HomeMy WebLinkAboutRPT 5 LEAGUE OF CITIES 12-21-81 AG-_-ND'
/'- OATE: DECE~ER 11, 1981 Inter-eom
BC~ LEDENDECKER, DIRECTCR CF PUBLIC WOIR~S/CITY Hlk1GINEER
FROM: M(I~)A ~3CKT,RY, ADMINISTR~i~iVE ASSISTANT
SUBJECT: LEAGUE CF CALIFO~qIA CITIES CCNFERENCE: CART.E T~r.~VISIfN
Last week, December 1st and 2nd, I represented the City at the League of
California Cities conference regarding cable television. For me, being very new
in the area of cable and possessing limited knowledge, this conference was of
great value.
The conference addressed four (4) major issues - Franchising and RFP's,
Refrandnising, Pending Litigation, and City's Future with Cable. Following is a
synopsis of each area as it relates to the City:
This part of the cDnference was not as beneficial to us as the others as we
currently have a frand~ise. However, when speaking directly with several
attorneys, both representing cities and cable u~,~anies, I found that our
franchise, although of the basic umbrella type, has loopholes and does not retain
much power or authority for the City.
As for the RFP, I can find no indication that the City ever issued an RFP.
If/when another franchise is considered, an RFP should seriously be considered so
that the maximum benefit can be reaped by the City.
One further item with regard to a franchise should be mentioned. No franchise
will ever give the City absolute power or authority. Due to pending litigation,
legal councils for governmental agencies are encouraging cities to work in a
cooperative spirit with their cable company so that the venture will be profitable
for both entities.
t~q~]CRTRING:
Sinc~ we recently changed frcm Six Star Nielson Cablevision to Cu,u,~niCcm, we may
be in a position to at least explore the possibility of refranchising - if not
total refranchising, section refranchising. Because of all the legal
technicalities, I feel it would be in the best interest of the City to contact a
consulting firm specializing in cable to give us a proper perspective of our
position and assist us in developing a stronger, more meaningful franchise.
P~)II~; LI~IG~:~IOq:
There are three (3) major issues that will have effect on the City.
a recap of each issue:
Following is
State Senate Bill 699
This bill actually limits the cities power for regulating cable
companies, especially in the area of fee regulation. This bill is in
LF~UE CF CALIFO~IA CITIES CCNFERENCE:
DECf~BER 11 , 1981
PAGE
CABLE TELEVISICN
reaction to an FCC ruling regarding cable television and the First
Amendment. The case is in the appeal stage and a decision is not
expected for approximately six (6) m~nths or more.
e
The Boulder Case
The decision in this case could effect our current franchise and
refranchising procedure. It directly relates to the non-exclusive
franchise clause. It is scheduled on the court docket in late December,
1981.
e
New York vs Teleprompter-Westinghouse
This case regards the recapturing of fees from apartment buildings and
condominiums. Since 40 percent plus of Tustin's residents fall into this
category, the ultimate decision would have an effect on our recapturable
fees. This case is tentatively scheduled on the court docket for late
December, 1981, or early January, 1982.
Many speakers took opposing views on whether cities had a future with cable and
what it was. Those that took a somewhat, but not totally, negative view had been
involved with cable since the late 60's/early 70's and had several problems with
their franchise agreements and RFP's. Personally. I must support the positive
vantage point.
I realize that, in the past, the City has encountered some problems with cable;
however, looking at the total picture and ultimate positive possibilities, they
were miniscule.
At this point in time, cable is basically in the entertainment business - at least
to us. While being an enhancer to the general public, this is not the most
beneficial aspect of cable to our c~,,,~nity.
We, as a City, are in a position to be positive and pro-active in m~eting the
needs of our citizens. Although we will not see the results of our pro-activity
immediately, the potential is there and can be realized in the not too distant
future.
We currently are in line for one-way access channels which will enable the
oa,.,~nity to internalize to a point; that is, they can becc~e more aware of and
involved in their local government, educational system, local service agencies,
etc. while in their own hemes.
If we start working with our cable u~,,pany now for two-way access channels, we
could offer our cu,,,unity home security systems, hom~ banking, home shopping,
etc. These features are great innovations for our residents. There are some
inherent concerns involved; for example, the individual's privacy rights.
However, I feel control measures can be enacted if we work with our cable c~,~any
in a cooperative and open manner so that all can benefit.
LF~SUE CF CALIFORNIA CITIES CCNFERENCE:
DECEMBER 11 , 1981
PAGE THREE
CABLE TELEVISICN
AS I said in the beginning, the conference was valuable. I obtained numerous
printed materials giving more detail on all of these issues and they are available
to anyone who may be interested.
db
cc: Bill Huston