My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-09-14-R
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2014
>
06-09-14-R
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/24/2016 3:50:33 PM
Creation date
9/9/2014 3:55:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
111
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Executive Summary <br />FRC’s Review of Comcast’s Formal Renewal Proposal <br />© Front Range Consulting, Inc.Page 7 <br />of credit requirement. Finally, it would be financially imprudent for the NSAC to not maintain <br />approximately a six month reserve of it annual budget as set forth in non-profit guidelines. The <br />ECG “recommendation” completely misunderstands the financial reserves that the NSAC has <br />prudently incurred during this franchise term and using any of these funds would be <br />detrimental to the NSAC on a going forward basis to purchase future expenditures. <br />The result of this ill-advised recommendation by ECG to use these reserves for future <br />expenditures would place the NSAC in an exposed financial position that could lead to the <br />collapse if the NSAC unless that is the end result the Proposal is attempting to suggest. These <br />reserves have been prudently incurred under the expiring franchise and memoranda of <br />understanding and should not be used to offset future capital and operating support obligation. <br />Most importantly, these funds are not Comcast funds but rather funds provided by subscribers <br />and to be prudently used by the NSAC. <br />Operating Support Payments <br />From the very onset of the Proposal, it suggests that operational support contributions are <br />unlawful.14 The FCC has made it very clear in 1999 that a cable operator is free to make <br />voluntary operating payments as part of a franchise agreement. In the letter ruling issued on <br />June 25, 1999, the FCC added the following modification and clarification: <br />The legislative history explains that "Subsection 622(g)(2)(C) establishes a specific <br />provision for PEG access in new franchises. In general, this section defines as a franchise <br />fee only monetary payments made by the cable operator, and does not include as a <br />"fee" any franchise requirements for the provision of services, facilities or equipment. <br />As regards PEG access in new franchises, payment for capital costs required by the <br />franchise to be made by the cable operator are not defined as fees under the provision. <br />These requirements may be established by the franchising authority under Section <br />611(b) or Section 624(b)(1). In addition, any payments which a cable operator makes <br />voluntarily relating to support of public, educational and governmental access and <br />which are not required by the franchise would not be subject to the 5 percent franchise <br />fee cap."See H.R. Rep. No. 98-934 at 65 (1984) reprinted in 1984 U.S.C.C.A.N. 4702;see <br />also 1984 U.S.C.C.A.N. at 4753 (Colloquy between Rep. Wirth and Rep. <br />Bliley). (Emphasis added). <br />Based on the well documented needs and interests in the franchise area, the Proposal should <br />have agreed to provide, at a minimum a voluntary payment, for the operational needs and <br />interests identified in order to allow the NSCC to continue to provide the services that were <br />confirmed by the Ascertainment Report. <br />14 See e.g., Proposal at 1.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.