HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/08/1997, 2 - PUBLIC, EDUCATION AND GOVERNMENT (PEG) ACCESS TO CABLE TELEVISION council °4 g_q,
j AGEnaa nEpont ,�N as
CITY O F SAN LUIS O B I S P O
FROM: Ken Hampian,Assistant City Administrative Officer
Prepared By: Wendy George,Assistant to the City Administrative Officer W
SUBJECT: PUBLIC, EDUCATION AND GOVERNMENT (PEG) ACCESS TO CABLE
TELEVISION
CAO RECOMMENDATION
1. Receive a report from staff and consultant, Kathleen Schuler of Schuler & Associates, on
the history of PEG access to cable television, its current status in the City of San Luis
Obispo and potential for future development.
2. Provide conceptual approval of a proposed plan for government access that includes the
broadcast of Council meetings, and direct staff to return with a policy regarding the
broadcasting of limited commission meetings, City production of informational videos and
the use of the City's broadcast capability by outside organizations.
3. Provide conceptual approval of a proposed plan for public access.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
PEG access channels allow the opportunity for the public, educational institutions and
govemmental agencies to provide local commercial-free informational and educational
programming over cable TV. In its 1995 franchise renewal, the City included provisions for PEG
access. After joining together to form the Consortium for Community Media, with the assistance
of consultant Kathleen Schuler of Schuler & Associates, local governmental and educational
agencies in the County have developed a model for PEG access which includes contracting with a
non-profit agency to administer access to the PEG channel. This model would relieve the City of
the responsibility and liability of providing public access,while still leaving control of government
access with the City. Government access could include the televising of City Council and
important commission meetings, as well as videos on issues of community interest such as the
recent program on Water Reclamation. Funding PEG.access will be a major concern. While the
City's franchise makes provisions for Sonic Cable to provide broadcast capability from the Council
Chambers and City/County Library Community Room, and includes a fund for public access
equipment and facilities, it does not provide on-going operating funds.
DISCUSSION
Background
Cable TV PEG access channels typically provide community-oriented programming, such as local
news, public announcements, distance education and government meetings. They are usually
Council Agenda Report-PEG Access
Page 2
programmed by individuals and local organizations, on either public, education or government
channels(PEG). Under the 1984 Cable Act, local franchising authorities could require that cable
operators set aside channels for.PEG use. In addition, franchising authorities could require cable
operators to provide services, facilities and equipment to support the use of these channels. When
the City of San Luis Obispo renewed its franchise in 1995, it included the following provisions for
PEG access:
• The establishment of a PEG Fund by Sonic Cable for the purchase of capital equipment and
facilities for PEG access equal to I%of its gross revenues.
• At its expense, Sonic will wire and equip the City Council and Community Room with live
cable broadcasting capabilities within three years of agreement execution.
• At its expense Sonic will provide a cable link to San Luis High School within three years of the
agreement execution.
• Sonic will provide channel capacity to accommodate the City's projected PEG access needs (up
to five channels through the life of the franchise).
However, the Cable Act stipulates that if the cable operator is required to provide operational
support for PEG access, those costs must be supported by the franchise fee. The City did not
include provision for PEG access operations funding in the franchise, since use of the franchise fee
would essentially amount to supporting operations through existing General Fund resources.
Consortium for Community Media
In 1995 the Consortium for Community Media was formed by a number of governmental and
educational agencies in the County, including the City of San Luis Obispo, to determine whether it
would be useful for the region to group together in its effort to make PEG a reality for San Luis
Obispo County. The Consortium worked with a consultant, Kathleen Schuler of Schuler and
Associates, for over a year and completed a resource inventory and needs assessment. It also
sponsored a pilot project, Television to Inform the Community (T.I.P.) to demonstrate the
possibilities available to local agencies through government access. Finally, it explored different
interactive bulletin board systems which might be used on a regional basis.
At the end of this first phase a report was issued (see attached executive summary) which also
included recommendations for various management options for public access. Some of the
significant findings in the report were:
• Collectively, the governmental and educational entities have significant telecommunications
resources.
• Several franchises contain some provisions for access channels.
• Technology resources available to any one institution are limited.
• There is a need for joint planning and resource sharing to support video based communications.
• The Consortium believes the general public and community organizations would benefit from a
robust public access program in the county.
X2-2
Council Agenda Report-PEG Access
Page 3
• There are a number of outstanding issues with the cable operators if the PEG access channels
are to be used effectively. Specifically, local governments need to reach local, regional and
county audiences. Negotiations should begin with the two main cable operators about an
interconnect for PEG access.
The single most important conclusion derived from the work done is that the Consortium believes a
"strategy of cooperation and collaboration on a county-wide, intersegmental basis will result in a
more cost effective, equitable deployment of technology and will help each agency achieve its
goals for lifelong learning and improved communications." Coordination of Consortium members
resources is key to developing a successful county-wide PEG access program that provides for
more diversified programming while not being a drain on an individual agency's finances.
The consultant strongly recommended the development of a regional strategic telecommunications
plan addressing more than just cable TV. The consultant feels that Institutional Television Fixed
Service(ITSF),microwave,satellite,wide area networks and the emerging technologies of personal
communications systems, digital cellular and switched digital video should also be included in the
strategic telecommunications plan. However, the Consortium focused its energy on cable TV,
specifically PEG access,choosing to address these other issues at a later date.
The Consortium elected not to continue forward into a second phase to explore county-wide PEG
options, due to the varying levels of interest in providing public access at this time. However, some
agencies, such as the County, the City of San Luis Obispo and the City of Morro Bay have a
greater need to move forward because of PEG provisions in their cable franchises and a higher
public interest in making a channel available.
As a result, the cities of Mono Bay and San Luis Obispo and the County of San Luis Obispo are
moving ahead in their efforts to address the management issues of PEG access. Preliminary
discussions have even been held by the City of San Luis Obispo and the County with Cuesta
College and the San Luis Obispo county Office of Education, which are interested in utilizing PEG
channels as part of their distance learning plans. At the same time, members of the Consortium
continue to meet informally, as they believe that ultimately PEG access can best be served on a
-regional basis. Thus, while these three agencies are currently working separately, their proposed
paths are parallel and can easily be merged in the future.
Why should the City of San Luis Obispo consider PEG access issues at this time?
Technically, the City could choose to take no action at this time on the PEG provisions in its
franchise. However, if it should take this approach the cable operator could possibly request a
return of the funding included in the franchise for PEG access. More importantly, in the recent past
the City's cable operator, Sonic Cable,has accommodated the public by providing tape insertion of
publicly produced television program to be transmitted over Channel 6. Channel 6 has recently
been leased to a private station and Sonic is no longer providing tape insertion to the public. (Sonic
is not legally required to do so.) Channel 54 is available as a public access channel, but unless the
City makes some provision for the public to insert tapes, and eventually broadcast live, there is
currently no public access available to the citizens of the City. Some members of the community
Council Agenda Report- PEG Access
Page a
are becoming increasingly frustrated by this situation. If the City were simply to make access
available without well-thought-out policies and procedures, it could find itself in the same dilemma
as the City of Morro Bay in trying to determine who ultimately controls the public channel—the
City or the public(see attached news article).
Additionally, PEG access provides benefits to the community which are not available through a
private station, even one such as the newly formed local station KSLO, Channel 6. It allows for a
diversity of expression,meets citizens First Amendments rights and lets members of the public talk
directly to each other, in a sense becoming the voice of the "common man". Service agencies can
speak to the community and local issues can be covered and discussed in a depth that is not
possible through commercial television. PEG access also provides a forum for the City to allow its
constituents to participate more directly in the governmental process by televising Council meeting
and other important commission meeting.
Finally,the educational community will increasingly require access to the PEG channels, controlled
by the City through its franchise,in order to meet its distance learning needs.
Government Access
The Cable Act of 1984 says very little about what government access entails. The policy for how it
is used lies within the governmental agency itself. Usually the channel is used by a city to provide
public information about government and community programs, services events and issues. This
use can include live broadcasts or tape delayed replays of meetings, pre-produced videos on
specific topics similar to the T.I.P. programs on wildfires and water reuse and interactive bulletin
board systems.
In its most recent franchise renewal with Sonic Cable,the City included a provision that Sonic must
provide wiring and equipment for a tum-key system for live broadcast from the Council Chambers
and from the City/County Library Community Room. Once in place, this system will allow
Council meetings to be broadcast on a regular basis. The franchise also includes a list of specific
equipment which must be installed by Sonic for use by the City. City staff is having this list
evaluated for its current adequacy and has reached an agreement with Sonic that Sonic will fund
whatever equipment the City determines is appropriate up the dollar level of the original equipment
list,plus installation. While an exact installation schedule has yet to be determined, it is likely that
broadcast of Council meetings could become a reality within this calendar year.
Once Sonic has provided the City with broadcast capability, the City will be faced with the
difficulty of administering government access. Many questions will need to be answered, ranging
from who will actually run the cameras during Council meetings to the philosophical issues of who
and what can be broadcast. Recognizing that current City staff does not have the technical ability
to televise meetings, we will be considering a number of options, including contracting with Cal
Poly or perhaps a local non-profit organization or installing an automated system that requires no
operators to be present. Attached is a brief survey of other cities which currently televise Council
meetings and how they have answered some of these questions.
Assuming that Council provides conceptual approval for televising Council meetings, and possibly
Council Agenda Report-PEG Access
Page 5
limited commission meetings,staff will also be developing a policy which will clearly articulate the
rules for use of government access. At this time staff would suggest considering only the broadcast
of Planning Commission meetings, in addition to Council meetings, similar to the approach used in
other cities. However, this policy will come back to the Council at a later date for consideration.
An outline of possible policy objectives is attached to this report.
Public Access
Public access to cable TV is perhaps the most complex part of the PEG equation. In order to fully
meet the needs of the public, there must be opportunities for the community to receive training in
producing television programs, the ability to broadcast programs on a live basis and insert tapes that
have been produced earlier. There are important First Amendment issues concerning what can be
broadcast and, as a result, the potential for great liability on the part of any organization that has
oversight of program content. There are also administrative issues of scheduling the channel and
integrating the demands of the public with the needs of the educational and governmental agencies
which also use the channel.
An even bigger issue is that of funding public access. While the City's franchise allows Sonic to
collect a PEG fee which can be used to provide television equipment and facilities for public
access, the Cable Act does not allow this money to be used for operational purposes. The City
could choose to allocate a portion of its franchise fee to support public access, but currently all
funds from the franchise fee go directly into the General fund.
Conceptual Framework for PEG Access in San Luis County
In order to tie together all the pieces of PEG access and to address the significant funding,
administrative and liability issues it poses, the Consortium's consultant has proposed a conceptual
model. Even though the cities of Morro Bay and San Luis Obispo and the County of San Luis
Obispo are working independently to address PEG access, as are a number or educational entities,
all the former'members of the Consortium have endorsed this model. While some entities are
moving forward separately,they could easily merge their programs at the appropriate time.
The model begins by relying on the establishment of a nonprofit access corporation which would be
independent from the City. Such a corporation is currently being established in Morro Bay, calling
itself Estero Community Access (ECA). Both the City of Morro Bay and the County are already
considering contracts with ECA to provide public access. In the model, the City would designate
the access corporation to manage the currently available access channel for the public, the City of
San Luis Obispo and the educational institutions. Channel management would include the
scheduling,programming and provision of playback services(tape insertion).
1. The nonprofit would also assume management of public access including:
• Establishing a reasonable scope of services that limits the City's operational subsidy.
• Establishing and enforcing public access policies and procedures, including those for
public use of the channel.
• Providing outreach to the public.
Council Agenda Report- PEG Access
Page 6
• Training the public in video production.
• Seeking additional funding and resources to support public access.
2. The City would establish the policies and program priorities for its own governmental
programming,but could contract with the public access corporation for production services,
including broadcasting of Council and perhaps some limited commission meetings.
3. Educational agencies would also establish policies and procedures for their own agencies'
programming,but could contract with the access corporation for specific services such as:
• Production services.
• Teacher and student training in video production.
• Media literacy training.
4. The non-profit could coordinate with educational institutions for specific services. Cuesta
college has already indicated its willingness to work with the County to make training
available at its studio in exchange for the County using its PEG equipment funding to
upgrade the studio. Other school districts may be willing to provide such training through
their adult education programs.
5. The non-profit could also coordinate with another agency to be a central site for tape
insertion. Currently,the County Office of Education is considering assuming this role.
Staff is supportive of this conceptual model and is recommending Council support to continue to
explore the possibility of contracting with a nonprofit agency to provide the proposed services to
the City. Before such a contract could be signed, the City would go through the appropriate RFP
process. As mentioned above,there is currently one nonprofit being organized, ECA in Morro Bay.
It is possible that before the City is ready to issue its RFP, others may also emerge. Staff believes
that this option would best relieve the City of administrative responsibility, be the most cost
effective and would insulate the City from First Amendment liability issues to the highest degree
possible. It also leaves open the option of eventually forming a JPA with other County agencies
which would allow for the sharing of funding and resources and provide a consistent regional PEG
access program.
CONCURRENCES
The County of San Luis Obispo and the City of Morro Bay are currently considering similar
conceptual frameworks for public access. The other former members of the Consortium are also
supportive of this model. The City Clerk is supportive of televising Council meetings and will be
taking the lead, with the technical assistance of the Building Maintenance Supervisor, in overseeing
the installation of equipment in the Council Chambers and the development of government access
policies.
J-6
Council Agenda Report-PEG Access
Page 7
FISCAL EUPACT
It is difficult to determine at this time what the fiscal impact of implementing a PEG access
program will be. Under the terms of the City's franchise agreement with Sonic Cable, broadcast
equipment for the Council Chambers and the City/County Library Community Room will be
provided at no cost to the City. Any time after March, 1998, the City may also borrow up to
$250,000 from the PEG access fund, currently being accrued by Sonic Cable from a I% surcharge
on customer fees, for the purchase of equipment to be used for Public access. However, no
additional funding is available through the franchise for on-going operations of PEG access, unless
part of the current franchise fee is designated for this purpose. Funding for broadcast services for
Council meetings and to assist a nonprofit corporation to provide PEG access are not currently
available.
It is important to note that the franchise contains very specific requirements which the City must
meet before it can withdraw from the PEG fund for equipment and facilities. The City must
develop a complete PEG operating plan which details a list of intended PEG users; the type and
level of programming for each user, and the capital equipment, facilities and estimated costs
required to support the intended uses. Further, the City or the nonprofit organization must commit
to cover operating expenses for at least a three-year period. This commitment must be approved by
a Council resolution. Finally, the City must determine that existing public facilities and equipment
are inadequate to meet the needs of the operating plan. Thanks to the survey work done by the
Consortium,this last requirement should be easy to meet.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Set the issue of PEG access aside to be addressed at a later time. As indicated earlier,
there is already pressure from the public to have access to the City's channel, since this
access is no longer available from Sonic Cable. There is also interest in Council and
commission meetings being broadcast. Citizens see the PEG fee designation on their cable
TV bill and call to ask how it is being used.
2. Direct staff to explore other management options for PEG access such as the City
providing direct management itself. This option is not recommended, as the City has
neither the staff nor the financial resources to manage PEG access.
Attachments
1 -Franchise agreement with Sonic
2 -Executive summary of Consortium study
3 -Management Options for PEG Access
4-Newspaper article from Sun Bulletin
5 - Summary of Government Policy Provisions
6-Televised Meetings Survey
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SAN LUIS OBISPO GRANTING A FIFTEEN YEAR FRANCHISE TO
SONIC CABLE TELEVISION OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
WHEREAS, Sonic Cable Television of San Luis Obispo notified the City in 1991 of their
desire to renew their cable television franchise that was scheduled to expire in April of 1993;
and
WHEREAS, upon receiving this notification from Sonic Cable Television of San Luis
Obispo, the City began preparing for the renewal process. Several studies and surveys were
carried out to assess the capabilities of the current cable system and ascertain the community's
future cable related needs. The results of these studies and surveys were used to create formal
franchise renewal objectives to guide the City through the franchise renewal process; and
WHEREAS, the City began meeting with Sonic Cable Television of San Luis Obispo in
early 1993 to develop a mutually acceptable franchise renewal agreement. Because the City and
Sonic Cable Television of San Luis Obispo were not able to reach agreement on a new franchise
prior to the April 1993 franchise expiration date, the City and Sonic Cable Television of San
Luis Obispo mutually agreed to extend the existing franchise for short-term increments until an
acceptable franchise agreement was developed; and
WHEREAS, in early February of 1995, City staff and Sonic Cable Television of San
Luis Obispo were able to reach agreement on a fifteen year franchise renewal proposal for the
City Council's consideration; and
WHEREAS, the City Council subsequently adopted a resolution on February 14, 1995
advising the community of the City's intention to grant a fifteen year franchise to Sonic Cable
Television of San.Luis Obispo and set a public hearing for March 7, 1995 to provide interested
parties with an opportunity to comment on the franchise prior to City Council action; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a public hearing on this date.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SAN LUIS OBISPO THAT:
SECTION 1. A non-exclusive fifteen year cable television franchise is granted to San
Cable Television of San Luis Obispo subject to the terms and conditions setforth in Exhibit A.
SECTION 2. A synopsis of this ordinance, approved by the City Attorney, together with
the ayes and noes shall be published once in full, at three (3) days prior to its final passage, in
a newspaper published and circulated in said City, and at the same time shall go into effect at
the expiration of thirty (30) days after its said final passage. A copy of the full final text of this
ordinance shall be on file in the office of the City Clerk on and after the date following the
introduction and passage to print and shall be available to any interested member of the public.
Upon motion of , seconded by and
on the following roll call vote:
A}rack men4 1 0�
Page 2
Ordinance No.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing ordinance was introduced to print this day of , 1995.
Mayor Allen Settle
ATTEST:
Diane Gladwell, City Clerk
APPROVED:
org ity 6Zttomey
CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
AND
SONIC CABLE TELEVISION OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
EFFECTIVE: 11995
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION 1 RENEWAL OF FRANCHISE . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
SECTION 2 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
SECTION 3 SYSTEM REBUILD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
SECTION 4 SERVICES AND PROGRAMMING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
SECTION 5 SUPPORT FOR PUBLIC, EDUCATIONAL AND GOVERNMENTAL
ACCESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
SECTION 6 REGULATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT A: SURETY GUARANTEE(SAMPLE)
EXHIBIT B: GRANTEE COMMITMENT TO PEG ACCESS FACILITIES AND
EQUIPMENT
EXHIBIT C: SERVICE TO PUBLIC FACILITIES
t:\agr\Sonic\CitySLO\46slofia214
01332221021495
AGREEMENT
This Agreement, made and entered into this day of , 1995, at San Luis
Obispo, California, by and between the City of San Luis Obispo, a municipal corporation of the
State of California, and Sonic Cable Television of San Luis Obispo, a California corporation.
RECITALS
1. The City of San Luis Obispo, pursuant to Ordinance No. 1238 and applicable law,
.is authorized to grant and renew one or more non-exclusive revocable franchises to operate,
construct, maintain and reconstruct a cable television system within the City.
2. The City, after due evaluation of Sonic Cable Leasing Corporation, and after public
hearings, has determined that it is in the best interests of the City and its residents to renew its
franchise with Sonic Cable Leasing Corporation. Sonic Cable Leasing Corporation has requested
that the City consent to its transfer of the franchise to Sonic Cable Television of San Luis Obispo,
which is also a wholly owned subsidiary of Sonic Communications. The City hereby consents to
the transfer of the franchise to Sonic Cable Television of San Luis Obispo. This transfer to Sonic
Cable Television of San Luis Obispo has occurred prior to the effective date of this Agreement.
3. Therefore, the City of San Luis Obispo (hereinafter the "Grantor") hereby grants to
Sonic Cable Television of San Luis Obispo (hereinafter the "Grantee") a renewal of its cable
television franchise in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance No. 1238 and this Agreement.
t:\agrlSonic\Ci'tySLO\46slofrn214
0133222\021495 1
l�
SECTION 1 RENEWAL OF FRANCHISE
1.1 Grant
The cable television franchise granted as of April 1, 1978 to Sonic Cable Television of San
Luis Obispo, which was assigned to Sonic Cable Leasing Corporation as of December 22, 1989,
pursuant to Resolution #6728, adopted by the City Council on December 5, 1989, which was
assigned to Sonic Cable Television of San Luis Obispo, is hereby renewed, subject to the terms and
conditions of this Agreement. Grantee is a wholly owned subsidiary of Sonic Communications, a
California corporation. The renewal extends the franchise, authority, right and privilege, to
construct, reconstruct, operate and maintain a cable television system within the streets and public
ways in the City of San Luis Obispo as it is now or may in the future be constituted.
1.2 Right of Grantor to Issue and Renew Franchise
Grantee acknowledges and accepts the present right of Grantor to issue and renew a franchise
and Grantee agrees it shall not now or at any time hereafter challenge any lawful exercise of this
right in any local, State or Federal court. This is not, however, a waiver of any constitutional or
legal right or privilege on the part of the Grantee.
1.3 Effective Date of Renewal
The renewal shall be effective on the date that the last of the parties has executed this
Agreement, provided that said date is no later than thirty (30) days after the date the City Council,
by Resolution, approves this Agreement. The renewal is further contingent upon the filing by
Grantee with the City Clerk of an original of the executed Franchise Agreement and the required
security fund and insurance certificates. If the filing of all of the above does not occur within sixty
(60) days after the effective date, the Grantor may declare this renewal null and void.
1.4 Duration
The term of the renewal shall be fifteen(15)years from the effective date hereof, at which
time the franchise shall expire and, except as otherwise provided herein, be of no force and effect
unless renewed for an additional period. Renewal shall be in accordance with applicable law:
1.5 Conflict with Cable Ordinance
The provisions of the City of San Luis Obispo Cable Television Regulatory Ordinance,
Ordinance No. 1238, are hereby incorporated herein by reference as if set out in full, and form part
t:\agr\Sonic\CitySL0\46s1ofm.214
0133222\021495 2
of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. In the event of any conflict between the terms and
conditions of this Agreement and the provisions of Ordinance No. 1238, this Agreement shall
prevail. Should Ordinance No. 1238 be amended, revised, superseded or otherwise changed after
the effective date hereof in such a way as would materially affect the terms and conditions of this
Agreement, said amendment,revision or change shall not apply to this Agreement without Grantee's
approval.
1.6. Definitions
The definitions contained in Ordinance No. 1238 are incorporated herein as if fully set forth.
t:\ag\SoniclCitySLOk46slofin214
0133222\021495 3
SECTION 2 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
2.1 Governing Requirements
Grantee shall comply with all lawful requirements of this Agreement, Ordinance No. 1238
and applicable State and Federal law.
2.2 Franchise Fee
Commencing on the effective date of this Agreement, the Grantee shall pay to the Grantor
an annual franchise fee of five percent (5%) of Gross Annual Revenues received by Grantee from
operation of the cable system in the City of San Luis Obispo. The fee shall be payable quarterly by
April 30, July 31, October 31 and January 31 for the preceding three- (3) month period.-
2.3 Resolution of Disputes
To aid in the analysis and resolution of any future disputed matters relative to the franchise,
the Grantor and Grantee may, by mutual agreement (both as to whether to hire and whom to hire),
employ the services of technical, financial or legal consultants, as mediators. All reasonable fees
of the consultants 'incurred by the Grantor and/or the Grantee in this regard shall be borne by the
parties in such proportion as is appropriate, in the judgment of the employed consultant(s).
2.4 Payment to Grantor
'No acceptance of any payment shall be construed as an accord that the amount is in fact the
correct amount, nor shall such acceptance of payment be construed as a release of any claim the
Grantor may have for further or additional sums payable under the provision of this Agreement. All
amounts shall be subject to audit, as authorized by Section 1.18 of Ordinance No. 1238.
2.5' Liability Insurance
(a) Upon the effective date of renewal the Grantee shall, at its sole expense, take
out, and maintain during the life of this Agreement and furnish to the Grantor, a policy of insurance
as required by the State of California for Workers' Compensation, and a policy of liability insurance
that shall conform to the provisions of Section 1.23 of Ordinance No. 1238.
The amounts of insurance shall not be less than the following:
Single Limit Coverage applying to Bodily and Personal Injury and Property Damage: Two
Million Dollars ($2,000,000). .
tAag\Sonic\CitySL0\46s1ofia214
0133222\021495 4
�l�
The following endorsements shall be attached to the liability policy:
(1) The policy shall cover on an "occurrence" basis.
(2) The policy shall cover Personal Injury as well as Bodily Injury.
(3) The policy shall cover blanket contractual liability subject to the standard universal
exclusions of contractual liability included in the carrier's standard endorsement as
to bodily injuries, personal injuries and property damage.
(4) Broad Form property damage liability shall be afforded.
(5) The Grantor shall be named additional insured on the policy.
(6) An endorsement shall be provided which states that the coverage is primary
insurance and that no other insurance effected by the Grantor will be called upon to
contribute to a loss under this coverage.
(7) Standard form of cross-liability shall be afforded.
(8) An endorsement stating that the policy shall not be canceled without thirty(30) days'
notice of such cancellation given to the Grantor.
(b) Grantor reserves the right to adjust the limit coverage requirements no more
often than every four(4)years, after conducting a duly noticed public hearing. Any such.adjustment
by the Grantor will be no greater than the increase in the Los Angeles/Long Beach Metropolitan
Area Consumer Price Index (all consumers) for such four- (4) year period, and will be based on
current prudent business practices of like enterprises involving the same or similar risks.
(c) Grantee shall submit to Grantor documentation of the required insurance
including a certificate of insurance signed by the insurance agent and companies named, as well as
all properly executed endorsements.
(d) Any deductible or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved
by Grantor. At the option of Grantor, insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductible or self-
insured retention as respects Grantor, its officers and employees or Grantee shall procure a bond
guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigation, claims, administration and defense
expenses.
(e) •Grantee hereby indemnifies Grantor for any damage resulting to it from .
failure of either Grantee or any subcontractor of Grantee to take out and maintain such insurance.
t:\agr\Sonic\CitySLO\46slofia.214
0133222\021495 5
a2�6
2.6 Indemnification
(a) Grantee shall indemnify, hold harmless, release and defend Grantor, its
officers, employees and agents from and against any and all actions, claims, demands, damages,
disability, losses, expenses including attorneys' fees and other defense costs or liabilities of any
.nature that may be asserted by any person or entity including Grantee from any cause whatsoever
including another's concurrent negligence arising out of or in any way connected with Grantee's
operation of the cable system, the exercise or enjoyment of the franchise renewed pursuant to this
Agreement, and/or the activities of Grantee, its subcontractors, employees and agents hereunder.
Grantee shall be solely responsible and save Grantor harmless from all matters relative to payment
of Grantee's employees including compliance with Social Security, withholding, and other similar
matters.
(b) This indemnification obligation is not limited in any way by a limitation on
the amount or type of damages or compensation payable by or for Grantee under Workers'
Compensation, disability or other employee benefit acts, acceptance of insurance certificates
required under this Agreement, or the teras, applicability or limitations of any insurance held by
Grantee.
(c) Grantor does not, and shall not,waive any rights against Grantee which it may
have by reason of this indemnification, because of the acceptance by Grantor, or the deposit with
Grantor by Grantee, of any of the insurance policies described in this Section.
(d) This indemnification by Grantee shall apply to all damages and claims for
damages of any kind suffered by reason of any of the aforesaid operations referred to in this Section,
regardless of whether or not such insurance policies shall have been determined to be applicable to
any of such damages or claims for damages.
(e) Grantee shall not be required to indemnify Grantor for negligence or
misconduct on the part of Grantor or its officials, boards, commissions, agents, or employees.
(f) Grantor shall hold Grantee harmless from any damage resulting from any such
acts of the Grantor or its officials, boards, commissions, agents or employees in utilizing any
governmental or educational access channels, or in activating emergency alert equipment or
t:\agr\SoniclCitySLO\46slofn.214
0133222\021495 6
facilities, or from work performed by Grantor and permitted by this Agreement, on or adjacent to
the cable system.
2.7 Security Fund
(a) In accordance with Section 1.19 of Ordinance No. 1238, within sixty (60)
days after the effective date of this Agreement, Grantee shall establish and provide to Grantor a
security fund, as security for the faithful performance by Grantee of all material provisions of this
Agreement. The security fund shall consist of two (2) parts. The first part shall be a bond or a
corporate guarantee from Sonic Communications and which shall be in the amount of Two Hundred .
Thousand Dollars ($200,000). Any guarantee shall be essentially similar to the example provided
in Exhibit "A". The second part shall be in the amount of at least Fifteen Thousand Dollars
($15,000) and.shall be in the form of an irrevocable bank letter of credit, whose wording shall be
subject to the approval of Grantor's City attorney, and shall reflect the provisions of paragraph(c)
below.
(b) The bond or guarantee shall be maintained at the amount provided above until
the system rebuild provided for in Section 3.1 herein is completed, at which time the bond or
guarantee shall be released, provided there are then no outstanding material violations of this
Agreement. The letter of credit portion of the security fund shall be maintained at the amount
provided above throughout the term of this Agreement, provided that at intervals no more often than
every four(4) years, Grantor shall have the right to require that this amount be increased to reflect
changes in the Los Angeles/Long Beach Metropolitan Area Consumer Price Index during the prior
four- (4)year period.
(c) The security fund may be assessed by Grantor for those purposes specified
in Sections 1.19 and 1.34 of Ordinance No. 1238,in accordance with the procedures of Section 1.35
of said Ordinance,provided that Grantee has received written notice, an opportunity to be heard and
an opportunity to cure any material violations prior to any assessment. As long as the Grantor
follows the procedures specified herein and in Ordinance No. 1238 for assessing and withdrawing
funds from said security fund, Grantee shall not initiate litigation or non-City administrative action
to prevent or impair Grantor from accessing those funds. Grantee's recourse, in the event Grantee
believes any taking of security funds is improper, shall be through legal action after the security has
t:\agr\Sonic\CitySLO\46slofm214
0133222\021495 7
been drawn upon. If the Grantor's action or taking is found to be improper by any court or agency
of competent jurisdiction, Grantee shall be entitled to a refund of the funds, including interest
accrued thereon.
(d) After any withdrawal from the security fund, Grantee, within thirty (3 0) days,
shall cause the security fund to be replenished to its full value, in accordance with the provisions of
Ordinance No. 1238. Any failure to replenish shall be deemed a material breach of this Agreement.
(e) Nothing herein shall be deemed a waiver of the normal permit and bonding
.requirements made of all contractors working within the City's rights-of-way.
2.8 Procedure for Remedying Franchise Violations
(a) The procedures for remedying franchise violations shall be those expressly
set forth in Section 1.34 of Ordinance No. 1238.
(b) If the violation is reasonably curable within thirty (30) days of receipt of
Grantor's written notice following the public hearing, and if Grantee has not commenced appropriate
corrective action within that thirty- (30) day period, or provided a plan to correct the violation in
accordance with subsection (c) below, then Grantor may proceed to assess from the security fund
damages for Grantee's individual or repeated willful violations of a material franchise requirement
ofup to Five Hundred Dollars($500)per day, or per incident, for unexcused violations of the system
rebuild completion schedule provided in Section 3.1 herein, and up to One Hundred Dollars ($100)
per day, or per incident, for all other unexcused violations, provided that all such violations of
similar nature occurring at the same time shall be deemed one incident.
(c) In the event any stated violation is not reasonably curable within such thirty
(3 0) days, the franchise will not be terminated or revoked or damages assessed if the Grantee has
provided,within said thirty(30) days, a plan, satisfactory to the Grantor, to remedy the violation and
continues to demonstrate good faith in seeking to correct said violation.
(d) In determining whether violations are material, Grantor shall take into
consideration the nature of the violation, whether the violation was chronic, the person or persons
bearing'the impact of the violation,the nature of the remedy required in order to prevent further such
violations and such other matters as the Grantor may deem appropriate.
tAagr\Sonic\CitySL0\46s1ofra.214
0133222\021495 8
2.9 Reservation of Rights
Grantor and Grantee reserve all rights that they may possess under the law unless expressly
waived herein.
2.10 State or Federal Preemption
In the event that the State or Federal Government discontinues preemption in any area of
cable communications over which it currently exercises jurisdiction in such manner as to expand
rather than limit municipal regulatory authority, Grantor may, if it so elects, adopt rules and
regulations in these areas, to the extent permitted by the then applicable law. If such regulation of
previously preempted areas conflicts with any provision of this Agreement, it shall not be
implemented without Grantee's concurrence.
2.11 Recovery of Litigation Costs
If any legal action is brought for the enforcement of this Agreement or because of any
alleged dispute, breach, default or misrepresentation in connection with any of the provisions of this
Agreement, the successful or prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees
and other costs incurred in that action or proceeding, in addition to any other relief to which it may
be entitled.
2.12 Settlement of Potential Prior Claims
Grantor and Grantee acknowledge that a dispute has arisen between them as to whether
Grantee's predecessor has complied with franchise obligations regarding the obligation to pay.
franchise fees. Grantor contends that Grantee's predecessor was not allowed to deduct amounts paid
by subscribers as franchise fees when determining gross annual revenues prior to determining
franchise fee obligations under the franchise superseded by this Agreement. Grantee contends that
amounts paid by subscribers as franchise fees should havebeen deducted from gross annual
revenues when determining franchise fee obligations under the franchise superseded by this
Agreement. While Grantor acknowledges that a substantial legal controversy exists as to the
correctness of its position on this issue, Grantee acknowledges that, for purposes of interpretation
of this Agreement, the parties have adopted Grantor's position with respect to the inclusion of
franchise fees paid by subscribers in the definition of gross revenues for the purpose of calculating
franchise fees due, as set forth in Ordinance No. 1238. The Grantor and Grantee hereby waive any
t:\agr\Sonic\CitySL0\46s1ofm214
0133222\021495 9
and all claims that may have arisen or may arise due to noncompliance with the prior franchise
including, without limitation, any claim for nonpayment, underpayment or overpayment of franchise
fees. '
t:\agr\Sonic\CitySLO\46slofm.214
0133222\021495 10
SECTION 3 SYSTEM REBUILD
3.1 Rebuild
Grantee shall rebuild the existing cable system to provide a capacity of at least seventy-eight
(78) analog downstream video channels [corresponding to an upper operating frequency of Five
Hundred Fifty Megahertz (550MHz)], within thirty-six (36) months of the effective date of this
Agreement. The system rebuild design shall utilize a "fiber to the serving area" approach in which
optical fiber cable shall be installed from the headend to nodes in areas comprising approximately
one hundred(100)to two thousand (2,000) homes, with coaxial cable utilized for the portion of the
system distributing signals from the node to the cable subscribers. Completion of construction shall
be defined as the ability to provide up to seventy-eight (78) channels of video programming, without
digital compression, to all residential subscribers within the City, as well as satisfactory completion
of any permit-specified requirements.
3.2 Future System Modifications
(a) To assure that Grantee's cable system continues to reflect the general cable industry
state-of-the-art throughout the term of the franchise, Grantor and Grantee agree to utilize cable
systems in terms of numbers of subscribers, penetration, and demographics as a basis for
comparison. The comparison communities ( also referred to as to as the "comparison group") shall
be selected no later than six years after the effective date of this Agreement. Grantor and Grantee
shall each select four communities to be included in the comparison group.
(b) Grantor and Grantee agree that subsequent to the completion of the rebuild required
in Section 3.1 above, but no sooner than seven(7)years after the effective date of this Agreement,
when (i) five or more cable systems in the comparison group (also referred to as the "comparison
sub-group") offer programming services which exceed the services provided on Grantee's system
by ten (10).services or more, and (ii) addition of such services is commercially reasonable, then
Grantor may require Grantee to provide additional programming services to meet the average
provided by the comparison sub-group. Grantee shall complete the modification within twelve (12) .
months of receipt of Grantor's request, subject to the availability.of system channel capacity. If this
provision would require Grantee to incur additional capital costs in excess of$500,000, then prior
t:\ag\Sonic\CiiS SL0\46slofin.214
01332221021495 11
to incurring any such additional capital costs, Grantee shall be entitled to an appropriate extension
of the franchise term on a commercially reasonable basis.
(c) Grantor and Grantee further agree that subsequent to the completion of the rebuild
required in Section 3.1 above, but no sooner than seven (7) years after the effective date of this
Agreement, when (i) five or more of the cable systems in the comparison group have activated
upstream communications capacity and are offering interactive residential services to all subscribers
on a regular (and not a test case or other experimental)basis, and (ii) the addition of such services
is commercially reasonable, then Grantor may require Grantee to activate the upstream capacity of
Grantee's system. Grantee shall complete this activation within twelve (12) months of receipt of
Grantor's request. If this provision would require Grantee to incur additional capital costs in excess
of $500,000, then prior to incurring any such additional costs, Grantee shall be entitled to an
appropriate extension of the franchise term on a commercially reasonable basis. Capital costs shall
include, without limitation, all costs to meet the provisions of Section 3.5 of this Agreement.
(d) For the purposes of this Section 3.2, the addition of programming services shall be
"commercially reasonable" if Grantee is able to recoup all capital costs and earn a reasonable return
on any such addition.
3.3 Emergency Alert Capability
Concurrent with the completion of the system rebuild provided in Section 3.1. above, Grantee
shall provide the system capability to transmit an emergency alert signal to all participating
subscribers, in the form of an audio override capability to permit Grantor and/or the County of San
Luis Obispo to interrupt and cablecast an audio message on all channels simultaneously in the event
of disaster or public emergency.
3.4 Standby Power
Concurrent with the completion of the system rebuild provided in Section 3.1 above, Grantee
shall provide standby power generating capacity at the cable system control center capable of
providing at least twelve (12) hours of emergency supply. Grantee shall maintain standby power
system supplies throughout the cable network and nodes capable of providing emergency power
within the standard limits of commercially available power supply units.
t\agrlSor icTitySM46slofm214
0133222\021495 12
,2-�3
3.5 Status Monitoring
Grantee shall provide an automatic status monitoring system or a functional equivalent when
the cable system has been activated for interactive service, provided that such status monitoring is
utilized by at least fifty percent(50%) of the comparison communities in Section 3.2(a).
t\agr\Sonic\CitySLO\46slofrn.214
0133222\021495 13
-All
SECTION 4 SERVICES AND PROGRAMMING
4.1 Provision of Service
(a) No later than the completion of the system rebuild provided in Section 3.1,
Grantee shall offer its normal range of services to all residents of the City, as the City exists on the
effective date of this Agreement, at standard installation charges and monthly rates.
(b) Service to all residents in any areas annexed to the City after the effective date
of this Agreement shall be provided at standard installation charges and monthly rates no later than
twelve (12) months after the date of such execution.
(c) In commercial areas, wherever Grantee has been given at least ten (10) days'
notice of a street opening, Grantee shall install conduit or cable in the affected trenches prior to the
trenches being closed.
(d) .Grantee shall have no obligation to extend its distribution lines to allow it to
provide service in any residential or commercial area where it cannot secure on commercially
reasonable terms any additional rights-of-way necessary for service to be provided to such area on
a commercially reasonable basis.
4.2 Services and Programming
Grantee shall provide Grantor with a list of program services offered, which list shall be
updated each time a change is made. Grantee shall not voluntarily reduce the number of program
services without thirty(3 0) days'prior notification to the Grantor and system subscribers.
4.3 Leased Channel Service
Subject to available system capacity, Grantee shall offer leased channel service in accordance
with applicable law.
t:\agr\Sor is\CitySLO\46slofin.214
0133222\021495 14
SECTION 5 SUPPORT FOR PUBLIC, EDUCATIONAL AND GOVERNMENTAL ACCESS
5.1 PEG Access Operating Costs
Based on the provisions of the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984 and future
applicable law, Grantor shall determine from time to time the funding level Grantor desires to make
available for public, educational and governmental (PEG) access operating costs, and the most
appropriate entity or entities to manage PEG access operations.
Any Grantor request for grant funds for equipment, facilities and channels for PEG access
use shall be accompanied by an operating plan which delineates the source of the required operating
funds to the extent required by Exhibit "B".
5.2 Grantee Support of PEG Usage
Grantee shall provide the following or equivalent support for PEG cable usage within the
franchise area:
(a) Provision and use of the grant funds and channels designated in Exhibit "B"
of this Agreement for local PEG programming and access use at no charge in accordance with the
requirements of Exhibit "B".
(b) Maintenance of Grantee's PEG access facilities and channels, and support of
PEG programming to the extent specified in Exhibit "B" of this Agreement.
(c) Provision of free public building installation and basic service, and provision
of one upstream transmission line to allow for hive cablecasting capability from the locations
specified in Exhibit "C", including San Luis Obispo High School, which capability shall be available
not later than the completion of the rebuild outlined in Section 3.1 above.
(d) Provision of wiring and equipment for a tum-key system(when used in
conjunction with the upstream transmission line described in(c) above) for live broadcast from the
City Council Chambers located in City Hall and the City Council Auxiliary Chamber located in the
San Luis Obispo City-County Library using the equipment described in Exhibit "C", which
equipment shall be available not later than the completion of the rebuild outlined in Section 3.1
above.
The parties agree that the commitments outlined in(c) and (d) above are voluntarily entered
into pursuant to the provisions of the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, and the cost of
t:\ag\Sonic\CitySLO\46slofin.214
0133222\021495 15
providing such commitments will not be'considered to be an amount required to satisfy franchise
requirements to support PEG during the term of the franchise and will not be charged against any
PEG funding due Grantor during the term of the franchise.
5.3 Compliance with Federal Law
In accepting this franchise, the Grantee agrees that the commitments indicated in Section 5.2
above are voluntarily entered into pursuant to the provisions of the Cable Communications Policy
Act of 1984, and will not be charged against any franchise fees due the Grantor during the term of
the franchise.
t:\agr\Sonic\CitySLO\46slo5n.214
0133222\021495 16
SECTION 6 REGULATION
6.1 Franchise Regulation
The franchise renewed under-this Agreement shall be subject to regulation by Grantor in
accordance with all of the lawful provisions of Ordinance No. 1238.
6.2 Force Majeure
The force majeure provisions of Section 1.36 of Ordinance No. 1238 shall apply.
6.3 Rate Regulation
Grantor knay elect to regulate rates at any time in accordance with applicable law.
t.\agr\Sonic\CitySLO\46slofin.214
0133222\021495 17
N WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor and Grantee have executed this Agreement the date and
year first above written.
APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
By:
Date:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
(SEAL)
(CORPORATE SEAL) SONIC CABLE TELEVISION OF SAN
LUIS OBISPr
By:
Christopher Cohan, President
Date:
t:\agr\Sonic\CitySLO\46slofm207
0133222\020995 18
EMMIT A
SURETY GUARANTEE
(SAWLE)
t:\agr\Sonic\CitySLO\46slofm.214
0133222\021495
A-]
EXHIBIT A: SURETY GUARANTEE
WIl[EREAS,the City of San Luis Obispo (hereinafter called "Grantor") under this Franchise
Agreement dated the day of 1995, has granted a franchise to Sonic Cable
Television of San Luis Obispo (hereinafter called "Grantee") to own, operate, and maintain a cable
television system (hereinafter called "the Franchise"); and
WHEREAS, Sonic Communications, (hereinafter called "Guarantor") a California
corporation, being the.parent company of the Grantee, has a substantial interest in said Franchise,
the conduct of the Grantee, and the Franchise Agreement between Grantor and Grantee establishing
Franchise requirements,which Agreement is hereby specifically referred to, incorporated herein and
made a part hereof, and
VV IEREAS, Section 2.7 of said Franchise Agreement requires the Grantee, as Principal, to
furnish security issued to cover the faithful performance of certain of the Grantee's obligations under
said Franchise, and which security shall be in favor of the Grantor,
NOW THEREFORE, subject to the provisions of Section 2.8, Guarantor hereby
unconditionally guarantees the due and punctual performance of any and all obligations of Grantee
contained in the Franchise Agreement, up to Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000). This
Guarantee shall, unless terminated, substituted or canceled as hereinafter provided, remain in full
force and effect for the period provided by said Franchise. Provided that, upon substitution of
another Guarafttor reasonably satisfactory to the Grantor, this Guarantee may be terminated,
substituted or canceled upon thirty(30) days' prior written notice from Guarantor to the Grantor and
Grantee.
t:\agr\Sonic\CitySLO\46slofn.214
0133222\021495
A-2
Any such notice to be given hereunder shall be addressed to Grantor, with a copy to Grantee.
Such terminations shall not affect liability incurred or accrued under this Guarantee prior to the
effective date of such termination or cancellation.
No claim, suit or action under this Guarantee by reason of any default of the Grantee shall
be brought against Guarantor unless asserted or commenced no later than six (6) months after the
effective date of such termination or cancellation of the Guarantee.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantee and Guarantor have hereunto set their hands and
seals this day of , 1995.
SONIC CABLE SONIC COMMUNICATIONS
TELEVISION OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
By: By:
Title: Title:
t:\agr\Sonic\CitySL0\46s1ofrn.214
0133222\021495
EXHIBIT B:
GRANTEE CONMTMENT TO
PEG ACCESS FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
t:\agr:Sonic\CirySLO\46slofin.214
0133222\021495
B-1
EXHIBIT B: GRANTEE COMMITMENT TO PEG ACCESS FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
1. PUBLIC, EDUCATIONAL AND GOVERNMENTAL (PEG) ACCESS CHANNELS
(a) From the effective date of this Agreement until the system rebuild provided in
Section 3.1 is completed, Grantee shall continue to provide capacity of one (1) downstream video
channel for composite PEG use.
(b) Concurrent with the completion of the system rebuild provided in Section 3.1,
Grantee shall make two (2) downstream video channels available exclusively for PEG use. These
channels shall be dedicated for the term of the franchise renewal, provided that Grantee may utilize
any portions of these channels during any time when they are not scheduled for PEG use. Grantor
and Grantee shall establish Hiles and procedures for such scheduling in accordance with Section 611
of the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984.
(c) After the completion of the system rebuild, at any time during the term of this
franchise, Grantor may request and Grantee shall provide up to a total of two (2) additional
downstream video channels for PEG use. Grantor may not submit such a request unless the PEG
channels already being utilized each are cablecasting at least eight(8) hours per weekday, exclusive
ofweekends, of unduplicated video programming on each channel already designated for PEG use,
and, further, that additional contemplated PEG programming cannot effectively utilize the existing
channels during the time they are available.
(d) Upon completion of the system rebuild provided in Section 3.1, Grantee shall make
available for interactive EG use at least thirty megahertz(30 MHZ) of upstream capacity and thirty
megahertz(30 MHZ) of downstream capacity, on a closed-circuit basis, at no cost to EG users. The
EG users shall be responsible for the procurement, installation and operating costs of any terminal
and interface equipment needed at the user facilities to utilize this interactive bandwidth. Using
t:\agr\Sonic\CitySLO\46slofia.214
0133222\021495
�-3S
B-2
monies available in the PEG Fund, Grantee shall be responsible for the procurement, installation and
operation costs of all equipment external to the EG user facilities necessary to provide and maintain
the communications network paths, except that Grantee shall be responsible for maintenance of the
external cable plant at its sole expense.
(e) As used in subparagraphs (a) (b) and (c) above, "PEG use" shall mean the use of the
channels and bandwidth to provide live, taped or character generated programming, or data
transmission for public, educational or governmental purposes by the Grantor and the governmental
and educational institutions listed in Exhibit C (collectively the "Other PEG Users"). Grantee
reserves the right to add other public, governmental and educational institutions to the list of Other
PEG Users from time to time. Grantor and the Other PEG Users shall establish rules and
procedures for scheduling the use of the channels available for PEG access use and provide a copy
of such rules to Grantee. As used in subparagraph (d) above, "EG use" shall mean the use of the
channels and bandwidth to provide live, taped or character generated programming, or data
transmission, for educational or governmental purposes by the Grantor and the governmental and
educational institutions listed in Exhibit C (collectively the "Other EG Users"). Grantor reserves
the right to add other governmental and educational institutions to the list of Other EG Users in a
timely manner to allow for construction of the necessary facilities in connection with the rebuild.
Grantor and the Other EG Users shall establish rules and procedures for scheduling the use of the
channels available for EG access use and provide a copy of such rules to Grantee. Grantee may
utilize any portion of these channels during any time when they are not scheduled for EG use.
Grantor, the Other PEG Users, the Other EG Users and Grantee shall establish rules and procedures
for scheduling use by Grantee in accordance with Section 611 of the Cable Communications Policy
Act of 1984, as amended from time to time.
t:\agr\Sonic\CitySLO\46slofm.214
0133222\021495
d2 3d
B-3
2. ESTABLISHMENT OF PEG FUND
On the effective date of this Agreement, Grantee agrees to establish a fund (the "PEG Fund")
for Grantor to use solely for PEG access equipment and facilities. Grantee shall pay into the PEG
Fund in arrears an amount equal to one percent (1%) of gross revenues. If applicable federal law
and regulations permit Grantee to "pass through" the cost of these funds to system subscribers,
Grantor shall not oppose such a pass-through. Grantor reserves the right to request, and receive,
an advance credited against the PEG Fund of up to Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars
($250,000), no sooner than three (3) years after the effective date of this Agreement, for designated
PEG capital equipment and facilities. The advance provided above shall accrue any interest costs.
At the Grantor's request, Grantee shall provide Grantor with a calculation of the current balance
available to Grantor in the PEG Fund.
3. REQUEST FOR GRANTS FROM PEG FUND
Including the advance provided in paragraph 2 above, any request by Grantor for funds from
the PEG Fund shall be in accordance with an operating plan prepared by Grantor. The operating
plan shall contain, as a minimum, the following information:
(a) List of intended PEG users.
(b) Planned type and level of programming for each user.
(c) Capital equipment, facilities and estimated costs required to support the intended
uses. This shall include a survey of existing publicly-owned equipment that might be available for
the intended purposes.
t:\agr\Sonic\CitySLO\46slofrn.214
0133222\021495
j ��
B-4
(d) User commitments by Grantor or another PEG user to cover operating expenses for
at least a three- (3) year period. The user commitments shall be approved by resolution of the City
Council.
(e) An evaluation by Grantor that the existing public facilities and equipment are
inadequate to meet the needs of the operating plan.
(f) Except for the advance provided in paragraph 2 above, a statement of the amount
requested and that the amount requested is less than or equal to the amount available in the PEG
Fund.
Based solely on Grantor's certification that the PEG operating plan is reasonable and
appropriate to meet PEG needs and objectives, Grantee shall provide the requested funds no later
than sixty (60) days after receipt of Grantor's request and the operating plan.
4. PEG OPERATIONS
Grantor may negotiate agreements with neighboring jurisdictions served by the same cable
system, educational institutions, or others to share operating expenses as appropriate. Grantor and
Grantee may negotiate an agreement for management of PEG facilities, if so desired by the parties.
5. TITLE TO PEG EQUIPMENT
Grantor shall retain title to all PEG equipment provided with funding made available in
accordance with paragraphs 2 and 3 above.
t:\agr\Sonic\CitySLO\46slofn.214
0133222\021495
-Oft
B-5
6. RELOCATION OF PEG CHANNELS
If Grantee relocates any PEG access channel to a different.channel number, Grantee shall
reimburse Grantor for any out-of-pocket Grantor costs incurred as a result of the relocation up to a
maximum of$1,000. Grantee shall provide Grantor and all subscribers with at least thirty(30) days'
written notice of the relocation of any PEG access channel.
7. PROMOTION OF PEG ACCESS
Grantee shall allow the Grantor to place bill stuffers in Grantee's subscriber statements sent
in the franchise area, for the purposes of promoting or explaining PEG access, no more than twice
per year upon the written request of the Grantor and at such times that the placement of such
materials would not effect Grantee's cost for the production and mailing of such statements. The
Grantor agrees to pay Grantee in advance for the actual costs incurred by Grantee in connection with
the placement of such materials. Grantee shall also make available access information provided by
Grantor in subscriber packets at the time of installation and at the counter in the system's business
office. Not more often than three (3) times per year, Grantee shall also distribute, at no charge to
Grantor, through advertising insertion equipment, promotional and awareness commercial spots
produced at the Grantor's cost and submitted by the Grantor in a format compatible with such
equipment once Grantee has acquired and activated such capability. Grantee shall also include a
listing of the known programming to be cablecast on PEG access channels in any program guide of
services for the cable system.
t:\agr\Sonic\CitySLO\46sloftn214
0133222\021495
EXHIBIT C
SERVICE TO PUBLIC TACILITIES
C-1
1. PUBLIC BUILDINGS TO BE PROVIDED WITH FREE CABLE TV CONNECTIONS
AND THE HIGHEST LEVEL'OF BASIC SERVICE:
City of San Luis ObisRo Buildings:
City Hall
Police Station
Fire Stations
Senior Citizens Center
City Recreational Center
City-County Library
City Recreation Department (current location and new location at 1341 Nipomo)
Public Works Department
Other Public Buildings:
San Luis Obispo High School
Pacific Beach High School
Laguna Middle School
Pachecho Elementary School
Hawthorne Elementary School
Sinsheimer Elementary School
Bishop Peak's Elementary School
Teach Elementary School
C.L. Smith Elementary School
Jesperson School
San Luis Coastal Office of Education
State of California(675 California Blvd.)
.San Luis Jr. High School.
San Luis Obispo County General Hospital
Crisis Center
2. PUBLIC BUILDINGS TO BE PROVIDED WITH LIVE PROGRAM ORIGINATION
CAPABILITY:
City of San Luis Obispo City Hall
San Luis Obispo City-County Library
San Luis Obispo High School
3. PUBLIC BUILDINGS TO BE PROVIDED WITH DATA TRANSMISSION
CAPABILITY:
City of San Luis Obispo City Hall
t:\agr\Sonic\CitySLO\46slofm.214
0133222\021595
C-2
4. EQUIPMENT FOR COUNCIL CHAMBERS AND COUNCIL AUXILIARY CHAMBER:
LOCATION: City Council Chambers
EQUIPMENT TO BE INSTALLED:
1 Fixed mounted camera with remote control pan, tilt and zoom capability
1 portable camera w/tripod and dolly
1 video/audio mixer
1 character generator
1 S-VHS editing recorder/player deck
4 Black&white video monitors
1 Color Monitor
I waveform monitor/vectorscope
1 audio monitor
1 microphone mixer
Wiring of all above equipment to master control room located adjacent to Council
Chambers and tie-in to house audio system.
LOCATION: Library Community Room
One fixed mounted camera with remote control pan, tilt and zoom capability wiring
to enable use of above provided portable camera. Tie to house audio system.
EQUIPMENT:
Equipment specifications will be of comparable quality as listed below
Qty Description
2 Sony PAC1/DXC-930 Color CCD camera with CMA-D2
power supply
1 Panasonic AG455 camcorder
2 Sony CCDC-25 DC power cable
2 Fujinon S 16x6.7BMD-A8 tele-conferencing lens
2 Vicon V6033PT pan tilt head, 151b load rating
1 Vicon V7000C desktop controller for use with two pan tilt
tAagr\S0n9*c\CitySL0\46s1ofn.214
0133222\021495
C-3
heads
1 Vicon V6634LM modification to all tele-conferencing lens
for presets
2 Vicon V6616WM wall mounts for V6033PT
1 Bogen 3196 Professional Tripod
1 Bogen 3198 dolly
1 Panasonic WJ-MX50 Video/Audio mixer
1 Panasonic WJ-KB50 Character generator for WJ-MX50
1 Panasonic AG-1970 S-VHS editing recorder/player
4 Panasonic TR-930B 9" monitors
2 Panasonic TY-K930 rackmount for single or dual rackmount
1 Panasonic CT-1383Y 13" Color monitor
1 Panasonic CT-1383 Custom rackmount kit for CT-1383Y
1 Videotek TVM-621• Combination Waveform monitor/
vectorscope, case not included
1 Vdeotek DRC-1 double rack mount case for TVM-621
1 Vdeotek BLK-1 blank panel
I Vdeotek APM-200 Stereo rackmount audio program monitor
1 Shure AMS-2415" black goose neck microphone with 20'
cable
1 Shure AMS-8000 8-channel automatic microphone mixer
New conduit'to be laid to cross Palm Street at 18" depth as well as a reasonable
easement and location for Palm Street to City Hall building to enable return wiring
from Community Room to Control Center adjacent to City Council chambers.
5.. QUALIFIED PUBLIC, EDUCATIONAL AND GOVERNMENTAL
ACCESS USERS:
City of Morro Bay
Cal Poly State University
b. OTHER EG USERS:
t:lagr\Sonic\CitySLO\46slofin.214
0133222\021495
-J
ACCEPTANCE OF FRANCHISE
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
SONIC CABLE TELEVISION OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a California corporation, hereby
agrees and undertakes during the life of the transferred franchise, to perform all of the terms,
conditions, provisions, and obligations thereof. SONIC CABLE TELEVISION OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO fiuther agrees to comply with the restrictions of said franchise and the laws and ordinances
of the City of San Luis Obispo, and-be subject to all rights, powers and privileges reserved and
reservable to the City of San Luis Obispo and its officers as in said laws and ordinances
contemplated and provided.
Dated: February 1995 SONIC CABLE TELEVISION
OF SAN LUIS OBISPO,
a California corporation
President
Secretary
t:\cor\Sonic\CitySLO\46accept.wkg
020995\hkm
San Luis Obispo Community Media Task Force
REPORT AND PRELIMINARY PLAN
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Table of Contents
Introduction.................................................................................................................................. i
PhaseI Findings..........................................................................................................................ii
Issues
PhaseI Conclusions...................................................................................................................iii
Agreements
GovernmentPilot Project...............................................................................................iv
EducationPilot Project...................................................................................................v
Interactive Bulletin Board System ..................................................................................v
ITFSContracts...............................................................................................................A
PEGAccess...................................................................................................................A
ReconveneTask Force.......................................................:..........................................vi
Consultant's Recommendations
Rationale for a Strategic Telecommunications Plan .......................................................vi
Outcomes of a Planning Process..................................................................................vii
Proposed Planning Process...........................................................................................vii
Addenda:
TaskForce Members......................................................................................................
Educational Distance Learning Priorities........................................................................II
Governmental Communications Priorities..................................................................... III
Ar#ac,k rnen+ 7- �'�3
San Luys Obispo Community Media 1 ask Force
REPORT AND PRELIMINARY PLAN
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
'W° INTRODUCTION In August 1995 the County of San Luis Obispo and the Cities
of Arroyo Grande, Atascadero, Grover Beach, Morro Bay,
Paso Robles and San Luis Obispo entered in an MOU to
establish a Task Force to plan for a San Luis Obispo County
Consortium for Community Media. Please see Addendum I
for a list of Task Force Members.
The MOU partners retained Schuler and Associates to
coordinate the first phase of a projected two year planning
process. The purpose of this first planning phase was to
identify (a)the telecommunications needs and resources of
the participating governmental and educational agencies and
(b)short term pilot projects which might demonstrate the
potential of telecommunications. Work was completed
between November 1995 and May 1996.
AVk PEASE I FINDINGS SIGNI[CANT CouNTY REsouRcEs
Collectively,the governmental and educational institutions
have significant telecommunications resources, including a
#Cabled Bldgs minimum of 15 satellite receive sites and between 101 and
reported b • 131 schools and public buildings linked to cable. Cal Poly,
iso Cuesta, Templeton Unified and one low power TV station
Sao ocable co have production and post-production capabilities with the
z
■Institutions County Office of Education planning to acquire additional
ti0
studio equipment this year.
u Most franchises contain provisions for access channels.
Toter Schs. Govt. Sonic Cable is planning to add more fiber to their system and
have committed to providing each city and the County in their
franchise area their own PEG channel soon.
A regional wireless cable' ITFS system will likely be in place
within the next two years, giving the educational institutions
the capacity to broadcast to their respective sites,to each
other and to the homes in the region. The use of wide area
networks is on the increase and through the County there is a
robust microwave system. Cal Poly is part of CSU Net, a
CSU system wide data and video network which will link
community colleges this year.
Linn INSIT=ONAL REsouxcEs
Technology resources available to any one institution are
limited, however. While the Task Force identified distance
learning, staff training and the interactive bulletin board
system (IBES) using cable TV as priorities, funds to support
May 1996 Page ii
San Lud"'Obispo Community Media Task Force
REPORT AND PRELIMINARY PLAN
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
such operations are very limited.
'gyp, PHASE I FINDINGS
COMMON NEEDS
✓DISTANCELE&WNG The schools and colleges identified distance learning and
improved communications as their top telecommunications
✓ STAFF 7MAUNG priorities while local governments placed improved
communications to the home and staff training as their
✓ COA04 MCA77ONS priorities(see Addenda 11&111).
JOINT PLANNING
There is a need for joint planning and resource sharing to
support video based communications. The Regional Network
Consortium,which focuses on data communications, may
serve as a model. There are precedents in other counties,
such as Monterey, Kern and Fresno,that demonstrate the
potential for intersegmental collaboration and a robust
regional network.
PUBLIC ACCESS
The Task Force believes the general public and community
organizations would benefit from a robust public access
program in the county. There are already a number of video
projects sponsored by the Video Producers Association and
trained volunteers interested in supporting community access.
The community needs to be brought together to help plan for
public access.
41L ISSUES
There are a number of outstanding issues with the cable
operators if the PEG access channels are to be used
effectively. Future planning for video communications must
address the links or gateways between cable TV, ITFS, CSU
Net, and other broadband networks. Specifically:
1. COUNTY WIDE CONNECTION Service areas of Cal Poly,
Cuesta College,the County Office of Education and many
San of the school districts are not contiguous with existing
Simeon cable TV franchise areas. Local governments need to
reach local, regional and county audiences. Negotiations
should begin with the cable operators about an
onic interconnect for PEG access. Planning for ITFS should
also address the north-south connection issue.
Falcon
2. CHANNEL DESIGNATION The educational and
May 1996 ,-Page iii
San Luis Obispo Community Media 1 ask Force
REPORT AND PRELIMINARY PLAN
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
governmental cable and ITFS channels should have the
same channel number throughout the county.
400 ISSUES
3. CHANNEL CAPACITY Given the importance of
interconnection,the Task Force should explore the .
feasibility of pooling channels in exchange for a county
wide interconnect and then sharing the costs of
programming the pooled channels.
4. WIRING PUBLIC BUILDINGS The cable regulators
should confirm the cable companies'wiring of schools
and public buildings, and schools should seek to connect
as many sites to the ITFS system.
ITFSable TV 5. GATEWAYS BETWEEN TELECOMMUNICATIONS
NETWORKS In the short run local agencies will piece
together their network using a variety of technologies:
cable TV, ITFS, satellite, microwave as well as ISDN,
ATM, and other broadband technologies. Future planning
must address the issue of gateways between the various
CSU Net atellite telecommunications networks to maximize the use of
existing technologies and to work toward a seamless
county wide network.
S. SATELLITE There are no satellite resources managed by
Task Force agencies in the north County area. For.
purposes of staff training and classroom instruction the
Task Force should explore means of making satellite
delivered programming available in the north county
through ITFS and cable TV.
4& PHASE I
CONCLUSIONS
COOPERATION AND COLLABORATION
The Task Force believes that a strategy of cooperation and
collaboration on a county wide, intersegmental basis will result
in a more cost effective, equitable deployment of technology
and will help each agency achieve its goals for lifelong
seaming and improved communications.
The Task Force also agrees that additional planning is needed
to develop a strategic video communications plan.
May 1996 >Page iv
San Luis Obispo Community Media Task Force
REPORT AND PRELIMINARY PLAN
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PHASE I
CONCLUSIONS
POSTPONE PHASE II PLANNING
However, The Task Force recommends that a decision about
a strategic planning process be postponed until the first
quarter of 1997, because:
• Task Force members need to engage their
constituents in discussions of the cost benefits of
ublic the technologies.
• The demonstration projects will be an important
Education educational tool and will let agencies gain
experience with the technology.
Government • The ITFS negotiations are still ongoing.
Cable • The County Office of Education, Cuesta College,
the Library and several school districts are just
initiating major technology projects.
E)
• Cal Poly has just begun their distance leaming
program.
• CSU Net is in the process of expanding the
network to community colleges.
INITIATE PEG ACCESS PLANNING NOW
The Task Force believes that there should be planning for
PEG access involving the community at large while the
education and governmental agencies initiate their pilot
efforts and address the outstanding issues.
44 AGREEMENTS
PILOT PROJECTS
Member agencies of the Task Force agreed to sponsor two
short term pilot projects (a) to demonstrate the value of the
cable access channels and of video communications and (b)
to gain experience working together on a technology based
project. These projects are:
1. GOVERNMENT PILOT PROJECT
The Government Work Group initiated a pilot project to
produce a series of 4 videos addressing countywide issues:
Skateboarding, Growing Healthy Communities with Dr.
Jennifer James, Wildland/Urban Interface Fire Protection and
Water Reuse. The pilot segments are projected to be
May 1996 Page v
�T
San Luis Obispo Community Media 1 ask Force
REPORT AND PRELIMINARY PLAN
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
cablecast in the fall 1996.
AGREEMENTS
1. GOVERNMENT PILOT PROJECT(coat.)
The Work Group is contracting with 2 independent production
groups. The estimated costs of$3,000 are being shared by
the County and the Cities of Arroyo Grande,Atascadero,
Grover Beach, Morro Bay, and San Luis Obispo. SLO County
Organization of Governments agreed to serve as fiscal agent.
2. EDUCATION PILOT PROJECT
The Education Work Group wants to develop(a) a pilot video
project and (b) a longer term vision for the use of video for
professional development and distance learning by all schools
in the county. Through the County Office of Education the
Education Work Group is working with the county planning
committee for the California Technology Assistance Project
(CTAP)to identify county professional development priorities,
explore distance Teaming as a strategy, and to explore CTAP
funding for a pilot video project
INTERACTIVE BULLETIN BOARD SYSTEM
Local governments and the schools need flexible, low cost
vehicles to communicate with the citizenry. Limited
community access to computers with modems continues to be
a barrier to greater use of SLO Net and the Internet. An
interactive bulletin board system (IBBS) allows the home
viewer to use a touch tone phone to request information which
is then displayed on a cable TV channel. IBBS offers a
relatively low cost system to provide large amounts of
information to the home upon demand.
The County intends to implement an IBBS on at least one of
its access channels. The timing will be dependent on the
development of the IBBS software for the personal computer
Notices rather than the Amiga platform. The County will explore the
Agendas feasibility of a third party to manage the IBBS and ways to
Events integrate an IBBS with SLO Net . (see PEGAccess Planning
Polling below).
Please refer to the Appendix for the Implementation Charts for the
government and education pilot projects and for the IBBS planning.
May 1996 Page.vi
San Luig`Vbispo Community Media Task Force
REPORT AND PRELIMINARY PLAN
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
4° AGREEMENTS
rrFS CONTRACTS
COE aso Robles The schools involved with the ITFS licensing process intend
to finalize a contract with a wireless cable operator and .
develop plans for utilization of the channels which may
Cal Cuesta include the formation of an alliance or consortium to facilitate
Poly programming and to reduce operational costs.
PEG ACCESS
San
Lucia Mar Luis Coastal The County of SLO intends to initiate a community planning
process to:
• explore community interest in public access.
• develop recommendations for PEG access
policies.
• recommend a management structure for the PEG
access channels, including the management of an
IBBS.
• develop a budget and funding strategy to support
public access. .
Morro Bay,Atascadero and the City of San Luis Obispo have
agreed to participate with the County, although the details of
that participation have yet to be defined.
RECONvENE TASK FORCE
The Task Force will reconvene in the first quarter of 1997 to
review the implementation of these initial projects and explore
the need for additional planning activities.
4& CONSULTANT'S
RECOMMENDATIONS
RATIONALE: A STRATEGIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS PLAN
The consultant strongly recommends the development of a
county wide strategic telecommunications plan that addresses
cable TV, ITFS, microwave, satellite,wide area networks and
the emerging technologies of personal communications
systems, digital cellular and switched digital video. The plan
should address both policy and cost effective applications.
May 1996 >Page vii
��`5 /
San Luis Obispo Community Media ,& ask Force
REPORT AND PRELIMINARY PLAN
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CONSULTANT'S
RECOMMENDATIONS
RATIONALE(cont.)
The rapid growth in network technologies offers great
opportunities for local governments and schools to deliver
Communities frequently overlook more services to more people for lower costs. However,the
the even higher costs ofdoing pace of technology changes, complex policy issues, lack of
local expertise and the perceived high costs of investing in
nothing. these technologies discourage local communities from even
exploring these opportunities. Communities frequently
overlook the even higher costs of doing nothing.
The technologies themselves are breaking down traditional
school and city boundaries since the applications such as
public safety communications systems,geographic
information systems and distance learning require new levels
of interagency cooperation.
Local communities, especially smaller and more rural
communities, have limited resources of their own to address
the complex changes in technology policy and regulation.
Policy makers must make telecommunications a priority and
join with other agencies to formulate appropriate policies and
regulatory postures.
OUTCOMES OF A PLANNING PROCESS
The goals for a planning process are to produce:
✓ ADVOCATES A cadre of knowledgeable people within local
government, education, community organizations and
local businesses who become effective advocates for the
video communications and other emerging
telecommunications technologies.
✓ PEG ACCESS • A Cable N Public, Educational and Governmental
Access Plan which examines the pooling of access
resources and the establishment of a consortium or
nonprofit agency to manage these resources.
✓ IBBS • An implementation plan for the IBBS to address (a)
funding and (b) management of the system, including
management by an access consortium or nonprofit
agency.
May 1996 Page viii
�—saz.
San Luis Obispo Community Media Task Force
REPORT AND PRELIMINARY PLAN
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
41k CONSULTANT'S
RECOMMENDATIONS
OUTCOMES(cont.)
✓ EDUCA77ONAL PLAN • An Educational Plan to address(a)the development of
distance leaming priorities, (b) common issues, (c)
planning for ITFS and cable TV distribution, (d)joint
program acquisition, and (e) establishment of policies and
procedures to promote the most effective use of ITFS and
cable TV channels.
• A Governmental Plan to address(a) common staff
✓ GOVERNMENTAL PLAN training and communications priorities, (b) video
programming priorities, (c)joint grant applications to
support common projects, and (d) establishment of
telecommunications policies and permitting procedures.
✓ TEC MCAL PLtN • Technical Plan to address county wide (a) infrastructure
development and coordination, (b) standards, and (c)
opportunities for joint purchasing and project
development.
✓ COORDINA77ON • A mechanism to continue coordination among the
agencies in the County. The role of existing
organizations, such as SLOCOG and the county wide
data consortium, should be explored.
PROPOSED PLANNING PROCESS
Given the complexity of a county wide plan the process
should build off existing affiliations within the county. It is
anticipated that by the time the Task Force re-convenes,
there will be at least six groups involved directly with some
aspect of the plan:
• The Government Work Group implementing the Video
Pilot.
• SLO County Organization of Governments
• The Education Work Group and the County CTAP
Planning Committee
• The ITFS licensees
• The Regional Network Consortium
May 1996 Page ix
,z-s3
San Luis Obispo Community Media !ask Force
REPORT AND PRELIMINARY PLAN
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
4% CONSULTANT'S
RECOMMENDATIONS
Task Force Task Force members are involved in all these
groups. However, the Task Force should be expanded as
necessary to ensure appropriate representation from the six
groups along with community organizations. The role of the
Task Force would be to:
• establish and manage the planning process.
• coordinate the work of the six groups.
• ensure communications among the six groups.
• be a liaison between the six groups and their agencies.
• recruit and work with any outside consultants or experts.
• conduct and/or collaborate with other organizations to
educate the community and policy makers as well as the
participants in the planning process.
• compile information and draft the plan.
• seek grants and other support to implement the planning
process.
Executive Committee It is recommended that a
representative group of 7 to 9 Task Force members be
appointed as an Executive Committee to provide leadership,
oversight and continuity to the process.
Work Groups The responsibility for planning will rest with
the working groups. Where possible pre-existing
organizations or groups such as the ones listed above should
serve as the working groups.
Business Affiliates The Task Force will need support from
the local business and vendor community to provide expertise
to the Task Force and working groups and to support the
implementation of the plan.
Since it is likely that the Task Force and various institutions in
the county will apply for state and federal grants, it is vital that
private partners be cultivated in advance to provide matching
funds and in-kind support for grant applications.
The Task Force should recruit the private sector early in the -
planning process with the goal of a formal public/private
partnership to implement the telecommunications plan.
May 1996 'Page x
Appendix L
MANAGEMENT OPTIONS FOR
PUBLIC, EDUCATIONAL AND GOVERNMENT ACCESS
Presented by Kathleen Schuler
April 18, 1996
BACKGROUND:
Program policies for public access differ markedly from those that can be set for educational and
govemmental access. But,the three sectors can share a production facilities while establishing separate
policies, procedures and criteria for programming. For example, in Honolulu there is one nonprofit
access center responsible for the management of PEG access, but local government and an educational
consortium set their respective program policies.
Management responsibilities for PEG access can be assigned to more than one entity.
The role of any access center and the costs associated with programming the access channels is
significantly affected by the way PEG programming gets produced. For example, some access centers
facilitate the programming by providing training and support to outside groups which actually produce the
programs. This model produces the most programming at least cost. Other centers serve as production
units, providing the production crew and the user groups provide the program content, a more costly
approach. Frequently, a center will combine both approaches.
MANAGEMENT OPTIONS FOR PUBLIC ACCESS:
I. City Management of Public Access:
Several cities in California have assumed responsibility for public access, putting in place
policies which forbid program content control (Ex., Torrance, Lakewood). Either an existing
department is assigned (most frequently the City Manager's Office, Parks and Recreation or the
Library) or a new division created to manage facilities and to program the public channel (ex.,
Cable Communications Office, City of Torrance). This model, while infrequent, occurs most
often when the community and city government share a single channel or facility.
Pros: Sharing of resources can be facilitated. Some city departments, like Parks and
Recreation and the Library, already have educational, recreational and informational programs
for the public, frequently including video production. City councils sometimes feel this model
guarantees accountability for public access.
Cons: The City is most exposed to liability for programming and to potential First Amendment
Violations, no matter what policies are in place. And, that exposure is the same no matter which
department is assigned responsibility. Conversely, the community is concerned that government
control of public channels would result in access only by mainstream organizations.
PEG Access Management Models Page 1
K Schuler April 18,1996
Mkchmeri+ 3 �'•��
2 School Management of Public Access:
A school is sometimes given the responsibility for public access, especially when the public
shares a channel with education and/or when the school has video facilities and training
programs in place. Usually, a public advisory group or a producers'group is set up to advise on
policy. Generally, community colleges are more open to public access than are school districts
and four year institutions. The most active community college managed public access centers in
Northern California are located at De Anza and Los Altos Community College. In some
communities the school just provides facility space and/or training (ex., Sacramento Community
Access Foundation contracts with the local community college for production training.)
Pros: Existing resource can be leveraged (for example, facilities and training). Schools
frequently have significant experience in video production. Community colleges, especially, are
geared to working with the public on both a credit and noncredit course basis. With dropping
enrollment the public schools may be able to offer sites for facilities. City Councils, looking to
ensure accountability, sometimes feel more comfortable placing public access in another public
institution rather than in a nonprofit.
Cons: The school's mandate and own programming needs frequently preclude full access by
the public. Schools frequently do not wish to take on responsibility for public access
programming. School bureaucracies can make access management cumbersome and
personnel costs and hiring practices usually increase costs of operation. Some members of the
community feel uncomfortable in a school environment (for ex., seniors on a high school
campus,those with limited education at Cal Poly).
3. Nonprofit Access Corporation Management:
Under this model the City creates or designates a nonprofit access corporation to assume
responsibility for part or all of the management of the access channels. The most active in
Northern California are Sacramento Community Cable Foundation, Mtn. View Community'
Television and Davis Community TV.
Cities are adopting this option with increasing frequency. The Alliance for Community Media
estimates there are 4,800 nonprofit access centers in the United States.
Pros: The nonprofit access corporation has access as its sole mandate. If established as
independent from the city, it provides the city with maximum protection against liability for public
access programming and First Amendment violations. Compared with city government and
schools, the nonprofit has minimal bureaucracy and has greater flexibility in fundraising. In the
case of lawsuits the nonprofit has relatively shallow pockets. And, it can take on the role of a
neutral, third party leader to bring together organizations that have little history of working
cooperatively.
Cons: In the absence of an existing agency able to take on public access, this model would
require the investment of time and resources in the planning and startup of a new organization.
City Councils are concerned about accountability of newly established and untested nonprofit
access centers. A nonprofit access center is particularly vulnerable if it lacks the support of the
City Council and a stable funding base.
PEG Access Management Models Page 2
K. Schuler April 18,1996
MANAGEMENT OPTIONS FOR EDUCATIONAL ACCESS:
1. Multiple Educational Access Centers:
In some communities channels and equipment are given to each educational institution,which
then controls its own programs and channels.
Pros: Each institution has maximum control over the development and utilization of its channels
and production facilities. It is a simpler management approach, embroiling each school only with
its own bureaucracy. Each entity can develop its own management structure.
Cons: This model is not the most cost effective. In most communities schools receive little
ongoing funding from the franchise fee,which when divided among multiple institutions is
insufficient to support a schools'video programming. Resources in a community become
fragmented. Resource sharing and joint ventures are necessary for distance learning programs
in most communities.
2. Educational Management Consortium:
M educational consortium is formed to manage a shared facility, resources and channels
dedicated to educational use. The consortium may be a nonprofit agency (ex., the Sacramento
Educational Consortium) or a joint powers agreement (ex., the Lakewood Educational
Technology Consortium). These consortia frequently coordinate use of multiple networks: cable
TV, ITFS,satellite, etc..
Pros: Consortium facilitates cost-effective use of limited access facilities and promotes
cooperative ventures. Shared programming responsibilities usually ensure that available
channels are filled.
Cons: Consortia create another administrative level and requires cooperation from institutions
that have little or no history of joint venturing or political cooperation. It requires that each school
relinquish a degree of control to a yet unknown management entity.
3. Educational Policy Consortium:
In this model the educational consortium sets the policies and allocates channel time for its
members, but does not actually manage an access facility or access channels. Each school may
produce its own programming (as in#1 above) or utilize the equipment in a central nonprofit
access center or another institution that manages the facilities and schedules the channels. On
Oahu the facilities and channels for education are managed by the nonprofit access corporation,
but the educational consortium set policies and control their own program content.
Pros: Since the scope of responsibility for the Policy Consortium is less than that under#2, it is
less costly (usually requiring no paid staff, for example). It allows the schools to exercise control
over educational policy and their programming and to share programming responsibilities, but
permits each school to control its own means of producing programs or to use the resources
provided by a nonprofit access corporation or another institution.
Cons: Similar to"#2-Cons° above,the policy consortium does not have control over the actual
management of any external facilities it uses.
PEG Access Management Models page 3
K Schuler April 18,1996
4. Central Nonprofit Access Center:
In this model the educational institutions participate in an umbrella nonprofit access center that
manages facilities and channels on behalf of its public, educational, and/or government
members. The access centers in Honolulu and Kauai are examples of this model.
Pros: This provides for the most cost-effective utilization of facilities and equipment and is most
commonly used where there are limited resources and/or when a neutral party is needed to
coordinate use of production resources. By having a central facility program the channels,
channel time can be more effectively utilized.
Cons: All participating parties must relinquish some degree of control to an unknown
management entity and cooperate with other institutions to fulfill its organizational objectives.
Participating institutions may have very different mandates, resources, and/or programming
goals. This is particularly difficult if the member institutions have little or no history of
cooperation. The nonprofit requires startup costs and planning time as well as ongoing
operational expenses.
MANAGEMENT OPTIONS FOR GoVEMWENTACCESS:
1. City Access Center:
In this model an existing city agency or a new division is created to manage the government
access channel(s) and production facilities. Access management is sometimes placed under:
• The City Manager who has responsibility for all city agencies and who is responsible
for cable franchise enforcement and telecommunications for the City.
• The City Library that serves as the major public information source for the City.
• The City Clerk who has responsibility for the maintenance and dissemination of
information for the legislative branch of the City.
Park and Recreation that provides a wide range of educational, recreational and
support services to the citizens.
Access management is usually not placed under the jurisdiction of Fire or Police, for their
internal information and communication needs usually pre-empt other agencies' use of the
channel or production resources. The setting aside of cable TV bandwidth for police and fire and
emergency information services should be negotiated separately from other access
requirements.
Pros: Policies for government access differ significantly from public access. This model
facilitates clearly differentiated policy development for each.establishing
government is usually
reludant to tum over policy and significant responsibility for establishing program priorities to a
non-govemment entity. City government is best able to coordinate and encourage the use of
government channels by other municipal agencies.
Cons: Again, multiple management and access facilities add to the cost of providing access
services, fragment limited resources and minimize cooperative ventures among user groups.
PEG Access Management Models Page 4
K Schuler April 18,1996
a-s�
2. City Access Policy Agency:
A city agency(see above) or a committee representing various departments is designated to
develop government access policies and procedures and to identify programming priorities.
Most frequently,the City Manager's Office takes the lead. Actual program production is
contracted out to a centralized access center or to another production unit. For example, the
City of Mtn. View contracts with the nonprofit access center for the coverage of city council
meetings and a given number of hours of other programming.
Pros: The city government can participate in a centralized production unit (like the nonprofit
access corporation) or contract ous.for production services while controlling policies for the
government channels and setting government programming priorities. Utilizing other production
facilities, especially those of a central access facility, can be cost effective for the city.
Cons: City government usually wants to maintain control of production facilities, and is reluctant
to tum over any significant control of program production to an outside agency. Not having
equipment on site (i.e., the Council chambers) makes coverage of meetings more cumbersome.
3. Central Nonprofit Access Corporation:
In this model the government participates as a member agency in the central nonprofit PEG
access corporation. This model is most common when local government shares a channel with
other user groups, access facilities and equipment are limited, and/or when a neutral
coordinating entity is needed. The County of Oahu, Hawaii, has established a nonprofit access
corporation to coordinate public, educational and governmental access.
Pros: See Educational access, nonprofit management above.
Cons: If the nonprofit is responsible for public access, and if city government has a significant
number of voting seats on the-Board,the city exposes itself to First Amendment violations and
liability. Given the city's role in the franchise enforcement and as a potential funder of the
access center, the city may exert undue influence over the operations of the organization. Also
see Educational access, nonprofit management above.
MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS:
The management model for access must address the following functions:
• establishing program and channel policies
• establishing and enforcing procedures
• allocating channel time
• setting programming priorities
• scheduling the channel(s)
program playback on the channel(s)
• provision of training
• provision of production assistance
• production of programs
• outreach and promotion
• supervision of access staff and other organizational management functions.
• resource development.
PEG Access Management Models Page S
K Schuler April 18,1996
One management entity can be given the responsibility for all the above functions, or they may be
delegated to a number of institutions. For example:
• Nonprofit Manage All for PEG Access: A nonprofit access organization could be created
to manage all PEG channels, to provide facilities, schedule the channel and provide
playback services, provide basic video production training, perform all administrative
functions and to conduct outreach and promotion.
• Nonprofit Manage All for Public Access Only: The nonprofit access organization could
serve all the above functions, but only for the public channels. The City and an educational
consortium could manage their own respective dedicated government and educational
channels.
• Divide Management Functions: The nonprofit access center could serve all of the
functions in#1 for the public, but contract with Cuesta to provide training through its credit
and/or noncredit courses. Local governments and the educational consortium could
establish the policies and programming priorities for its dedicated channels, but contract
with the nonprofit for production facilities and assistance.
The basic model adopted for program production significantly affects the role of the access center, the
staffing pattern and the costs associated with programming the channel. For example:
• Access Center As Facilitator. Many access centers provide training and some production
support, but the users write the scripts, supply the talent, operate the cameras- in short,
produce the programs. This is regarded as the "pure" public access model. This model
produces the most programming at the lowest costs. Some argue that program quality can
be a problem.
• Access Center as Production Unit: On the other hand, some centers, particularly those
serving government and education, have adopted a "local origination" approach, serving as
a production unit for the users. The center provides the production crew while the user group
provides the program content (the council meeting, the event, on air talent, etc.). This is
creates more costly per program costs and limits the amount of programming that can be
produced with available staff.
In practice most public access centers tend to emphasize the facilitator role while creating
some productions of their own while government and educational access rely more on
professional production staff.
PEG Access Management Models Page 6
K Schuler April 18,1996
o� 'l019
RECOMMENDATJONS:
Establish a Nonprofit PEG Access Center: A nonprofit access center should be established to
coordinate the use of the PEG channels, to schedule the channels,to oversee playback, to ensure the
equitable use of all facilities and equipment available for access,to conduct promotion and outreach for
the channels, the organization, and for all programming. The Center should also manage an IBBS on
behalf of its participating cities, schools and organizations.
Input and Oversight: Formal mechanisms be established to ensure appropriate input into the policies
and procedures of the nonprofit by the.public, educational and governmental users and to provide
accountability.
Municipal Access: The County and cities should develop the policies and priorities for government
programming.
Educational Access: An educational consortium should be established to develop the policies and
priorities for educational programming. and to coordinate existing educational production resources.
Planning Process for the Access Center: The planning process, incorporation of the organization and
recruitment of the Board of Directors, and an Executive Director should take approximately nine months.
Government and Educational Access Planning: At the same time the County, cities and an
educational consortium should each institute internal planning processes to develop their respective
access related plans.
Funding: No access center in the country is self sufficient through fees for service, contracts or
traditional fundraising. All rely on some level of support from franchise fees, cable operator payments or
some level of support from the franchising authorities. It is recommended that the planning process
address the following funding options:
• Pooling of some portion of franchise fees from participating cities and County.
• Pooling of cable operator payments for equipment and facilities.
• Contracts for production services for participating cities, County and schools.
• Agencies set aside funds in their own budgets to support programming needs.
• Joint funding for special projects, such as a county wide homework hotline or coverage of
school sports.
• IBBS fees from information providers and other fee for service options.
• Video production training provided through adult education, Cuesta College and/or a
nonprofit group.
• Development of a formal internship program with Cuesta and Cal Poly.
• Development of a volunteer program.
• Grants for special joint projects.
PEG Access Management Models Page 7
K Schuler April 18,1996
o�—G�
Cows:
This discussion outlines the areas of cost when instituting the access management recommendations.
1. Planning for the Nonprofit Access Center: Expenses include the hiring of a consultant(s)to
assist with the planning process,to prepare the documents for incorporation, to help recruit the
Executive Director and to train the new Board of Directors. This cost is dependent on the level
of support that can be provided by the participating agencies. Filing fees for incorporation are
approximately$900.
2. Startup Costs: Expenses include the recruitment of the Executive Director, hiring and training
of key staff, and recruitment and orientation for the Board plus facility rental, staff salaries,
equipment and furniture purchases, and general administrative support. Facilities and
improvements are the greatest variable for budgeting purposes, depending on whether space
can be donated or co-located with other production facilities.
3. Ongoing Operational Costs: In addition to salaries, rent, and the usual costs of running a
nonprofit,the organization will incur costs associated with production (supplies, maintenance),
training, outreach and promotion.
It is difficult to project operational costs because of the large number of variables: the scope of
the center's responsibilities; the number of channels to be programmed;whether facilities are
built, rented or donated;the volume of users; the number of staff and level of expertise; the
amount of programming the center produces vs. the amount produced by its users, etc..
Although ongoing operational budgets for nonprofit access centers in California range from
$20,000 to$500,000 a year, it is difficult for a center to operate on less than $125,000 to
$150,000 per year plus funds for equipment maintenance and replacement.
PEG Access Management Models Page 8
K Schuler April 18,1996
Y \
= sidents wrestle over Channel 54
°::.MyNeilTarrell to let Channel 54 grow without what it is going'to be,or we get went on,tbp air."As Mr.Bouc.
'MORRO=BAY'—A tug-0f-war atY-approved guidelines. out and cancel.the,deal with er. said last July," Mathie
;;.over�contrdl' of.Channel 54 Public Works Director Bill Sonic,"said Elliott.. said, "we really have opene
,eznerged;iW Monday night's Boucher said, "we .have Steve Mathieu, a member of Pandora',s Box."
--City'Council meeting;'which ached into the nether-regions the Video Broadcasting Com-
r-was givens a six-month exten- of legal issues." He added that mittee.and the person most re-
'^ 6MA. ' his department has no money sponsible for putting Channel
4..a'.The''City Council voted to budgeted for legal costs arising 54 on the air, said he's studied
(,.limit cii'blecasts to city'meet- out of Channel 54, but will how public access channels
4,ipgs l open to the public, and need legal advice"very soon.". work in cities nationwide. He
!';some=community, events spon- .. ,Councilman..Dave Elliottproposed rules to the.Public
wanted the cit
�sorpd or-sanctioned by the city, y to:.keep the Wgrlii Advisory Board'which
I schools and the state park. original tapes of meetings,and were:accepted in.la.Ne'part
';Xvident at Monday's meet- erase and.recycle.them.every last"July.
-U ..'•` 'few months: He also favored He.acknowledged,the city's
krng..was ythat'residents''and
;*some'council members dis- setting guidelines soon. legal:responsibility became
dz}gree sharply:over who should "We should either decide precanous .when Channel 54
tae in
char the'program-
rraung 9rCliamel 54. .
a y-Pity Attorney David Hunt
kcautioned+the council that
SNannel 484.is a product of the
city's•fisnchise
agreement-with
^'Sonic Cable;which means the
1'controls,;and is responsible
, fpr,anytliizig it bioadcasts.
so,!the city's control of
Ehann .I54 i r aises legal:4ues-
ions'with regards to Federal
r'
mmunlcations Commission
+des;'and>First Amendment
�'guatantees of free speech.,
"An'attorney's worst night-
s mare is if somebody presents a
'! ape (for Channel 54 broad-
;.cast) that we reject, and we
0ci t:have'solid.guidelines,"
tad Hunt
it .,• ;.,..
aunt said the city ty should not
y T
A 4achmeM-
Mar-24-57 06:07P schuier & assoc. 1 415 751-7122 P .05
Policies and Procedures for Government Access
Outline
MISSION OR PURPOSE- EXAMPLES
• Increase participation in the democratic process
involvement of the citizenry in the governance of the City
• Public Information
• Community Forum
• Celebration of diversity of community
MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE
• How policies are established
• Responsible departmentiagency
• Partnerships
PROGRAMMING PRIORITIES
• Coverage of governmental agency meetings:
• Dissemination of department information
• Coverage of programs, forums and conferences
• Information on issues
• Live coverage
• Emergency information
PROGRAM CONTENT GUIDELINES
• Non-editorial information
• Non-political
• Neutrality
• Non-commercial
• Solicitation of funds
• Non-discriminatory
• Religious and Non-Sectarian Programming
ELGIBLE USERS
PROCEDURES
• Program Production
• Editing policies
• Acquired or Pre-produced Programming
• Submission of Tapes
• Scheduling
Aki-hme,1+ 6 -441
.S y v U5
C x
� E > m Via ` Eo ° c
u y a J I = 0 y o
m N W y Q V 3 U « y y •� ` •CJ �"' y O C l0 L 7 d
aEa aci a 75
cc m G ? .5 9 e y ? y 0 cc
J r .� 'O ,� ' •C C 6 d
E c y n ° e-C E ° c
C 7 y 00 C N .0 y 0J G E o0
U .0 = ° ayi = 0 = to r=
•v a� ami ami a d d = `o s a E m o m
Ez d s 3
O
" erz
= s y r°—b ° > o CC m m y oz e 0
z � ; x � � -- V �
Z =
T C J N
a`i 3 'fl O E 0 �. O .U. V C a`i i. '" ° I J 40.
E E O . J s o o E :: o' 4 = Ew E 0 a) a`' N
0 42
_ 'd —E
U O .-> E Al ° d O E m vy
a
T U E m y .°� a o as S I s {. E � E E o $ c
e o E �, ._. d w, ° E ;: °' a5i ai ° o m E °
z U z 0. N ` 0
rn
d ^ E ao y v °
> n y m b, O 0 y •y N C
c o c U c m s a m E y Q c
Q ai ° a = v = d Q 5 o f a _ ° >
d = 0 's m t' o = 0 °0 o E ° :? aLi y S E T
0 Q m 0U dN E > sU_�.: U ° n vTati
3 6 3 eo p = >
«.
.. a d E E m cmi ¢ c ; m d o x E > d
O E
3 U � en E y o UO U � U a U Uco U
0
w T y
y o
Y J Oq oo y .y t .^ « C « in C 00 L •O y J O o4 5
a m 5 .S ao y �3 d E N 6 U ° �J. Q c v aJi 'm n C y m
>, >, = .S O >, E
Ec.? Q •5 c = m o m m •= _ E 2 = a = o
Y o _ o ' c 3 c > o d v y o a E a o a
•- 6 O — C L J N m o0 O .O ,d_, ° a J �+ ` t:. a s C o .�_"
C06 w J 0 — y c°� ° c.5 OD >, ` y c e d o '� y = o U y = s °
.0. 6 C y C y 'J �. C m 0) y J N J r U C �,'
fl m c c � C Y = o C �' E Q = y __ c 0 C U = o Q m
Y Y O = 0 0 m C m O y C �. U �. = C O N v .0 �' = y .y
d 3 c U E U �2i v w d y ° a 3 7 3 U co °c U a>i ; c o 3 Z j _ >
r = ° m 0 1' °°N > 3 •0 °� n c E w axi °c Lj z y = E o = T=° z E
'o z 5 0 _ 5 d m — m o c o d y a U
m Y m _ U e a'u a aoQ ` �' U E J o o U o s
r e mQ o ;a oz m0 0 o U o � d� 3z U o
3 a U c U >
•� Y y
spp d
mA •� G �' '� �' _
V c O^
7 e y y ate' E y N T T y T� y ° VB
.Y z uvin d M W) 0 — 0 E y
r > >- o o
mto
y
o _ _ ° m c
c=a O ° _ 00 c Itr
T cri Y a m lV tj °
v CC � 0o m `o o _. o xpo = °`' vo g poo m =°� 0 500
O O y O aV O C O U O O c 7 0 V O
i O 7 0. i DD p N �O O c wl V1 o l C O G e^1
° :O °O 'i. �: ... ° N C O N m T 000 ca O x o0
U .� �o .., Vl .-. � v OCt•ly
A4ac.hrnen+ (o