HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA - 08021988 - I.O.10 Tdr" = BOARD OF SUPERVISORS I . 0. 10
FRM: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE C ltra
July 25, 1988 CWIQ
DATE; \^JO"" "J
Status Report on Negotiations
SUBJECT: regarding Cable TV Ordinance
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION•
Acknowledge receipt of the status report of the Internal
.Operations Committee on negotiations regarding the new Cable TV
Ordinance.
BACKGROUND:
On April 19, 1988, the . Board of Supervisors approved our last
status report on this subject. We met with Sara Hoffman, Cable
TV Franchise Administrator, on July 25, 1988 and reviewed the
attached report from her dated July 21, 1988. In particular, we
discussed the two unresolved issues identified in Ms. Hoffman' s
report; namely, the extent to which the cable operators should be
required to indemnify the County against third party claims, and
the types of revenue and expenditures which should be taken into
account in defining the cable companies ' gross receipts for .
purposes of calculating the franchise fee.
On the indemnification issue, the County' s Risk Management
Division is concerned that the County do everything possible to
protect itself from liability against third party claims by
requiring the cable operators to defend the County against any
such claims. We agree that staff should attempt to negotiate an
ordinance which will, to the maximum extent possible, indemnify
the County against such third party claims.
We generally agree with the position taken by staff on those
items of revenue and expenditure which should beiexcluded in
defining gross receipts. Generally, revenue which the cable
company receives as a result of its franchise should be included
in gross receipts. Revenue from peripheral activities not
covered by the County' s franchise, such as the operation of a
video store, should be excluded from gross revenue. In addition,
certain mandated expenditures for items which are unique to the
cable TV industry, such as federal copyright fees plus bad debts
and refundable deposits from customers, are appropriate to be
deducted from gross receipts.
X
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: _ YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMME DATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR X RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
X APPROV OTHER �-� .-�
/ /�
SIGNATURE(S1: Sunne W. PCPeak Tom Torlakson
ACTION OF BOARD ON August 2. 1988 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HERESY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT II AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES; NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
CC: County Administrator ATTESTED p{ /
County Counsel
Cable TV Franchise Administrator PHIL BA HELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
M382/7-83 BY ,DEPUTY
Page 2
We agree with the Cable ,TV Franchise Administrator that many of
the other expenditures suggested by the cable TV industry are not
appropriate for purposes of reducing the company' s gross
receipts.
We will continue to keep the Board apprised of developments . in
,this regard.
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Administration Building
651 Pine Street
Martinez, California
DATE: July 21 , 1988
TO: Internal Operations Committee
FROM: Sara Hoffman, Franchise AdministraZ�—
SUBJECT: STATUS OF CABLE ORDINANCE NEGOTIATIONS
The first phase of negotiations will be concluded on July 28. At that time, we will have
reviewed the entire Cable Ordinance with the Cable Operators once; identifying areas of
agreement and issues that still need resolution. The final negotiations will take place during
the week of September 19. In addition, staff plans to hold public workshops the second
week of September to assess community needs and interests.
Recent discussions with the Operators concluded with two unresolved issues that the
Committee may want to discuss:
♦ Indemnifications (Section 58-6.010) - The Cable Operators are concerned that the
current language would require them to indemnify the County against third party
claims even when the cable operator is not at fault. An example would be a first
amendment lawsuit against the County if the County did not grant a second franchise
within a service territory.
Franchise Fees (Section 58-6.002)-Cable Operators offer a wide variety of services
and products that were not available in past years. For example, one cable operator
will be opening a video movie rental store. Consequently,staff agrees with the Cable
Operators that there should be certain exclusions to the definition of gross receipts
which are subject to a franchise fee. Staff and the Cable Operators agree that
franchise fees should not be paid on refundable deposits collected from
subscribers, bad debts orcopyright fees collected by the Federal Copyright Tribunal.
The staff position has been that the County should receive franchise fees to the extent
that they are permitted by law and the product/service cannot be easily obtained in
the market by a non-franchised entity. The Cable Operators argue that franchise fees
should be based only on services received over the right-of-way from subscribers.
They wish to exclude such activities as advertising, payments to program suppliers,
installation and reconnection, commercial use channels and converter rentals, as
well as general taxes and fees (such as the possessory interest tax).
SMH:cm(eh)
ioc721.doc