My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5/1/1990
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1990
>
5/1/1990
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:02:44 PM
Creation date
6/5/2015 12:44:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
05/01/1990
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
74
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
Director Pinto advised that staff is asking the Board to put <br />this into effect as of July 1 so that the franchises can get <br />their bills ready and printed. He noted that the monies from the <br />franchise fees go into the County's general fund. <br />Commissioner Bowman was concerned about extending the cable <br />franchises terms from 20 to 28 years, but Director Pinto <br />explained that the length of the franchises does not matter <br />because they are non-exclusive and allow other competition to <br />enter the county. <br />Vice Chairman Bird pointed out that the franchise fee is <br />actually a pass-through charge to the customer because it is the <br />customers who require that right-of-way in order to receive their <br />cable service. <br />Director Pinto explained that extension of service is <br />something over which the County hasn't much authority, although <br />our franchises do require that they will extend service if there <br />are "x" number of customers per mile. He felt that both the <br />cable companies are far improved from what they were 5 or 6 years <br />ago. <br />The Vice Chairman opened the Public Hearing, and asked if <br />anyone wished to be heard in this matter. <br />Ken Vickers, general manager of Falcon Cable in Sebastian, <br />advised that the increase in the franchise fee would amount to <br />approximately 35� on the typical monthly bill in their system. <br />He pointed out that with the present ordinance there is at least <br />some medium of dialogue as far as negotiations between the County <br />and the franchise operators about the raising of these fees. In <br />order to retain that flexibility they would like to suggest a <br />change in the wording under Section 11 of the proposed ordinance <br />where it says "the maximum percentage amount allowed by law as a <br />license fee for its CAN System." They would like to insert <br />"after a public hearing" at the end of that sentence. Secondly, <br />while they appreciate the additional 8 years, they would like to <br />MAY�� 39 11LIUK SIU PAGE .� I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.