Agenda Packets - 1983/10/24 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

N.R. 4103 allows the FCC to establish different regulations when systems have Lit least 36 channels and 70 percent of the households are subscribers. Franchise fees. As in the Senate bill, franchise fees could not exceed five percent of gross revenues. Franchise fees include assessments and taxes but do not include taxes of general applicability and franchise enforcement requirements such as bond, penalties, and liquidated damages. Services. The bill grandfathers service requirements in existing franchises. The operator could remove a particular service if a significant change in circumstances occurred. Whether such removal was justified would be settled through litigation. The cable operator would not need to replace the service with a similar service. Facilities. A city could require certain cable system facilities (channel capacity) and access -related facilities (studios). After negotiating with the city, an operator could remove such facilities if a significant change in circumstances occurred. The city and the operator would submit any unresolved disputes to binding arbitration. Municipal ownership. When a franchise expires, a city could buy a cable system for fair market value, resolving price disputes through binding arbitration. The bill does not set a minimum price when a franchise is terminated for cause, however the operator would be entitled to de novo court review of the basis for termination. The bill requires an independent board or management company to make programming decisions for a municipally owned system. No elected or appointed official could serve on the board. Industrial Development Bonds In an effort to raise tax revenues, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dan Rostenkowski proposed (with administration support) a state by state volume cap on the issuance of all private -purpose industrial development bonds. The plan would cut IDB volume in half by limiting private -purpose IDBs to $100 per capita. This cap would not apply to mortgage revenue bonds. Some tax committee members support this proposal because it does not restrict particular types of projects, rather it restricts the volume, leaving controversial decisions on appropriate uses of IDBs with the state legislatures. The main provisions of the proposal include limiting private -purpose IDBs to $100 per capita. State and city issuers would split this volume cap based on 1983 experience. Thus, governmental units that issued large amounts of IDBs in 1983 would get a larger portion of the volume cap than those with relatively small issuances. Some interpret the bill as authorizing the state legislatures to change these allocations, but this authority is not clear. Governmental units could transfer all or a portion of their allocation. In 1983 Minnesota has already used 182 percent of its proposed 1984 cap. If passed, this proposal would result in a significant reduction of projects. Rep. Pickle is opposed to restricting IDBs solely on the basis of population. Instead he supports allocations based on economic distress or need for economic development. In response to the volume cap proposal, Pickle has over