those charges are collected by the cable provider and returned to the local governments of the three communities based on the number of viewers in each town. Each of those communities are then supposed to use those funds for funding local public access cable at WBRW. Unfortunately, Washington Township has been withholding a substantial portion of these funds.

WBRW was formed by the communities of Bruce, Romeo and Washington to share the responsibility of providing public access cable. The three communities committed to using their cable fees from the Cable Companies for this effort. Unfortunately, Washington Township has chosen to withhold funds believed by station management to be approximately $200,000 to date. Instead, they have used funds to build their own video capabilities separate from the other towns. This reneging on an agreed-upon arrangement is an unwise blow to inter-town relations, a poor use of resident money, and a cloud over the integrity of township leadership.

Rather than living up to their obligation to turn all of the cable fees funds over to WBRW, Washington has used a portion of the funds to install equipment at the Washington Township hall. They have also used the funds to hire the son of Helen Sergott to tape meetings at a much higher cost than if WBRW were to perform the tapings. He is the son of one of the women Mr. Kirsh appointed when he replaced two long-time Planning Commission members in an attempt to get a rubber stamp panel for his expansive development plans.

The resolution to form the Tri-Community Cable Communications Commission and WBRW clearly states the following:

“the Romeo Village Council and the Washington and Bruce Township Boards shall vest in the Tri-Community Cable Communications Commission the power to receive and expend all [emphasis mine] cable TV franchise fees from the participating communities for the operation of a Community Program Channel and Studio, and shall be authorized to select and appoint competent and qualified persons to operate said Studio.”

It goes on to say the following:

“Any resolutions, franchises or ordinances or parts thereof in conflict with the provisions of this resolution are hereby repealed.”

Note that this was approved by Washington township on 5/21/86 and by the other two towns that same year. 

In an attempt to justify reneging on this resolution, Washington obtained a legal opinion. In a legal dispute, both sides will obtain legal opinions that often justify the position each is taking even though the positions are mutually exclusive. In this opinion, counsel focuses primarily on whether the township was REQUIRED by law or by any township ordinance to turn the fees over to WBRW. As you can see from the second resolution quote above, the township agreed to repeal any conflicting ordinance. The legal opinion desperately attempts to justify NOT paying all of the funds into WBRW by stating that the resolution does not specifically require the township to transfer all cable fees to the station but rather simply vests in the station the right to receive "any" fees that the communities choose to transfer to it.

A plain reading of the resolution shows that the lawyer's interpretation does not match the intent of the parties who agreed to the resolution. The resolution clearly states that the parties VEST in the station the right to RECEIVE AND EXPEND ALL cable TV franchise fees from the participating communities. The transfer is clearly intended by that language. This is confirmed by the fact that Washington turned over all the cable fees for over 15 years after the signing of the original resolution to form WBRW. Withholding of funds began several years ago.

The reasons Washington gives for withholding the money vary from day to day. Gary Kirsh claims to be uncomfortable with the level of coverage that WBRW gives Washington Township. He also appears to believe that it is unfair that Washington pays more than 1/3 of the costs of the station when it is only 1/3 of the three towns benefiting from it. His logic is faulty as shown below.

Though Washington pays more in total, its cost per customer is equitable to the other towns. Washington receives more from the Cable Company than the other two towns because the cable company collects more from Washington residents than it does from Bruce and Romeo. This is simply because Washington has more residents than the other towns. Since it has more residents enjoying the benefit of WBRW, Washington naturally should pay the larger portion of the station costs. In other words, the PER CABLE VIEWER COST is equitable.

It is not intended that Washington receive MORE of the fees because it has MORE of the viewers but then WITHHOLD the extra fees from WBRW. That would be an unintended windfall for the township. Washington has a moral responsibility as the most significant beneficiary of the station to turn its collected fees over to the station. The argument would hold true if the tables were turned and Bruce was growing faster than Washington.

Fairness aside, a deal is a deal.

I do not have any opinion on the qualifications of Helen Sergott’s son and am certain he is a fine man.  However, the manner in which he was hired concerns me.  Consider the following:

On 2/7/06, the Washington Cable Committee instructed several members to research how other towns handle the taping of meetings.  A written report was prepared which summarized their discussions as shown below:

Clinton            recommended a minimum of $15 per hour for a part-timer

Macomb          recommended $15 for external tech or ask WBRW to do it

Harrison          hired someone for $10 per hour

Chesterfield    Comcast tapes at no charge

Shelby             $13 per hour is paid to a part-timer

Fraser              Flat fee of $125-150 per meeting with average length being 3 hours

Bruce               Use Channel 6 equipment – no tech, no cost.

Interestingly, Washington chose to hire Mr. Sergott at $35 per hour (max $125 per meeting) despite most of the feedback above suggesting a lower rate.  Is the price paid to Helen Sergott’s son reasonable?  Ignore the feedback from other towns.  The WBRW station manager who has much broader responsibilities makes less per hour.  Also consider that WBRW would likely have used trained volunteers to do the taping FOR FREE. 

How was the contract with Helen Sergott’s son bid?  Files retrieved from the township under the Freedom of Information Act  show the following timeline:

            4/3/06              Received bid by township employee at $175 per meeting

            4/18/06            Cable Committee met regarding Video Production Manager

            4/19/06            Committee issued memo to Board recommending Sergott

            4/19/06            “Revised” Sergott bid received (original was not providedin foia)

            4/19/06            Board tabled hiring manager pending review of applications.

            5/1/06              Received bid by private citizen at $30 per hour

            5/3/06              Board approved Sergott contract.

The files received under FOIA include a draft public announcement which would have allowed applications to be submitted until May 3rd. I reviewed past issues of the Romeo Observer, which the township typically uses for public notices, but did not find the notice between the 4/19 delay and the 5/3 decision. It is possible that the posting was either issued before 4/19 or never published at all. Either way, it appears that a recommendation to accept Sergott was on the fast track before the 5/3 deadline for bids being submitted had passed.

At the very least, the way this situation has been handled does not instill confidence.

Washington officials have claimed that WBRW is not lacking for anything. The fact that they have been operating within a balanced budget despite Mr. Kirsh withholding the funds is not proof that they have enough funding. It simply means station management has made the fiscally responsible decision to live within the funds allocated to it. Additional funds would make other projects possible that might not otherwise be considered today. There are many uses the funds could be put to including upgrading technology to allow for high definition, streaming video, tapeless, equipment, and additional staff to generate more programming to better serve the community.

In fact, if Washington feels that some cable equipment is needed at the township hall, they should use their seats on the Tri-Community Cable Committee to vote for expenditures to improve equipment at all three of Bruce, Romeo and Washington offices. If the three towns needed to pay for someone to tape governmental meetings rather than use volunteers, perhaps those contracts should have been entered into by WBRW rather than each individual township. This could have resulted in some economies of scale. Instead, Washington withheld the funds and went alone, paying a higher hourly rate to the son of a Kirsh ally than WBRW would have cost.

WBRW has put station management in the uncomfortable position of coming hat in hand to request additional funds for projects when they don't have to do that with the other two towns.

WBRW serves three communities yet most of its air time is used for local ads. There is not sufficient programming to occupy the available air time even though, as a public access station, anyone from any of the communities can produce a program and have it aired. There is no need for an entirely new station just to serve one of the three communities. It is financially irresponsible to attempt to go it alone. Further, doing so creates an unnecessary barrier between the communities.

Township officials are denying they want their own station or studio.  However, they have recently discussed the need for a bi-monthly half hour “magazine”.  They are discussing acquiring at least one camera, increased lighting, new microphones and speakers, a laptop to edit video, and training capability all to operate under the direction of their video contractor Mr. Sergott.  To deny they want their own studio is like saying they don’t want a car, but intend to buy the drive train, engine, braking system, electrical system, and wheels.  Will they bid the production contract this time and give WBRW a chance to bid on the work that should be assigned to them in the first place?

Tax payers are not being served well by this ambition.

The real motive behind Mr. Kirsh's treatment of WBRW became obvious after I announced that I was running against him. WBRW aired my announcement. Mr. Kirsh called the station demanding they pull their coverage, attempting to censor the news. Mr. Kirsh has frequently used WBRW and other mediums to promote himself but bristled when they actually provided coverage of a real news event that he felt was detrimental to his campaign. When the station refused to allow him to censor what was truly legitimate news, he wrote an unflattering letter to the editor about WBRW's coverage of Super Sunday. This was both unfair and unprofessional. Mr. Kirsh came to a recent Tri-Community Cable meeting to raise his grievances. Forty to Fifty residents came to the meeting to show their support for the station and its leadership.

Mr. Kirsh appears very concerned with his legacy and his grand political ambitions. Having his own production capabilities allows him to better influence the community's perception of him and adds to his resume for the pursuit of higher offices. This ambition and need for control does not serve tax payers well.

It’s time for Washington Township to live up to its obligations to WBRW and pursue a collaborative approach with the surrounding communities. Making the best and highest use of WBRW rather than pursuing an individual path allows for economies of scale which benefits residents. It is the financially responsible, collaborative and ethical approach to restore the cable fees to WBRW and work with the surrounding communities to make the station the best it can be.

At the November 7 meeting of the Washington Township Board of Trustees, Washington's Board followed the recommendation of Supervisor Gary Kirsh and selected one of their own to fill a vacancy on the Tri–Community Cable Commission (TCCC). The TCCC is a 6 member panel made up of 2 representatives from each of the communities of Romeo, Bruce and Washington. They guide the activities of the local cable station WBRW. Despite applications from a highly qualified former station manager and videographer and other applicants, Gary Kirsh selected Wayne Durham, a Washington Trustee. When asked for his qualifications, Mr. Durham said he has been in management and knows how to work a video camera. Mr. Kirsh defended his appointment by stating that he knew he would be second guessed by “outside forces”. Apparently he regards residents as outsiders. Mr. Kirsh's motive is clear – Mr. Durham is a Kirsh ally who is unlikely to question Mr. Kirsh's controversial withholding of cable fees from the station.