Licensed to non-actual locations

[Garrett Wollman]

<<On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 03:20:49 -0500, "Paul Hopfgarten" <paul@derrynh.net> said:

> If you think about it, WHOM is also currently licensed to a "non-political"
> subdivision.

> Mt. Washington is NOT actually a political subdivision in New Hampshire (I
> want to say it's Sargent's Purchase...which even at that, is still
> unincorporated).

> I guess "common knowledge" of a location is sufficient for the FCC...

The FCC generally prefers incorporated municipalities, and if pressed
will accept a "Census-defined place" (particularly in southern states
where municipalities ae in short supply).  They don't believe our
towns really exist, because the Census Bureau conflates them with
midwestern townships.

For allocations purposes today, there is something called "/Tuck/
analysis" which is supposed to demonstrate that the proposed community
is a real community.  The commission was much more lax in the days of
yore when they could hardly give away FM licenses.

-GAWollman