Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 04031990 - 1.74 4 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS = Contra FROM: l Costa n: : Phil Batchelor, County Administrator County DATE: March 19, 1990 'rA COV SUBJECT: Reexamination of the effective competition standard for the regulation of cable television basic service rates. SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECONEENDATION Authorize the Assistant Franchise Administrator to submit comments to the Federal Communications Commission in support of the National League of Cities position on MM Docket No. 90-4 (Reexamination of the effective competition standard for the regulation of cable television basic service rates) . FINANCIAL IMPACT No financial impact to the County. REASONS FOR RECONIlENDATION/BACKGROUND In connection with its Cable Inquiry, the text of which was released on December 29,1990, the FCC is holding three public hearings outside of Washington and is accepting comments on the matter of the reexamination of the effective competition standard for the regulation of cable television basic service rates. As currently defined "effective competition" exists wherever three or more over-the-air broadcast signals or translators are available in the cable franchise territory. In practice this has meant that rates are unregulated throughout Contra Costa County. The National League of Cities suggests that the only effective competition to a multi-channel system is another cable system, multi-channel service or combination of ff-air and cable with CONTINUED ON ATTACHMEN1Ye.-- YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Ly APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURES: ACTION OF BOARD ON APR 3 1990APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED x OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE X UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) 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- APR 3 1990 Pat Burke, CAO Office PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF Sara Hoffman, Communi t.y Dev, SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR David Schmidt, County Counsel BY M382 (10/88) DEPUTY the same range of channels and programming as the cable system. Staff agrees and supports their recommendation to change the definition of "effective competition" and allow more regulation of all cable rates. In Contra Costa County where our cable systems do not have meaningful competition, rate regulation would enable our County government to once again provide citizens with protection against unreasonable and frequent cable rate increases. 1-074 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) Reexamination of the Effective ) Competition Standard for the ) MM Docket No. 90-4 Regulation of Cable Television ) Basic Service Rates ) Comments of CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Date Filed March 22 , 1990 1 Before the 2 Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 3 In the Matter of ) 4 Reexamination of the Effective ) Competition Standard for the ) MM Docket No. 90-4 5 Regulation of Cable Television ) Basic Service Rates ) 6 7 The County of Contra Costa hereby submits these comments in 8 response to the reexamination of the effective competition 9 standard for the regulation of cable television basic 10 service rates. 11 12 13 REDEFINE "EFFECTIVE COMPETITION" 14 15 Contra Costa County agrees with the National League of 16 Cities that the definition of "effective competition" should 17 be changed. Current Commission standards were established at 18 a time when cable television was used primarily to 19 retransmit the signals of television broadcast stations in 20 areas where the quality of over-the-air reception was poor. 21 The nature of the services provided over cable systems has . 22 undergone major changes since that time. Services today 23 include satellite programming (e.g. , ESPN, CNN and C-SPAN) , 24 cable only programming(e.g. , TNT) , and others (e.g. , X 25 press) . 26 27 In light of these changes, Contra Costa County believes that 28 three off-air broadcast stations do not offer competition to multi-channel cable service. In 1980, the average number of 2 channels on Basic service offered by the nine cable systems 3 in Contra Costa County was 13 . In 1990, the average number 4 of channels is 31. Of these only half are broadcast within a 5 30 mile range of our County. Many of the other channels are 6 satellite channels with wide viewership. 7 8 Therefore, the County also agrees with the National League 9 of Cities that the only effective competition to a 10 multi-channel system is another cable system, multi-channel 11 service or combination of off-air and cable with the same 12 range of channels and programming as the cable system. 13 However, for the last 24 years Contra Costa County has had 14 nonexclusive franchises with our nine cable systems. In 15 that time only one cable company has applied for an 16 overlapping franchise. This cable company currently 17 provides service to a small, upscale area (i.e. , 18 approximately 500 of the County' s 49 ,000 subscribers) . 19 Given the economics of the cable business, the hilly 20 geography of our County and the lack of adequate off-air 21 channels without the use of prohibitively expensive 22- equipment, the cable systems in our area have a natural, de 23 facto monopoly within their service areas. 24 25 In those situations where a cabled system does not have 26 meaningful competition, rate regulation by the local 27 28 -2- 1 franchising authority is necessary to protect the public 2 against the unregulated, de facto monopoly that otherwise 3 exists. 4 5 6 CONCLUSION 7 8 Contra Costa County urges the Commission to redefine 9 'effective competition" to: provide for local regulation 10 where overbuilds are not economically feasible and 11 sufficient off-air signals are not available and restore 12 local rate regulation for all cable rates. 13 14 15 Respectfully submitted, 16 17 Pat Burke 18 Assistant Franchise Administrator 19 651 Pine Street, 11th Floor Martinez , CA 94553 20 ( 415) 646-2948 21 cc: Leslie Wollock, NLC 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -3-