HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 11051991 - 2.6 w
2. 6
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUN'T'Y, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on ' November 5, 1991 by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Fanden, McPeak, Torlakson, Powers
NOES: Supervisor Schroder
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: Interconnected Cable Television Channel
The Board received from Sara Hoffman, Franchise Administrator,
the report (attached hereto and included as a part of this document)
on the proposed interconnected cable television channel. Ms. Hoffman
spoke on the issues presented in the report.
Sanford M. Skaggs, representing a majority of the cable
television operators who are franchised by the County, Law firm of
McCutchen, Doyle, Brown & Enersen, P. O. Box V, Walnut Creek194596 ,
referred to his August 12, 1991 letter to the County Administrator on
this matter. He commented on potential costs to the County for the
construction of an interconnect. 1
Board .members considered the options set forth in the referenced
report and commented on the advantages of an interconnect channel by
providing educational and public awareness programming to County
residents.
Supervisor Schroder expressed concern that the proposed
interconnect is a duplication of technology available today capable
of providing educational programs to television- viewers. He advised
that he did not believe there is a need for this program nor, that
this is the time to' add a new program of this kind because of present
economic conditions.
On recommendation of Suprvisor McPeak, the Board:
- REAFFIRMED its decision to implement a cable interconnect;
DIRECTED staff to negotiate a two-phase implementation
process, provided the FCC firmly agrees to the program and
the microwave stations can absolutely be constructedlwithin
the identified timeframe. The two phases shall include (a)
immediate dedication of regularly scheduled time andl
channels by all operators (which could be phased in) ;; and (b)
interconnect completed no later than January 1, 19941from now
provided the County is utilizing at least 80 percent !of the
dedicated time. The results of the negotiations are 'to be
reported to the Board of Supervisors no later than December
31, 1991.
- AUTHORIZED the County Administator, or his designee, to
negotiate a financing arrangement such that the payback period
is 5 - 7 years with the cost to consumers to be about 3 cents
a month or no more than 5 cents a month.
cc: County Administrator I hereby certify that this Is a true ant., or-7ct copy of
an action taken and entered on tl,.. :"as of #0
Sara Hoffman. Board of Supervisors on the date
Director, CDD / �g
ATTESTED:
PHIL BATCHELOR,Clerk o' ::_. "scard
of Supervisors and County Administrator
ey oe�+.itv
"-0®6
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: Phil Batchelor County Administrator
By: Sara Hoffman, Franchise Administrator \
�_ -- Contra
Costa
DATE: November 5, 1991
SUBJECT: 'Interconnected Cable Television Channel
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
CONSIDER funding alternatives for County's Cable TV Channel:
1. Current Board Policy: Each Cable Operator voluntarily pays a
proportional cost of the entire system, with payments credited
against future franchise fees.
2 . Alternate Board Policy: Direct Cable Operators under Ordinance
82-28 to interconnect their systems and require interconnect as a
condition of franchise renewal requests for other Cable Operators.
DIRECT the Franchise Administrator to return to the Board for specific Board
authorization and action for implementation of the perferred_--. Board policy so
that the County Cable TV Channel can be operational by June, 1992 either by:
a) implementation of the Alternate Board Policy, if the current Board
Policy has not received firm commitments from the Cable Operators
by December 31, 1991.
OR
b) immediate implementation of the Alternate Board Polilcy-
FISCAL IMPACT
1. Current Board Policy: Loss of approximately $600, 000 in general
fund revenue over 7 years with an imputed interest rate of 8%, as
proposed by"
y the cable operators; without interest as proposed by
staff.
2 . Alternate Board Policy: No cost to County. However, �the Operators
could put interconnect costs into cable rates. If spread equally
among all rate payers, the cost would be approximately $2 .75 per
customer or $. 0325 per month for 7 years.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURt�`
,qt.
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOAR COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S) :
ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
r�
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT j TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: NOES: / ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
ATTESTED
PHIL BATCHEL`Olk., CLERK OF
THE BOARD OF SUPkRVISORS
AND COUNTY ADMINIS - TOR
cc: Com ity Development
,,DEPUTY
h23:i rcon.bos BY
FISCAL IMPACT (Cont'd)
It is important to note that the current Board policy depends upon voluntary
payment by the Operators. Since the 1984 Federal Cable Communications Policy
Act and Section 58-8. 018 of County Cable Ordinance 82-28 allow for provision
of facilities and equipment, not payments, the Alternate Board policy is the
only alternative unless the Operators cooperate.
On-going channel expenses would be funded by the County from the existing
Community Access Trust Fund.
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION
Request by Cable Operators
On August 12, 1991, the County received the attached letter from Mr. Sanford
Skaggs representing seven of the nine cable systems involved in the
negotiations. Mr. Skaggs expressed concern for the County!s financial
position and suggested that construction of an interconnect i would cause
additional strain. Mr. Skaggs requested shared use of existing community
channels to distribute County programming.
Review of Cable Operators Request i
1. Shared Use of Community Channel - Cost Shared use of current
community channels would be very expensive, about $250, 000/year for only ten
hours of programs per week.
To air, a program countywide in a timely manner on shared channels, a tape
must be duplicated at a cost of between $20 - $40 depending on tape length.
Nine tapes ($180 - $360) must then be delivered to the various cable systems
throughout the County. If staff delivers the tapes, it takes approximately
6 hours at $20/hour or $120. If Federal Expressed, costs are $15 each or
$135. Therefore, to air one, one-hour program would cost $480'. To air 10
hours of programming a week would cost $4,800 or $249, 600 a year. Even at
this limited production rate, the interconnect repays itself in only 2 and
1/2 years.
2 . Shared Use of Community Channel - Availability Even if the County
were willing to bear the recurring cost burden of tape duplication and
distribution, current channel availability makes the alternative infeasible.
The County currently has difficulty scheduling County programs on the same
date and time. Attached is a sample schedule for a six minuteiprogram. As
can be seen, times and channel numbers vary widely, making it difficult and
expensive to advertise programming to viewers. Programming on different
channels, different dates and times has been a major obstacle to the County's
CCTV efforts over the past 3 years.
Mr. Skaggs has questioned the need for the County to have a 1124-hour
channel. " Obviously, we do not expect to provide day and night I programming,
at least initially, and have provided that the Operators may use the channel
when not in use by the County. The key point is to have channel availability
during "peak hour" times, to maximize its availability to County citizens.
3 . Benefits Given to Cities. The County's interconnectiolnis not only
clearly permitted under federal law, it is consistent with past contributions
from cable companies to cities in Contra Costa County for Community
television. The City of Richmond received $100, 000 at the signing of their
agreement and $300, 000 over the next nine years. Other cities have also
received facilities and equipment amounting to thousands of dollars (list
attached) .
4 . Limited Opportunity During Renewals. The 1 1984 Cable
Communications Policy Act provides a window of opportunity during renewal of
a cable franchise. A local government may require cable operators to provide
community television facilities and equipment as part of their renewal
request. Five of the nine cable operators are currently in the renewal
process.
5. FCC License Requirement. License applications for the microwave
path were prepared and submitted to the FCC in September 1991. Once
licensed, the County has one year to complete construction. If not complete,
the FCC may allow one extension. If construction is still incomplete, the
County must complete a new feasibility study and new license applications
(approximately $35, 000) , and risks losing the microwave paths (which are
2
becoming increasingly scarce) .
History of Board Policy and Activities
The County has been steadily working towards its goal of the interconnect for
the past 6 years:
1985 - Developed a policy and workplan for
Interconnect and Community Television in
cooperation with Cities and Cable Companies.
1986 - Approved workplan and established trust fund
for community television programming and CCTV,
the countywide interconnect .
1987 - Surveyed cable TV subscribers to determine
their needs and interests (in accordance with
Cable Act requirements) . 80% of those
surveyed were interested in local news
programs and issues of countywide concern.
1988 - Established support for Community Television
production. The County purchased equipment
and provided grants and training to
departments interested in producing community
programming. Trained 20 employees and
produced 10 programs. Negotiations began with
cable operators on a new Cable Ordinance.
1989 - Continued negotiations with cable operators
who selected the franchise fee pre-payment
funding option (options attached) for the
interconnect and proposed additional
conditions. Continued training and grants (12
programs funded plus the Health Department
produced the first series of 8 programs on
Health issues) . Purchased editing equipment
to reduce post-production costs.
1990 - Completed interconnect feasibility study,
including costs and microwave path
availability. The Board determined that the
interconnect was technically and economically
feasible. Training and program production
continued, with the added assistance of a
part-time video technician.
1991 - Board directed staff on March 26, 1991 to take
the steps necessary to activate a countywide
interconnected channel by January 1992 . FCC
license applications for the microwave
interconnect have been prepared and submitted
to the FCC. (These had to be submitted within
6 months of the frequency coordination. )
Target 1992 - Countywide Interconnected Cable TV Channel
operational.
Benefits of County Channel
The Board verified the interest in the Countywide interconnected channel
through its 1987 countywide survey. The results conclusively demonstrated
interest and demand for the channel. Benefits are many:
1. Programs to Citizens - Information about services and issues of
countywide concern can be aired on a timely and cost effective
basis. One tape can be inserted at a central location and aired
countywide.
2 . Scheduling of Programs - With a single channel number and
scheduling responsibility, program schedules can be printed monthly
to alert subscribers to upcoming programs of interest. These
schedules could be published by local newspapers, be available at
local libraries or be distributed through other means.
3
3 . Multi-agency Benefit - Cities, fire departments, police
departments, , East Bay Regional Park District and schools have
expressed an interest in providing programming to air on the
channel. Some of these agencies would prefer daytime programming
opportunities. This could amount to 8-10 hours of programming a
day, more than most community channels. In addition, a bulletin
board would ' air continually with information about countywide
events, meetings, hearings, services and programs.
4 . Interactive, Live Programming - Although many programs will be
tape delayed, the County could provide .its constituents additional
services, such as live, interactive hearings and emergency
information from the Office of Emergency Services.
Next Steps
The steps necessary to activate the County's Cable TV channel are
somewhat lengthy since the cable channel consists of both the
interconnected microwave system and allocation of a single dedicated
channel to the County. Also, not all cable operators are under the same
ordinance. At this time, staff anticipates that some or all of the
following actions will need to be taken by the Board:
1) Determine that the interconnect is technically and economically
feasible and direct cable operators under Ordinance 82-28 to comply
with the interconnection requirements.
2) Amend Ordinance 82-28 to clarify the County's right to control its
Cable TV channel and to require dedication of such channel by cable
operators under 82-28.
3) Adopt a new ':cable ordinance (or amend the existing one) for cable
operators subject to cable renewal. {
4) Issue requests for cable renewals to the applicable cable
operators.
5) As appropriate, renew cable franchises and order compliance for the
interconnection and channel requirement.
I
C
4
MCCUTCHEN, DOYLE, BROWN & ENERSEN
COUNSELORS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO- 1331 NORTH CALIFORNIA BOULEVARD WASHINGTON,D.C.
LOS ANGELES POST OFFICE BOX V SHANGHAI
SAN J05E WALNUT CREEK, CALIFORNIA 94596 TAIPEI
WALNUT CREEK TELEPHONE (41S) 937-8000
COSTA MESA FACSIMILE (415) 975-5390 AFFILIATED OFFICE
BANGKOK
August 12, 1991
DIRECT DIAL NUMBER
(415) 975-5310
BY MESSENGER
Mr . Phil Batchelor
County Administrator ' s Office
651 Pine Street
County Administration Building, lith Floor ; !
Martinez, CA 94553 '
Our File No . 73209-001
Dear Mr . Batchelor :
We represent the majority of cable television
operators who are franchised by the County.
As you know, negotiations regarding a new County;
franchise ordinance have been underway for some time. The
operators and your staff have made progress on most of the
issues under discussion. There is one major policy issue which
we believe should be revisited by the Board of Supervisors in
light of current conditions . Doing so may avoid unnecessary
expenditures of time and effort to address associated and
subordinate issues .
The policy issue is whether the County desires to
expend the money necessary to construct an interconnect between
the cable systems operating in the County. Such an
interconnect would cost more than $400 , 000 to install , with
annual operating' costs which may well approach $200 , 000 . It is
proposed that the operators advance the funds for this
construction and that they be repaid by credits against future
`ranchise fees . Since franchise fees are deposited in the
4eneral fund, the result would be to reduce general fund
revenues by this amount . The well publicized fiscal problems
of the County cause us to wonder whether the County continues
to desire to spend its limited resources fo'r this project .
This appears 'Co be a policy issue which cannot be resolved by
your staff .
Mr . Phil Batchelor
August 12, 19911,
Page 2
we believe that the County can accomplish most, if not
all , of its objectives without spending the money. The
proposal calls for an interconnect which would allow live
broadcasts on aldedicated channel to all cable customers in the
County simultaneously. The operators propose an alternative
which ultimately would provide the same service except that
broadcasts could not be live and they would be on a shared
channel . There appears to be no reason for the operators to
dedicate a channel (24 hours per day, seven days per week) as
has been proposed. Experience shows that it is not realistic
to expect a local government to create more than a few I hours of
programming a week.
The alternate would use videotapes duplicated so that
the cable systems could broadcast at the same hour . Studios
which could be used to produce County showsare available in
Martinez, Lafayette. and Walnut Creek. Tapes -could also be made
of other events on location, such as Board meetings . Tapes
could be broadcast on the channel which each operator now
maintains for public access. If it is essential that the shows
be broadcast on the same channel, most of the systems could
make a common channel available quickly. Some will not have
the necessary channel capacity until their systems are I
rebuilt . If this less expensive alternate is acceptable1 the
operators are confident that the details can be worked out with
your staff .
Very truly yours,
SanforM. 9kagg s
SMS:ks/I
5770G
cc : Sara Hoffman'
Clients
VIDEO TAPE AIRING SCHEDULE „
MARTINEZ BOCCE FEDERATION
SPECIAL. OLYMPICS TOURNAMENT
(6 minutes)
The following cable stations will air the above program:
7/29 7/30 7/31 8/1 8/2
Televents, Inc. Ch. 19 6p.m. 9p.m. 8p.m.
Concord TV Cable Ch. 19 11p.m. 11p.m.
Viacom (East Co) Ch. 16 TO BE SCHEDULED
Televents(East) Ch. 19 7p.m. 7p.m. 7p.m. 7p.m.
United Artist Ch. 6 9:30p.m. I�
f
PROGRAM MAY BE AIRED AT OTHER TIMES BY ALL CABLE STATIONS LISTED
ABOVE. PLEASE CHECK THE BULLETIN BOARD ON THE CHANNEL FOR
ADDITIONAL AIRING TIMES.
This list represents .5 of the 9 Cable Systems in Contra Costa County, '
COMMUNITY ACCESS CONTRIBUTIONS MADE BY CABLE OPERATORS
TO CITIES
CITY YEAR FRANCHISED NO. OF SUBSCRIBERS
CONCORD 1988 37,771
* $40,000 - Installed equipment to televise Council
Meetings.
r
* $75,000 - $5,000/Yr. for labor to televise Council
Meetings for 15 yrs.
* ? If City contributes $10,000 or more to Access
efforts, cable operator will contribute 25% to a
max of $7,000 as a match.
WALNUT CREEK 1986 18,181
* $20,800 - Yearly cost for production of weekly Council
Meetings at approximate cost of $400 a week.'
* $ 2,500 - Character Generator
i
SAN RAMON 1988 8,809
* $55,000 - One, time cost for local cablecast facilities.
* $15,000 - $1,,000 a year for maintenance of above facility.
*$156,000 - 5 hours a week use of a mobile studio van and
technician. Rental of same estimated at $200 an
hour x 52 weeks = $10,400 a year for 15 years.
* $6,000 - 3 workshops a year estimated at $400 each for
5 years.
MARTINEZ 1982 9,625
* $50,000 - Franchisee is required to spend this amount.
yearly? on access.
* $,70,000 - k studio must be established with equipment
valued at $70,000.
PINOLE 1986 2,203
* $40,000 - In;, a modification to the franchise, operator
agreed to contribute this amount over 8 years.
* $15,000 - Hard wired city studio to cable system headend.
* $10,000 - Provided 1/2" edit system, 3/4" deck, camera and
miscellaneous equipment.
* ? - Several hours of technical support donated.
* - Dedicated channel programmed by the City.
CITY YEAR FRANCHISED NO. OF SUBSCRIBERS
HERCULES 1977 3,111
* $1,500 - Modulator to transmit programming,
* $10,00+ - Hard wire (2 way) to headend and amplifiers.
* ? - Maintain equipment. (Nebulous at best. )
* - Dedicated channel programmed by the City.
RICHMOND 1989 15,000
*$400,000 - Capital grant over 10 years
$100,000 at signing of agreement
$100,000 at 2 years
$100,000 at 5 years
$100,000 at 10 years
* ? - Five upstream channels
One for the City to programm
Two� for Contra Costa College
One for fire departments
One for schools
* ? Three modulators (Transmitters)
hard wire to headend.
acccon. lst
10/18/89
COUNTYWIDE CABLE INTERCONNECT
FUNDING OPTIONS
Option 1 -Cable Operators provide all facilities/ equipment.
* Operators would be required to include a proposal
for equipment to transmit and receive TV signals and
for a production/playback facility as part of their
Renewal Application. }
* Non-renewing Operators under Ord 82-28 are regulated
as follows: "Where it is technically and economically
feasible, the grantee may be required to interconnect
its system with other broadband communication '
facilities at the discretion of the Board. . . "
option 2 - Cable 'Operators provide all facilities/equipment,
with credit on future franchise fees,
* Operators would pay all. costs of the interconnect
(receiving equipment, transmission equipment, and
production/playback facility) . In return, they would
receive a prorated credit on franchise fee payments
over the next ten years for the transmission equipment
and production/playback facility costs. (Approximately
$400,000, See Attachment A) Receiving equipment would
be installed by the Operators.
Option 3 - County provides facilities/equipment (except for
receiving egui.pment) with no limitations on
channel use.
* Cable Operators provide receiving equipment and agree
to allow the County to lease the channel to cover
expenses. The County develops an RFP requesting
transmission equipment and the development of a
production/playback facility in exchange for use of the
channel for an agreed upon number of hours per day over
a specific period of time.
OVERVIEW - INTERCONNECT IMPLEMENTATION
Draft Ordinance Operator's Current Position 4
• Interconnection operational in one year • Interconnect operational in 2 years
IF 1) new survey still demonstrates demand.
2) interim programming satisfactory.
• Shared channel during interim • Shared channel during interim
- exclusive County use - exclusive County use for negotiated times.
5 hours/week - operators will bear cost ofi tape duplication/
distribution.
• Common channel number upon interconnect • Possibility of common channel number
- deferrals subject to Board approval for shared channel (not Televents or Viacom).
Staff Concerns:
1) 2 year delay would jeopardize FCC permits for microwave paths. Permits Iare good for 1 year
(1 year extension may be allowed).
2) East Bay Regional Parks District must also grant licenses for antennae. They have expressed
the intent to do so, and staff believes it would be wise to move forward, given their current
position.
3) Re-evaluation of interconnect would be costly (original survey cost $30,000).
4) Cable operators previously agreed to the implementation schedule in the draft ordinance. Would
they change their;.,position again after the two years?
5) During the shared channel period, the County loses the benefit of "live" programming (for
election results, video conferencing, public information meetings, call-in programs).
h24:intercon.vew