Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 1982-06-30 164 F F i City Council , Special Meeting Police Dept. & Council Chambers Redding, California June 30, 1982 4:00 P.M. iThe meeting was called to order by Mayor Gard with the following Council III Members present: Demsher, Fulton, Kirkpatrick, Pugh, and Gard. Also present were City Manager Brickwood, Assistant City Manager Courtney, City Attorney Hays, Public Works Director Arness, Planning and Community Development Director Perry, Personnel Officer Bristow, Deputy City Clerk Strohmayer, and Minute Clerk Rupp. VIACOM CABLEVISION - Community Situation A memorandum from the City Attorney was submitted to Council explaining Viacom' s reluctance to recognize the City' s regulatory authority to establish rates which it may charge for its service. It was noted that apparently, Viacom has concluded that it will deregulate, based upon AB 699, which removes the rate regulatory abilities of the local agency. The memorandum suggested that if Viacom does not choose to deregulate, but continues to ignore the regulatory authority of the City Council , that the City consider in closed session, filing legal action against Viacom. A letter was received from Viacom dated June 29, 1982 , which is hereby made a part of these records by reference. This letter outlined their counter proposal and indicated their intention to deregulate under existing state law if this counter proposal is rejected by Council . Council Member Fulton said that in regard to the CATV Committee meeting of i June 17, 1982, at which time the City presented its proposal and Viacom t presented theirs, it was his impression that Viacom would consider theIII City' s proposal and come back with a counter proposal . Dr. Fulton felt that Viacom' s counter proposal should have been discussed more fully with the Committee before being brought back to Council , especially when only three Council Members were present at the June 21 meeting. Council Member Kirkpatrick stated that at the CATV Committee meeting on June 17 , it was understood and agreed to by both the Committee and Viacom that a recommendation would be made to Council at its June 21 meeting. City Attorney Hays responded to a question from Mayor Gard stating that a change was made in the counter proposal presented verbally by Viacom to Council on June 21 , which would allow the money in the proposed escrow account to be refunded to the subscribers rather than revert to the City' s general fund. Councilman Kirkpatrick also noted that the new counter proposal does not mention the money in the proposed escrow account reverting to the City and asked why this change had been made. Mr. Kent Rasmussen, Vice President of Viacom, advised that a counter proposal was directed to the City Attorney on the day of the City Council Meeting of June 21 , 1982. He said it was Viacom' s desire that the City could use the escrow money in any way they felt appropriate. And, since i, the reaction of the Council was negative about the money reverting to the y City' s general fund, a change was made to refund the money directly toIII r subscribers at Viacom's expense. 1- Councilman Demsher asked why the subscribers would be charged the $9 rate during the negotiation period. E E t C 6/30/82 F c' 165 Mr. Rasmussen stated that with the longer period of a new franchise, they would have a longer period to amortize their increased costs. If, however, the franchise is not negotiated by January 1 , 1983, they will need to get their money back as soon as possible. He said that in the event that they are not successful , they will credit everyone's account by about $6. 4 Mr. Rasmussen said the most important thing to Viacom is that the franchise be renewed. Mr. Rasmussen stated that they don't like AB 699 and stated that it is 1 usually unnecessary. He said that in most communities , they have been able 1 to get voluntary compliance. Mr. Rasmussen indicated that the counter proposal is intended to be a compromise. Mr. Frank Donaldson, 502 Redwood Boulevard, explained a problem with Viacom in the Redwood Mobilehome Park, involving Viacom's inability to provide service to the park. Mr. Kirkpatrick noted that this matter would be more appropriately dis- cussed during franchise negotiations rather than during rate schedule discussions. In response to an inquiry from Mayor Gard, City Attorney Hays advised that the Government Code dealing with deregulation, only discusses rates and does not deal with the situation of the overhead poles. He added that if Viacom elects to deregulate, the franchise would still be intact except for the ability of the City to regulate rates. Mrs. Gard noted that any other company that would choose to come in would have access to our facilities if the City chose to allow it. The City Attorney concurred. Councilman Kirkpatrick suggested that legal action against Viacom be discussed in closed session. At the hour of 4:20 P.M. , an executive session was held by Council to discussed possible legal action against Viacom. At the hour of 4:45 P.M. , the special City Council meeting was reconvened. Mayor Gard announced that no action will be taken by Council at this time. Councilman Pugh said it is his understanding that the rate resolution adopted by Council on June 21 , 1982, was discussed at the Committee meeting and was an interim rate until a franchise can be renegotiated. He said it is also his understanding that it was the intention of Council that the $8 rate be adopted and that negotiations be completed for a new franchise by January 1 , 1983. Councilman Kirkpatrick indicated that this is correct and it was indicated in a memorandum to the City Council from the City Attorney, at the time that the rate resolution was adopted that the rates would be renegotiated in the new franchise by January 1 , 1983. Councilman Pugh clarified that Viacom has indicated the $8 interim rate is 1 not acceptable, and they wish to continue charging the $9 rate. Councilman Kirkpatrick concurred and said that based upon Viacom's decision not to accept the $8 rate, they are also rejecting the chance to renego- tiate a franchise at this point. He concurred that Council should take no further action at this time. 4 4 f 4 6/30/82 166 EXECUTIVE SESSION - re Personnel Matters At the hour of 4:50 P.M. , an Executive Session was held to discuss per- sonnel matters. At the hour of 5:10 P.M. , the special meeting of the City Council was reconvened. F ADJOURNMENT III There being no further business , at the hour of 5:10 P.M. , Mayor Gard declared the meeting adjourned. APPROVED: cla.A.41p) i im• 1),,,Acx_ (mt.,. 'ayor ATTEST: C is //. > L-E -) City Clerk b y: 8P-42---( 1Azo 12 Deputy City Clerk S III F F i IIIC 1i rLr 1 `C Y Ar i. 6/30/82 , '