Georgia House Bill HB346

Georgia 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/10/25

Caption

Local government; prohibit municipalities and counties from using public, educational, and governmental programming (PEG) channels for political purposes

Summary

House Bill 346 amends Georgia’s expedited franchising law for cable and video services to place new limits on how municipalities and counties may use public, educational, and governmental programming (PEG) channels. The bill preserves local governments’ ability to request PEG channel capacity, but it conditions access on programming and utilization standards, including minimum hours of original, nonduplicative content and requirements that channels be substantially used. It also specifies how many PEG channels may be requested based on local population and whether the channel is on a basic/analog or nonbasic digital tier. A central feature of the bill is a prohibition on using PEG channel capacity for political purposes. Under the bill, local governments could not use PEG channels to broadcast partisan political programming or content associated with a candidate’s campaign. The bill also provides that if a municipality or county fails to meet the usage criteria or substantial-utilization standards, the channel may be withdrawn after notice, though it can be restored if the local government later certifies compliance.

Impact

HB346 would amend O.C.G.A. § 36-76-8, the state franchise statute governing PEG access channels, by adding explicit content restrictions and operational thresholds for local governments that receive PEG capacity from cable or video service providers. It would affect municipalities and counties that seek or maintain PEG channels, as well as franchise holders that must allocate and, in some cases, restore channel capacity. The bill would also create a state-law basis for removing underused PEG channels and would limit local governments’ ability to use those channels for political messaging.

Sentiment

The available record shows no committee transcript or vote history, so there is no documented floor or committee debate to gauge support or opposition. Based on the bill text and caption, the measure appears to reflect a regulatory and content-restriction approach toward PEG channels, suggesting likely support from sponsors concerned about political use of public-access resources. At the same time, the bill’s limits on local-government programming and the possibility of losing channel capacity could be viewed as restrictive by municipalities and counties that operate PEG channels.

Contention

The main point of contention is the prohibition on political use of PEG channels, including partisan programming and campaign-related content. Local governments may object that the restriction could limit their ability to communicate with residents or air content that they view as informational rather than political. Another likely area of dispute is the bill’s enforcement mechanism: channels that do not meet the bill’s programming and utilization standards can be removed, which may concern municipalities and counties that lack the resources to produce the required amount of original content. Franchise holders may also be affected by the obligation to allocate, monitor, and potentially restore channel capacity under the new standards.