Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCable Commission Information - Petition for Reconsideration t:LCrl,. c � • January 19 , 1977 i Mr. John Marchwn Chairman Cable Tclevision Task Force Intergovernmental Relations Study Coui;nittee Tompki_na County Board of Representatives I Court House Ithaca, 14Y 14850 C Dear Mr. i•i_archam: R This is in response to your letter of December 21, 1976 requesting a declaratory ruling on the legal and regulatory acceptability of the proposed Tompkins County. Cable Television Commission. The Commission finds that the proposal is acceptable from both a legal and regulatonj standpoint . As you are av,are, the Convnission has a statutory mandate to cooperate with munici- palities to encourage and facilitate regional franchising :-id 1 ' into r-inunicipal cooperation in relation to cable comvunications ' operations . . lie look at your proposed Commission with great interest- because of its "pioneering" aspects and can foresee it being a significant resource to the participating municipalities and, thus , of equally significant value to the public. The Commission stands ready to provide whatever resources available to assist you. If you have further queations , please feel free to contact rae. Sincerely, -----�, Robert F. Kelly 1 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) ss: CITY OF WASHINGTON ) A F F I D A V I T Anthony Ceracche, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that: He is President of Ceracche Television Corporation; and He has read the foregoing Petition for Reconsideration; and The facts stated therein are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief. � A Anthony Ceracche Subscribed and sworn to before me this 2nd day of February, 1977. Notary Public My commission expires: CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE_ I, Ruth H. Wescott, a secretary in the law firm of Cohen and Berfield, Washington, D. C. , hereby certify that on the 4th day of February, 1977, I sent by U. S. mail, postage prepaid, a complete copy of the foregoing "Petition For Reconsideration" to the following: Hugh S. MacNeil Robert F. Linton, Supervisor Chairman, Tompkins County Town of Enfield Board of Representatives R. D. #1 . 132 Glenside Road Trumansburg, New York 14886 Ithaca, New York 14850 Daniel Schreher, Mayor James Drader, Supervisor Village of Trumansburg Town of Newfield Bradley Street Pearl Street Trumansburg, New York 14886 Newfield, New York 14867 John Marcham Bruce M. Payne, Supervisor Chairman, Cable Television Task Town of Ulysses Force Elm Street Intergovernmental Relations Study Trumansburg, New York 14886 Committee Tompkins County Board of Francis Wright, Supervisor Representatives Town of Danby Court House 2350 Danby Road Ithaca, New York 14850 Willseyville, New York 13864 Edward J. Conley, Mayor Frank Satterly, Mayor City of Ithaca Village of Groton 108 East Green Street Municipal Building Ithaca, New York 14850 108 Cortland Street Groton, New York 13073 Walter Schwan, Supervisor Town of Ithaca Hicks Dow, Supervisor 126 E. Senaca Street ° Town of Groton Ithaca, New York 14850 Town Hall, Conger Blvd. Groton, New York 13073 Fred C. Marcham, Mayor Village of Cayuga Heights 836 Hanshaw Road Ithaca, New York 14850 -2- Harold Payton, Supervisor Town of Caroline 736 Valley Road Brooktondale, New York 14817 Seymour Smidt, Mayor Village of Lansing 292 North Triphammer Road Ithaca, New York 14850 Wesley McDermott, Supervisor' Town of Lansing R. D. #2 Locke, New York 13092 Charles G. McCord, Supervisor Town of Dryden 65 E. Main Street Dryden, New York 13053 i Ruth H. Wescott FEB 8 1977 CITY OF ITHACA TOMPKINS COUNTY ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 OFFICE OF TELEPHONE: 272-1713 THE MAYOR CODE 607 MEMO TO: Hon. Martin A. Shapiro, City Attorney Hon. Ethel- Nichols, Chairman of the Charter & Ordinance Hon. Dana Ulloth, Chairman of the Cable. Commission Hon. Joseph Rundle, City Clerk FROM: Mayor Edward J. Conley ,Q DATE: February 7, 1977 L SUBJECT-.; Cable Commission --on Television Petition for Reconsideration - Request by the Board of Representatives of Tompkins County for a Declaratory Ruling - Docket No. 90099 Attached hereto please find a copy of the above for your information. EJC:rb ATTACH. -F F ,;,7777r t�ry �Fyr �� ok r "� '�!t � J �"Ta 5t x :x'� i iN;_ •, c.�f t e, ,. :r '' � + 'J:'Yti}+t, vl� 1 p"...� 4�k�,,SK� .•i � . '� Yrs.. e/ r. � �. 4 " tart i -� oXL is 4:•+r,� t - : �� .- tF- jja .a r• rt j 7 A m + ,• 1, ..r'a� W -`s.' '.� N a fa �;� a �'a. .r.'`3y �' M' 1,�'tm3.4��p�y �, k s. ' 1• b av ;� + .�• 7...,4 ` �Y,•�G F` M�,.d�... Y'4fp� :: �k$ .:. 44 f iJ 2 4 N ,'`j e. ���F ,$ml+ 3'tf � k fie. i r° ��,�t t��a^ � rl-; {'p eft ''•r N•'�' i,✓Y. Yeti ,�1 ,+ cc � .3• .r � !' atT �,i Y r "gyp a � �!1 r§"r" r '.�xWpa,. 4r' y{ /• + - .�• �tht ,� ` 1'� W� re ,1: - - 3J''` .i}��..4:M1t .�1 t ��S ' �.^ * �T ��WIJ �i f'1 � ; •�� F •„�f..'� �i .°�+ ; `ri 3•• �'�.H , . A' S- �," � 0.�� , �'t`y>.,,a��^Mta'��,.:.Y 1^t,P as,'e� � 6-Sws • •i^N •r. :m,,:f ada i4J' ° ,:':� �'\".. .„; ,.1� F `��� t t4 4 € x n � W rk Ci � �' fes_ • & '1'ctey ww ..�x t � 1 .. ��.�. •3r .r '.i ,pear F�'#'k4,At 7 °';/� y • .S^I� -. - 4,yy /•4-w at 5�S S y 1'�"s h� VtT �t�i 43�*' •r: � ,� i4o Vis. k yye 4 _ �-.e#fi ta�:;+.r<:yx� .> •"aa�w�s�a�.�,.�a3;�,z.o..,xrnkd.w�.�..e;. .. .�a ..,.,�.,u.Wu,,.x...._., �e.'a uN,tY!TSw,d�.vLrL,. -..�?'�R _ ���^°°§.1Y`�S " '�' `'�7 �,,.as.R t TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1 II. The Commission's Action was Premature . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 III. The Threat to the Growth of Cable Television in Tompld.ns County. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - IV. Duplication of Presently Available Services . . . . . . . . . . . 8 V. Undue and Unnecessary Burden of TCCC. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 a. TCCC will engender undue delay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 b. TCCC will not provide meaningful guidance to municipalities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 VI. Violations of Existing Franchise Rights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 VII. Violation of Article 28 of the Executive Law. . . . . . . . . . . 18 VIII. Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 R k E I I qrr�_ STATE OF NEW YORK COMMISSION ON CABLE TELEVISION In the Matter of ) Request by the Board of ) Representatives of Tompkins ) Docket No. 90099 County for a Declaratory Ruling ) PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION Ceracche Television Corporation (Ceracche Television), by its attorneys, hereby petitions for reconsideration of the Commission's action (by letter of the Chairman) of January 19, 1977, in the above- captioned proceeding, which is attached hereto. In that letter the Commission approved the legal and regulatory acceptability of the pro- posed Tompkins County Cable Television Commission (TCCC). Ceracche Television is the operator of cable television systems serving most of the communities referenced in the request which commenced this pro- ceeding and is therefore clearly an interested party. I. Summary Ceracche Television has been the operator of cable television systems in Tompkins County for almost twenty-five years. During this period, Ceracche Television has continuously sought to provide the best possible service to its subscribers at rates below those typically charged in New York State. In addition to maximizing the amount of programming available, and offering substantial program origination, Ceracche Television has sought to extend service to the many sparsely populated areas in -2- Tompkins County. Indeed, Ceracche Television serves areas that most cable operators would refuse to serve because of the small number of subscribers. Despite these efforts, Ceracche Television in recent years has experienced increased regulatory burdens from some communities which i have long received excellent service. These burdens have included unreasonable refusals to grant necessary rate increases and attempts to impose unreasonable and unjustified franchise requirements. As a result of the uncertainty arising from these developments, Ceracche Television was precluded from making further extensions that otherwise would have been effectuated. Unfortunately, continuing increases in costs have made it unlikely that these extensions are now feasible. The proposed TCCC represents the culmination of over regulation of cable television in Tompkins County. TCCC would create unreasonable I delay and undue burdens, would be duplicative of services already f available and would be of no real benefit to the municipalities involved. Ceracche Television is already subject to three tiers of regulation - federal, state and local. The addition of an additional regulatory tier at the county level would stifle even further the growth of cable television in Tompkins County. For it is impossible for Ceracche Television to provide the same type of service that has been provided in the past if it is subjected to more and more overregulation. -3- The provision of quality cable television service in Tompkins County is as much the goal of Ceracche Television as of the municipalities involved. In the past, Ceracche Television has made extraordinary efforts to achieve this goal. The creation of an agency such as TCCC will ensure that Ceracche Television will be unable to continue to provide the-level of service desired. For these reasons, the Commission should disapprove the creation of TCCC and the various communities involved should abandon the proposal to form the TCCC. II. The Commission's Action was Premature It is respectfully urged that the manner in which the Commission acted on this matter was inappropriate and inconsistent with Ceracche Television's due process rights. For the following reasons, the Commission's January 19, 1977 action should be vacated in its entirety and the matter should be considered de novo by the Commission. The request was filed by the Cable Television Task Force (CTTF) on December 21, 1976. No copy was served on Ceracche Television or its counsel by CTTF. The existance of the request first became known as a result of the Commission's Weekly Bulletin of January 3, 1977. Upon receipt of the Bulletin, Counsel for Ceracche Television requested a copy of this pleading from the Commission's staff, which did not arrive until January 13, 1977, due to a delay in the mails. On January 19, 1977, Ceracche Television informally notified the Commission of its desire to -4- file comments and was advised later in the same day that the Commission had acted on it. Ceracche Television received no formal notification of this action and is not listed as a party receiving a copy of the Commission's letter. It is a matter of record with the Commission that Ceracche Television is the operator of cable television systems in Tompkins County. It is further evident that the matters raised by CTTF would vitally affect Ceracche Television's interests. It is respectfully urged that it was inappropriate to act on this matter without first assuring that Ceracche Television was given notice of this matter and an opportunity to comment. This evidently was not done. Furthermore, it is ordinary Commission is policy not to act on matters until twenty days after they appear in the i Weekly Bulletin. The Commission acted on this matter only sixteen days after it was noticed in the Bulletin. I For these reasons, the Commission's January 19, 1977 action should be considered a nullity. Rather, this matter should be entirely reconsidered in order to ensure Ceracche Television's due process rights. As set forth hereafter, Ceracche Television believes that the pro- posed TCCC represents a major threat to the orderly growth of cable television in Tompkins County. The sole result of the creation of such an agency would be intolerable and unjustified delay with no compensating public benefits. It should be noted that this pleading is directed to the -5- specific proposal now before the Commission. III. The Threat to the Growth of Cable Television in Tompkins County Ceracche Television has been providing cable television service to large areas of Tompkins County for almost twenty-five years. During I this time, Ceracche Television has always sought to provide a quality service with the maximum amount of programming permitted by applicable regulations. Thus, Ceracche Television began as a one channel service and through the years came to provide 13 channel service and will soon provide 23 channel service in many areas. It has pioneered the development of both free and pay nonbroadcast programming. Ceracche Television has also sought, to the extent possible, to extend service to rural areas of the County. This policy has been followed even though a large portion of Tompkins County consists of sparsely populatedareas which can only be served at a financial loss. Ceracche Television has undertaken these efforts because of its desire not to withhold the benefits of cable technology where there is any reasonable manner by which that service can be provided. This is particularly so since these areas I are unlikely to receive service from any other operator. Ceracche Television has extended service to several areas of Tompkins County with approximately 15 subscribers per mile. Most cable operators are unwilling to serve areas with fewer than 40 or 50 i subscribers per mile. It is thus evident that Ceracche Television has -b- in the past endeavored at considerable cost to itself to provide service to the maximum number of persons. In the past two years, however, Ceracche Television has been confronted with the development of increasingly burdensome regulatory policies from several of the municipalities in which it operates. These burdens have included unreasonable franchise requirements, unreasonable rate policies and unwarranted interference in the operation of Ceracche Television's business. The result of these developments has been to adversely affect Ceracche Television's ability to provide the same level of service. Ceracche Television's policy of extending service to the maximum extent possible has been particularly affected. Ceracche Television has been completely unable to make any such extensions. This is the direct result of unreasonable regulatory requirements imposed by some munici- palities. _ Ceracche Television attempted to obtain initial franchises to permit I the extension of service to new systems in the Towns of Danby and Enfield. �. Each of these towns is very sparsely populated with fewer than 20 sub- scribers per mile. Because of unreasonable municipal demands, these i i franchises have never been granted and accordingly the residents thereof ' remain without service. Unreasonable rate policies by some municipalities have made it -7- uncertain whether sufficient revenues will be available to meet the costs incurred by expensive line extensions into sparsely populated areas. As a result, line extensions that might otherwise have been made into areas in the Village of Trumansburg and the Towns of Ithaca, Groton, Ulysses and Dryden have not been possible. Because of these developments, persons who might have received service may be permanently deprived of such service. Unfortunately, .construction costs have skyrocketed in the past two years and it is likely that the same extensions that could have been made before would not prove economically feasible at this time, at least at present rates. It is thus evident that unreasonable municipal actions to date have caused irreparable injury to the public in Tompkins County. The proposed TCCC constitutes the culmination of the trend toward burdensome regulation. As will be demonstrated, the sole result of the creation of this agency will be delay and intolerable overregulation. Under these conditions, it would be impossible for Ceracche Television to provide the same level of service since the adverse regulatory climate would make it impossible for Ceracche Television to invest the funds necessary to provide the types of service that have been offered in the past. The proposed TCCC accordingly constitutes a serious threat to the public's ability to receive the best possible service. Ceracche Television does not dispute the right of the municipalities to prescribe appropriate -8- regulations designed to protect the public. Overregulation, however, creates excessive difficulties and costs that make it impossible for Ceracche Television to accomplish what it could in the absence of such regulation. The ultimate loser will be the public. IV. Duplication of Presently Available Services The creation of TCCC would be unnecessary and duplicative since the principal service it is designed to provide -- advice to municipalities on cable franchising questions -- is presently available by virtue of the existence of this Commission. Pursuant to Sections 811 and 815(3) of the Executive Law, the providing of such advice to municipalities is one of the Commission's principal responsibilities. This Commission has issued many publications designed to assist local municipalities in understanding cable television. Moreover, the Commission maintains a full-time staff whose function is to assist municipalities with respect to cable television matters. While Ceracche Television may not be willing to accept every judgment made by the Commission's staff, Ceracche Television will at least know that such advice is disinterested in nature and based on some understanding of the realities of cable television, an assurance that neither Ceracche Television nor the affected municipalities have with respect to the proposed. TCCC, as will be demonstrated. In CTTF's request, reference is made to the recent efforts of the Commission's staff with respect to franchise amendments in the City -S- of Ithaca. This is cited as a justification for the creation of TCCC; however, exactly the opposite is true. This situation arose during the course of franchise negotiations which had reached an impasse. The parties sought the assistance of the i Commission's staff and the result was a prompt resolution of out-- standing ut=standing differences acceptable to both sides. This resolution was accomplished at an informal meeting without the necessity of time- consuming formal proceedings. This fully demonstrates that ample assistance of proven effectiveness is now available to any municipality which feels the need for such outside assistance. In view of this, there is no justification for establishing a new bureaucracy of questionable effectiveness to perform the same functions already being performed adequately by the Commission. Should any difficulties arise between Ceracche Television and any of the municipalities it serves, Ceracche Television would always be willing to meet with representatives of that municipality and the Commission with a view toward amicably resolving these.matters. Ceracche Television believes that such a procedure is much more beneficial both to it and to the municipality than for the municipality to cede its decision-making function to an agency such as TCCC. By making effective use of the assistance presently available from the Commission, a municipality will be able to preserve its independence _10- with 1Owith respect to cable television while at the same time ensuring the availability of expert assistance when and if needed. With respect to rate matters, the Commission's statute -- Article 28 of the Executive Law -- provides even broader relief to any municipalities which feel unable or unwilling to confront such issues. Pursuant to Section i 825(5)(e) of the Executive Law, any municipality may (with the concurrence of the cable operator) request the Commission to assume the function of fixing rates. This is a more responsible course of action than retaining the ultimate authority to prescribe rates while delegating the responsibility i for decision-making to a quasi-official body such as TCCC, as would be i the result of the proposal now under consideration. It is accordingly suggested that no public interest benefit exists for creating an additional regulatory tier to perform functions already f i being adequately performed. Regulation exists to achieve certain goals, not as an end it itself. The public is not benefited by the existence of excessive regulation beyond that necessary to accomplish those goals since the burdens placed on the operator ultimately fall on the public. V. Undue and Unnecessary Burden of TCCC The burdensome nature of TCCC may be seen from a review of the specific proposal submitted to the Commission. In substance, TCCC would assume for the participating municipalities the function of reviewing proposed franchises and franchise amendments. TCCC would also hold -11- a public hearing on behalf of the municipality involved. The municipalities would nonetheless retain the final decision-making authority and would be free to conduct further review proceedings and public hearings if they so desired. TCCC would therefore constitute a new tier of regulation for cable television. The cable television industry in New York is presently subject to three tiers of regulation -- local, state and federal. The result has already been a substantial delay in the processing of matters that otherwise would be resolved fairly quickly. The creation of TCCC would represent the institution of four-tier regulation -- local, county, state and federal. No other business is subject to such excessive over- regulation. i Incredibly, TCCC would be further subdivided into two parts: TCCC itself and a Review Committee (RC). Upon receiving a matter for its consideration, TCCC would have the option of referrring it to the RC (which would probably occur with respect to all but the most inconse- quential matters), which would then conduct its own review of the matter i and prepare a report. Upon receipt of the RC report, TCCC would consider the question again and prepare its report to the municipality. There would thus be two tiers within TCCC. a. TCCC will engender undue delay. The potential for undue and excessive delay is evident. Indeed, -12- pursuant to Section 7 of the proposed TCCC agreement, participating municipalities would be required to allow TCCC at least two months to produce its recommendation. As a practical matter, the processing of such matters is likely to take a good deal longer. There would also remain the need to obtain subsequent municipal approval which could well take as long as it presently does. Thereafter, state and sometimes federal approval would be required. The delay is likely to be further increased since it does not appear that TCCC would have any significant full-time staff. Section 11 of the proposed agreement would permit TCCC to maintain a staff; however, it is probable that as a practical matter,TCCC would exist on a continuing basis only as "an office. . .for receipt of mail and outside communications. " It would appear likely, therefore, that both TCCC and its RC would consist of part-time members whose principal obligations would be to some other interest. Lengthy delays are likely to occur simply because of the i' inability of the members to find a mutually convenient time to meet or because other obligations have prevented them from conducting studies needed to make their determination. Further delays could result because, as proposed, TCCC would include one representative from each municipality plus up to three additional members. If all the municipalities in Tompkins County participated, there would be at least 16 members and as many as 19. -13- Serious difficulties could be encountered in obtaining a quorum of these members, especially since a member representing one municipality might be less than eager to devote time to matters not affecting his municipality. f b. TCCC will not provide meaningful guidance to municipalities. Ceracche Television also doubts that the proposed TCCC would be effective in achieving its goal of providing expert guidance to municipalities. Ceracche Television does not believe that any meaningful expertise can be developed by persons who are not involved in cable television on a continuing basis. Such would not appear to be the case with TCCC which would likely be called upon to act only on an occasional basis. The functions to be performed by TCCC would not lend themselves to the development of any real expertise. Cable television franchises ordinarily are granted for relatively long periods of time. Because of federal and state regulatory developments since 1972, the past few years have seen more than the usual amount of i franchising activity. In the ordinary course of events, however, it is likely that several years might go by in which TCCC would not be called upon to perform. During this time, previous members of TCCC or its RC will be replaced or lose interest and new members will be in office E who have had no prior experience. Indeed, a municipality may well contact j TCCC after a period of time and find that it simply does not exist any more. -14- It is accordingly suggested that any agency such as the proposed TCCC which lacks full-time personnel and continuity of operation simply cannot realistically hope to perform a meaningful regulatory function. The ultimate result is likely to be a serious disservice to its participating municipalities. The proposed TCCC would also apparently rely on outside "experts" i either as members of it or its RC or as consultants thereto. There are no standards guiding the selection of such "experts" and Ceracche Television I fears that such "experts" as may surface may perform a serious disservice i to the participating municipalities. The fact that a person is an expert in some field does not necessarily make him an expert about cable I television. As noted, Ceracche Television believes that at least some t continuous involvement in cable television is necessary to achieve a meaningful understanding of the problems of this industry. Such "experts" as may be found are not likely to possess or develop any real expertise i with respect to the subject matter involved due to the fact that they will only be called upon sporadically. In view of the part-time, occasional nature of TCCC, it is also highly likely that such "experts" as may be willing to devote time to TCCC may well be individuals with an axe to grind. It is Ceracche Television's experience that many such self-acclaimed "experts" have surfaced in Tompkins County in recent years. These "experts" have in many instances been motivated by completely unrealistic notions about cable television -15- and a total disregard for, if not animosity toward, the rights of Ceracche Television. Ceracche Television does not oppose the right of any individual to make known his views concerning cable television; however, such persons should not be permitted to do so under the guise of quasi- official "disinterested experts. " The status of the proposed TCCC as an "expert" body is further compromised by the fact that its membership would consist principally of appointed representatives of each municipality. The municipalities of Tompkins County are mistaken if they believe that the interests of each municipality are identical. There are many situations where a particular proposal may be in the best interest of a given municipality but be against the interests of the majority. In such a circumstance, the municipality may find that it has ceded its decision-making function to an agency whose membership is adverse to the municipality's best interest. It is thus likely that the participating municipalities will have no way of knowing whether the product it receives from TCCC is genuine expertise, partisan prejudice or simple misinformation. If one of the latter two, municipal action based thereon will create more problems than it will solve. In many cases, the likely result will be the type of unreasonable requirements that have already seriously threatened the growth of cable television in Tompkins County. Whatever expertise may be possessed by TCCC'.s "experts", it is -16- likely that they will lack one important aspect -- an intimate knowledge of the unique problems of each of the several municipalities in Tompkins County. This is an expertise that is presently possessed by the legislatures of the various municipalities that is not likely to be adequately assumed by TCCC. It is respectfully submitted that many of the present problems that have arisen in Tompkins County are the result of local legislators relying on self-acclaimed "experts" rather than their own common sense and knowledge of their community and its unique problems. Because each community has its own special problems, decisions concerning cable television are best made by those closest to these problems rather than outside "experts" who will have little to no real compre- hension of these matters. It is also clearly unrealistic for the municipalities involved to suppose that by the creation of TCCC, they would be able to avoid the difficulties arising from cable television regulation. Under the proposed agreement, each municipality would retain the ultimate authority with respect to cable television within their jurisdiction. Of necessity, i they would also retain the ultimate responsibility both to the public and the cable operator to ensure that such regulation is carried on in an effective and prompt manner. Such responsibility cannot be delegated to TCCC. It is accordingly evident that the proposed TCCC will result in -17- overregulation with attendant delay. Moreover, there is no reasonable basis to expect that TCCC will be able to produce the promised benefits. More likely, TCCC would be only a serious burden not only to Ceracche Television but also to its participating municipalities. i VI. Violation of Existing Franchise Rights Ceracche Television has franchise agreements with several communities in Tompkins County. None of these agreements provide for the creation of any agency such as TCCC or the assumption by that agency of any rights or responsibilities under the franchise. Accordingly, Ceracche Television would take the view that any municipal decision to participate in such an endeavor would constitute a violation of Cerrache Television's rights under the franchise. In this regard, The Commission recently indicated that except in the exercise of its police power, a municipality cannot unilaterally amend a franchise in a manner inconsistent with the terms of the original franchise. The City of Oneonta, Order Denying Amendment, December 23, 1976. The Commission recognized that a franchise is a contract that cannot be changed except pursuant to the terms thereof or by the F agreement of both parties. i The participation of a municipality in the proposed TCCC would result in a substantial change in the terms of Ceracche Television's existing franchises. The Commission should not give its approval to a f -18- proposal that would result in a violation of the principles announced in the Commission's Oneonta decision. VII. Violation of Article 28 of the Executive Law Article 28 of the Executive Law sets forth the policy of the legislature with respect to the franchising of cable television systems in this State. Section 811 contains the basic statement of policy and reads in pertinent part: ". . .the legislature of the state of New York has determined. .. . .that while said operations must be subject to state oversight, they also must be protected from undue restraint and regulation so as to assure cable systems with optimum techno- logy and maximum penetration in this State as rapidly as economically and technically feasible. . . " (emphasis added. ) Section 811 further states that it is this Commission's responsibility: ". . .to review the suitability of practices for franchising cable television companies to pro- tect the public interest. ... if Pursuant to Section 815(2)(a), this Commission is required to prescribe standards for procedures and practices to be followed in the granting of a cable television system. The Commission is also granted broad powers pursuant to Section 816(1) and (5) to.take such action as is necessary to accomplish the legislative goals. The Commission has an affirmative obligation to ensure that the proposed TCCC is consistent with the public interest and the legislature's finding that cable systems should not be subject to "undue restraint and -19- regulation. " For the reasons set forth above, it is clear that the proposed TCCC would constitute the very type of undue regulation which the legislature found to be objectionable. Thus, TCCC is likely to be dilatory, burdensome, duplicative and ineffective. The legislature clearly intended that the Commission should pro- tect cable operators from this type of undue regulation. The legis- lature properly recognized that excessive regulation will result in an adverse impact on the growth of cable television, which will be the precise result of the TCCC proposal. The Commission should therefore prohibit the initiation of such excessive regulation as is embodied in the TCCC proposal. At very least, the Commission should not permit the TCCC proposal to go forward until such time as a rulemaking proceeding has been held to consider the questions raised by such a proposal. As noted, Section 815(2)(a) directs the Commission to establish standards for the franchising process; however, there are no standards governing such as the proposal for TCCC. The creation of TCCC could be the beginning of a major change in the nature, of cable television franchising throughout the State. -20- The instant pleading raises serious questions concerning the need for, and efficacy of, such a regulatory structure that should be fully con- sidered by the Commission before it permits these fundamental changes in franchising practices to occur. A further legal question raised is the proposal that TCCC would be permitted to conduct a public hearing on behalf of the municipalities. This may conflict with the provision of Section 819 of the Executive Law which requires that cable systems be franchised "by the municipality in which it proposes to provide or extend service. " Although under the TCCC proposal the municipality would retain the theoretical authority to grant franchises, it is likely that in many instances the municipalities would merely accept TCCC's proposal without independent consideration. This is inconsistent with the implicit intent of Section 819 that cable should be regulated in the first instance by municipal officials elected by the people who would be receiving service. TCCC would not be elected by the people and would be only indirectly responsive to the public. The public could suffer severely under the TCCC proposal since the result may be a lack of any clear responsibility for cable television mat- { C ters. Thus, municipalities may take the view that these problems should be addressed to TCCC. TCCC, on the other hand, would have to say that it was purely an advisory body and that problems should be taken to the Wool- .—W -21- municipalities. The public may therefore find itself unable to locate public officials willing to admit responsibility for cable television matters. Such a result would be clearly inconsistent with the legislature's intent. It is evident that none of the serious public interest questions raised by the TCCC proposal received adequate consideration in the Commission's action. Clearly, a development of potentially major significance such as this warrants a thorough Commission inquiry prior to its being permitted to proceed. Ceracche Television and the public it serves should not be used as guinea pigs for ill-conceived regulatory experiments. VIII. Conclusion The proposed TCCC is likely to be excessively burdensome and to produce few compensating benefits. The inevitable result would be a serious crisis in the or derly development of cable television in Tompkins County. The Commission should not therefore permit this proposal to go forward at this time. The foregoing does not reflect any intent on Ceracche Television's part to create a hostile relationship with local franchising authorities. It .has always been Ceracche Television's desire to work cooperatively with local officials toward the common goal of both -- the provision of the best and most economical service to the public. Unfortunately, some local officials in recent years seem to have taken the view (without apparent justification) that the only way in which they can properly execute their responsibilities is by assuming a hostile attitude towards Ceracche -22- Television. The result of this has been a serious injury to the public. It is Ceracche Television's desire that this situation be corrected so that cable television matters can be addressed on a basis of cooperation and mutual trust to the benefit of all parties involved. The undersigned have read this pleading and the facts stated therein are true and correct to the best of their knowledge, information and belief and this pleading is not interposed for purposes of delay. Respectfully submitted, CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION By Lewis I. Cohen By _. Roy NV. Boyce COHEN AND BERFIELD Its Attorneys 1129 20th Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20036 I February 4, 1977 Page 1 of .9 TELEVISION CABLE FRANCHISE Agreement made this 7th day of February , 1977, by and between the CITY OF ITHACA, a municipal corporation duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, party of the first part, Grantor, and CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION, a domestic corporation duly organized under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, having its principal place of business at 519 West State Street, Ithaca, New York, party of the second part, Grantee. WITNESSETH: That in consideration of the promises and covenants hereinafter made, the parties agree as follows: 1. Ceracche Television Corporation, of 519 West State, Ithaca, New York, here- inafter referred to as grantee is hereby granted and invested with the right and authority to construct, erect, operate and maintain buildings, machinery, and apparatus within the city limits of the City of Ithaca, as it now is, and as it hereafter may be constituted by revision, modification, or addition, and which said buildings, machinery, apparatus may or shall become necessary in the transmission of television programs, and distribution and sale of television or radio programs for the use of the citizens of the City of Ithaca, said rights hereby granted to be non-exclusive. The City has approved the legal, character, financial, technical and other qualifications of the Grantee and the adequacy and feasibility of its construction arrangements as part of a full public proceeding affording due process. 2. Grantee shall have the right, further, to erect, place, operate, repair and maintain poles, wires, transmission lines, distribution lines, and service lines in and-over and the right to use, all public avenues, streets, alleys, grounds, and places in the city, and within its present limit or as it here- after may be extended, for the purpose of furnishing the, City of Ithaca and its inhabitants with television or radio service, provided always, that such poles, wires, transmission lines, distribution lines, and service lines shall not interfere with, nor obstruct, the necessary or proper use of said streets, avenues, alleys, public grounds or places. s 3. Grantee shall have the right and permission of the� City of Ithaca to use existing poles, wires, transmission lines and service lines now erected and in existence, and owned, controlled or operated by the New York Telephone Company or'New York State Electric and Gas Corporation within the City of Ithaca, upon ' the condition that it shall first obtain the written permission of the New York Telephone Company or New York State Electric and Gas Corporation respectively for such uses. 4. Grantee shall be permitted to extend its poles, wires, transmission lines, distribution lines and service line, and to give service to the City of Ithaca and to its inhabitants in accordance with the permission, rules, regulations and statutes as the same may be amended from time to time, of the Public Service Commission, Federal Communications Commission, and other regulatory bodies of the State of New York and of the United States of America and subject at all times to the applicable laws of the State of New York and of the United States of America. Page 2 of 9 5. Grantee is hereby empowered, and subject always to the approval, if necessary, of the Public Service Commission of the State of New York or other applicable State Commission, and the Federal Communications Commission, to use proper practices, and procedures within the spirit of this franchise and appropriate to the service within the geographical limits of this franchise. 6. Grantee, upon execution of this franchise agreement, shall, if required be allowed to proceed to petition the Public Service Commission of the State of New York or other applicable State Commission and Federal Communications Commission for any approval required to be had in the premises, and upon such k' approval, he shall notify the Mayor of the City of Ithaca in writing. 7. No poles are to erected upon the public streets, alleys, avenues and public grounds and no excavation of any type shall be done or caused to be done unless permission in writing is first obtained from the Department of Public Works of the City of Ithaca, New York. 8. In the event that a change is made in the grade of public street, alleys, avenues and grounds by authority of the City, which shall necessitate the removal of any poles, wires, transmission lines, and distribution lines, to conform to the change of grade, Grantee shall make the necessary changes in its lines, at its own expenses, upon due notice from the Board of Public Works of the. City to do so. 9. All work in any way necessitated by the business of the Grantee which may involve the opening, breaking or tearing up of a portion of a street, sidewalk or other part of any City-owned or City-controlled property shall be done by the City at the expense of the Grantee. Grantee shall save and keep the City harmless against all loss or damage to person or property caused by' the construction, laying maintenance or operation of any of its lines or other undertaking under the authority of this franchise. 10. a) During the term of this franchise, Grantee shall furnish to all persons desiring the service offered, and paying for the same, a wire service capable of producing as good a quality of television picture signal or reception as may be practical from time to time, and shall make all reasonable and practicable betterments or improvements of said service as improvements in the science of carrying of television signals shall warrant, as well as in the elimination of radio interference. b) The Grantee shall certify to the City and provide such required documentation to prove that it is in fact meeting the minimal technical standards required by the Federal Communications Commission and the New York State Commission on Cable Television. Said certification and documentation will be provided as may be requested by the City. If in the belief of the City the minimum technical standards are not being met, or if the Grantee shall fail to provide such certification and documentation as required herein, then the City may, at its sole option, employ the services of the New York State Commission on Cable Television engineering van to make certification checks within the City. The Grantee agrees to such verification checks at the discretion of the State Cable Commission (should they be required by the City). 3 Page 3 of 9 c) Service shall be defined to include the providing of cable service to subscribers' homes and businesses in the City through the use of cable and necessary instruments. Further service shall include the program services provided by Ceracche such as over-the-air broadcast pictures, pay television programs and local origination, Additional services should be provided only after securing City approval, if lawfully required by the State Cable Commission. It is understood that litigation is pending in the U.S. District Court in the Northern District of New York concerning the State Commission's juris- diction to regulate auxiliary services. 11. This franchise does not in any manner grant to the Grantee, his successors or assigns, the exclusive right to the sale and service of television sets, accessories, or convertors within the City of Ithaca, and it is expressly understood that the right to sell such sets or accessories or convertors is reserved to any and all legitimate dealers. By Acceptance of this franchise, the Grantee, his successors and assigns shall be deemed to have accepted the following conditions: ' (a) Any persons, individual or corporation may purchase television sets from any source without any liability to the holder of the franchise ' herein granted. (b) The holder of this franchise shall be required to permit any individual or corporation to have access to the services of the holder of this it franchise, subject only to the payment of regular installation fee and monthly charges which are hereby established as follows: (1) Residential or Commercial establishments: Maximum charges: First installation charge - $20.00. Each additional installation - $10.00. Rental for first installation - $5.50 per month, basic cable service including 20 channels ($5.50/month, convertor supplied by subscriber, $7.50/ month, convertor rented from Grantee). Additional rental charge for each extra set at the same establishment: Residental: no change will be made in the present charge of 50 cents monthly for additional hookups to the same subscriber at the same address that were in operation as of March 1, 1975, such additional hookups to be billed at the price of $1.00 monthly per additional hookup installed after March 1, 1975. Commercial: $1.00 per month per set. (2) Suspended service: No charge for disconnecting and no rental charge while disconnected. Reconnecting charge: $5.00. (3) The user shall have the privilege of selling and trans- ferring.the service once only to a different party at a different address for t a $10.00 transfer charge, where the service is available at the time. (4) Changing location of cable: $5.00 for moving to another location in same room or for moving to a different room in same apartment or living quarters. (5) Any user who has paid the regular established residential installation fee and moves to another residence within the city where the service is available may have this service transferred for a $10.00 charge. (6) Cable service may be disconnected when rental or install- ation charge is sixty days past due. If service is disconnected because of non- payment, on- a ent a charge of $5.50 is made for reconnection after ' P ym � g past-due account is paid. Page 4 of .9 (7) Installation may be disconnected if user attempts to run more than one set at one time on each installation, or permits anyone else to do the same; or tampers with the lines in any way. (8) Any increase of the maximum charges must first be ap- proved by the Common Council, after a full public hearing affording due process. Such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. (9) All installation and other charges include applicable federal, state and local taxes, if any, except sales tax. (10) The City specifically reserves the right to conduct a subscriber or other rate investigation when it believes on the basis of financial data available to it that substantial changes in costs, revenues, or profits of the Grantee has occurred, and may on the basis of such investigation, adjust the subscribers' rates or any other rates contained in this agreement. (c) Grantee of this franchise shall not directly or indirectly reflect the cost of installations in the price of sets sold by it. 12. If the trees in the City streets interfere with the erection of poles or the stringing of wires, or cables, in accordance with the terms of this fran- chise, written permission for removing said trees, or any part thereof, must be obtained from the Department of Public Works, for trees on City property and from the owners of private property. 13. In all street installations, the cable or wires erected shall, in all respects, comply with the provisions of all existing Codes pertaining to the extension of wires across the streets, and all applicable provisions of the Electrical Code of the City of Ithaca. Coaxial cable shall be used to carry the television signal throughout the street installations. Messenger cable shall be used to carry the coaxial cable across the streets. �i 14. The holder of this franchise shall, at all times, keep in effect the following types of insurance coverage: (1) Workmen's Compensation upon its employees engaged in any manner in the installation or servicing of its plant and its equipment within the City of Ithaca. (2) Public Liability Insurance in a total over-all amount of not less than $50,000.00 insuring the holder of this franchise and the City of f Ithaca against liability for property damage, and $100,000.00 to $300,000.00 f. for personal injury or death by reason of the installation, servicing or operation of its plant and equipment or installations within the City of Ithaca. �. 15. The term of this franchise shall be ten (10) years from the effective date , hereof. The franchise may be automatically renewed at the option of the Grantee for an additional period extending to May 1, 1991, unless after review of the performance of the Grantee, Grantor shall determine that said performance has been inadequate, in which case the Grantor may, upon one (1) month's written notice to the Grantee, terminate this franchise agreement at the end of the initial ten-year term. However, this franchise may be revoked in the event the t N i Page 5 of 9 grantee shall fail to comply with the terms and conditions herein set forth within sixty days after written notice of such failure has been received by the grantee. 16. This franchise is personal to the grantee, and may be transferred only on application to and approval by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca. No permit or grant of similar privileges and powers as are covered by this franchise shall be allowed during the period hereof except upon a franchise applied for an approved by the Common Council. i 17. The Grantee shall pay to the City Chamberlain annually a sum equal to three per centum (3%) of its gross revenues from its cable service operations within the City, said gross revenues to include the "basic" charges and rentals as set forth in paragraph No. 11 hereinabove and the charges and rentals as set forth in paragraph No. 31 hereinbelow. The City may increase the per centum sum in the first sentence of this paragraph as permitted by law or regulations of the Federal Communications Commission or New York State Cable Commission. Such fees shall be and constitute a lien upon the property of the Grantee within the City prior and superior to all other debts, obligations, taxes, mortgages, or liens of whatsoever nature regardless of the time of the creation thereof, excepting herefrom any prior liens on the New York State Cable Commission. Failure to make the required report or pay such franchise fees shall be grounds for revocation of this franchise. 4 18. Any continuous and willful violation of any section or provision of this franchise shall be grounds .for cancellation of the franchise, after due notice and public hearing. The right is reserved to the Grantee to prosecute in any Court or otherwise, any stealing, pirating or unlawful uses of the services covered by this franchise. 19. If any section of this franchise agreement or any clause or any phrase thereof shall be held to be unconstitutional or void, all other portions not so held shall be and remain in full force and effect. 20. The City recognizes that Grantee has already constructed its system sub- stantially throughout the entire City. Grantee shall continue to provide such service throughout the duration of the franchise, pursuant to this franchise. 21. Grantee shall construct its cable system using materials of good and durable quality and all work involved in construction, installation, maintenance, and : repair of the cable system shall be performed in a safe, thorough and reliable F manner. F. 22. The Grantor and the Grantee have adopted procedures for the investigation and resolution of all complaints regarding cable television operations. The Grantee shall maintain a local business office or agent for these purposes. All complaints shall first be forwarded to the Grantee who shall maintain a log of each complaint, the date it was made, the name of the complainant, the resolution thereof, and the date of the resolution. All complaints not resolved by the Grantee within one (1) week after receipt shall be forwarded to the Grantor for review. The Mayor of the City of. Ithaca or his designee or designated committee has primary responsibility for the continuing administration of the franchise and implementation of complaint procedures. Notice of the procedures for reporting and resolving complaints will be given to each subscriber at the time k F Page 6 of 9 of initial subscription to the cable system and at intervals thereafter of not more than one year. Such notice may be written or by such other means as the New York State Commission on Cable Television may approve upon application by Grantee. 23. Grantee shall not abandon any service or portion thereof without the written consent of the City. 24. Any City or private property damaged or destroyed shall be promptly repaired or replaced by Grantee and restored to serviceable condition. 25. Grantee shall not refuse to hire or employ, nor bar or discharge from employment, nor discriminate against any person in compensation or in terms, conditions, or privileges of employment because of age, race, creed, color, national origin or sex. 26. The City reserves the right to adopt, in addition to the provisions contained in the franchise and existing applicable ordinances, such additional regulations as it shall find necessary in the exercise of its police power; provided, however, that such regulations are reasonable and not materially in conflict with the privileges granted in the franchise. 27. The City reserves the right to inspect all pertinent books, records, maps, plans, financial statements, and other like materials of the franchisee, upon reasonable notice and during normal business hours. 28. This franchise is in compliance with the franchise standards of the New York State Commission on Cable Television and the provisions hereof are subject to the approval of said Commission. 3 29. a) Within thirty days of the receipt of final operating authority, Grar_tee : shall post security with the City in the amount of $5,000 in the form of a letter of credit or such undertaking as may be acceptable in form to the City Attorney. b) Said security shall be forfeit to the extent specified by the City Council if the Grantee fails to substantially comply with the construction schedule herein specified or if the Grantee commits a material breach of any of the terms and conditions herein prescribed. As an alternative, the City Council may unilaterally shorten or decrease the term of this franchise if h j. it shall find that the Grantee has materially breached any of the terms of this franchise agreement. =" c) The Grantee shall be entitled to notice and hearing before the City Council prior to any forfeiture or decrease in the term of this franchise. d) No forfeiture shall be imposed for failures beyond the reasonable control of the Grantee. e) In the event of forfeiture of part or all of the initial security, the Grantee shall within thirty days thereafter post additional security so that the total amount of security posted equals $5,000. 30. Grantee shall file requests for all necessary operating authorization with the City of Ithaca, Commission on Cable Television, and the Federal Communications Page 7 of 9 Commission within 60 days from the date this amendment is granted. 31. The City has approved, pursuant to a public hearing held after public notice, the following rates: (a) A charge of $6.00 per month per television receiver may be made for subscription or pay cable programming, i.e. , Home Box Office. s { (b) A maximum charge of $2.00 per month per television receiver may be made for the provision by Grantee of a converter for the reception E' of either subscription or pay cable programming or the reception of additional broadcast channels that may be received only with such convertor. ' (c) The charges authorized in this Section are optional and no subscriber may be required to receive either of these services as a condition s to receiving the basic cable service. 32. Public Access (a) The Ceracche Television Corporation shall provide one full separate single channel for public access programming on a demand basis up " to and including an amount of time equal to the duplicated portion of a particular channel. F (b) This single channel shall be located between channel 2 and 12 subject to approval by the Federal Communications Commission; if such approval is not granted, then the channel may be other than 2 through 12. (c) Access to the separate channel shall be provided on a first- come, first-served basis within the following priorities: t 7 (1) Local live programming access F (2) Public access (3) Education access (4) Government access (d) Users of the Public Access channel shall reserve their time at least one and no more than four weeks in advance of their desired broad- cast time; this provision may be waived in a particular case by Ceracche Television Corporation in its sole discretion. (e) Studio time shall be provided at a cost not to exceed the actual cost of operating the studio. (f.) The administration of public access broadcasting shall remain with the Ceracche Television Corporation. (g) The City Cable Commission shall act as the Common Council agent in resolving disputes between the Ceracche Television Corporation and public access users in the City of Ithaca. Page 8 of 9 t (h) Video tapes to be shown on the public access channel shall be delivered to the studio at least two working days in advance of airing. (i) All access broadcasts shall conform to all applicable Federal Communications Commission and State Cable regulations. 33. By execution hereof the parties hereof revoke and rescind any and all prior franchises heretofore given by the City to the Grantee. 34. The Grantee shall also be required to submit its annual financial state- ments, Uniform Cable Commission financial reports, and State and Federal Income Tax Returns and any other reasonable financial information requested, to the Common Council annually as soon thereafter as they may be available. The City may request advice and analysis with regard to said financial documents etc. , from the State Cable Commission and outside accountants if it deems necessary, and receive and consider the results therefrom, before any rate increase hereunder shall be granted. 35. The value of this franchise at the end of the term shall be zero. 36. In the event the Grantor annexes additional land areas in the future, then all of the conditions of this franchise shall apply to the annexed area. In the event that the new land area so annexed is not wired by the Grantee for the services set forth herein, then a construction schedule shall be negotiated between the Grantor and the Grantee within one year, or the City may, at its option, impose any of the penalty provisions contained herein as if the Grantee had materially breached any term or provision of this franchise agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and seals the day and year first above written. CITY OF ITHACA ' BY: Mayor CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION Anthony teracche J `.ppT I k •• ' Page g of 9 STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS ) SS: CITY OF ITHACA ) G / k On this r2 day of 1977, before me, the subscriber, personally appeared Edward J. Conley, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and state that he is Mayor of the CITY OF ITHACA, the corporation described in and which executed the foregoing instrument; that he knows the seal of said corporation; I that the seal thereto affixed is such corporate seal; that it was affixed by order of the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, and that he signed his name thereto by like order. N ary Public JOSEPH A. RUNDLE Notary Public, State of New York No. 55-4507134 STATE OF NEW YORK ) Qualified in Tompkins County Term Expires March 30, 19.77 COUNTY OF TOMPKINS ) SS: CITY OF ITHACA ) On this 10 day of J4AVAlt/11977, before me, the subscriber, personally appeared Anthony Ceracche, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and state that he is President of CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION, the corporation described in and which executed the foregoing instrument; that he knows the seal of 4 said corporation; that the seal thereto affixed is such corporate seal; that it was affixed by order of the Board of Directors of said corporation, and that he signed his name thereto by like order. Notary Public k M MARTIN A. SHAPIRO Notary Public, State of New York NO. 55-893"')10 ualified in TompkiAs County erm Expires 'March, 30, 1978 F��:l MAR s ? '9 r Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D. C. 20554 In re: ) CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION ) File No. City of Ithaca, New York ) Code No. Application for Certificate of ) Compliance ) APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Submitted by: CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION By G4 Antho Ceracche, Presi ent Counsel: Cohen and Berfield 1129- 20th Street, N.W. Washington, D. C. 20036 Date: ti, / 7 7 APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Section I - Identity, Location of System, and Signals Presently Carried and Authorized Ceracche Television Corporation, 519 West State Street, Ithaca, New York 14850, presently operates a cable television system serving the City of Ithaca, New York. The following signals are carried on this system: Network Station City Affiliation WSYR-TV Syracuse, New York NBC WCNY-TV Syracuse, New York ETV WNEW-TV New York, New York Independent WENY-TV Elmira, New York ABC WTVH Syracuse, New York CBS WSKG Binghamton, New York ETV WOR-TV New York, New York Independent WICZ-TV Binghamton, New York NBC WPIX New York, New York Independent WBNG-TV Binghamton, New York CBS WNYS-TV Syracuse, New York ABC WROC-TV Rochester, New York NBC WHEC-TV Rochester, New York CBS WOKR Rochester, New York ABC WBJA-TV Binghamton, New York ABC WDAU-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania CBS WNEP-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania ABC WVIA-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania ETV WXXI Rochester, New York ETV The purpose of the instant application is to request certification of this .existing system. The system commenced operation in May, 1952. Its franchise expires May 1, 1991. - 2 - Section II - Sections 76. 252 et seq. Statement This system is part of a headend serving 3, 500 or more subscribers and Sections 76. 252 et seq. of the Rules are applicable. Pursuant to Section 76. 252, this system has twenty channel, two-way capacity. The system does not have available a full channel for access uses; however, channel space will be made available for such uses to the extent possible, consistent with Section 76. 254(c) of the Rules. Equip- ment for local production and presentation of non-automated program- ming, including public access, is available, consistent with Section 76. 256(a). Applicant will comply with the operating and assessment of cost provisions otherwise set forth in Section 76. 256. Applicant's operating rules are attached hereto as Attachment No. 1. Section III - Certificate of Service There is attached hereto as Attachment No. 2 a Certificate of Service of the requisite information on the requisite parties, including a complete copy on the franchising authority. Applicant will make this application available for public inspection in the community if the franchising authority does not. RULES GOVERNING PUBLIC, EDUCATIONAL AND LEASED ACCESS 1. Ceracche Television Corporation will provide public, educational and leased access on cable television systems served by its headend in Ithaca, New York. 2. No control will be exercised over non-operator programming except as necessary to ensure compliance with these rules. 3. Public and leased access will be made available on a first-come nondiscriminatory basis. 4. No program, production or presentation shall be transmitted or permitted to be transmitted which involves directly or indirectly any lottery information or which involves a lottery. 5. No program, production or presentation shall be transmitted or permitted to be transmitted which involves any obscene or indecent material. 6. When any leased access user presents any matter for which money, services, or other valuable consideration is either directly or indirectly paid or promised to, or charged or received by, such access user, the access user shall make an announcement that such matter is sponsored, paid for, or furnished, either in whole or in part, and by whom and on whose behalf such consideration was supplied: Provided, however, that "service or other valuable consideration" shall not include any service or property furnished without charge or at a nominal charge for use on, or in connection with, such access cablecasting unless it is so furnished as consideration -2- for an identification in an access cablecast of any person, product, service, trademark, or brand name beyond an identification which is reasonably related to the use of such service or property on the access cablecast. . 7. No advertising material designed to promote the sale of commercial products or services (including advertising by or on behalf of candidates for public office) shall be included in public or educational access programming. 8. (a) Application for channel use shall be submitted in writing and shall identify the user by name and address and specify the following: (1) The day or days for access cablecasting desired; (2) The time segment (e. g. , 9:00-10:00 a. m. or 10:00-11:00 p. m. , etc. ) desired and the duration of the cablecast; (3) A statement that no lottery is involved and that no lottery Information or obscene or indecent matter is to be cablecast; (4) A statement that all appropriate arrangements and clearances have been obtained from broadcast stations, networks, sponsors, music licensing organizations, performers representatives and without limitation by the above, any and all other persons (natural or otherwise) as may be necessary for authorization to transmit its program material over the facilities of the CATV system; (5) The identity of any sponsor or person (natural or otherwise) • . -3- which has directly or indirectly paid or promised to pay the access user money or has directly or indirectly furnished or promised to furnish services or other valuable consideration in connection with the access cablecast; (6) A statement that the access user has read and understands the provisions of Sections 4-7 of these rules and will comply therewith; (7) The nature of the cablecast, i. e. , film, video tape, live, etc. ; (8) The production facilities and personnel of the system which will be necessary for presentation of the access cablecast, if any; and, (9) Such other and/or additional information, exclusive of program content, as is necessary to enable the system to properly perform its responsibilities in accordance with Rule 76. 256 of the FCC. (b) All requests for access are to be submitted at least 10 days in advance of the desired date and time of the proposed access cablecast. (e) All requests shall be promptly processed. In cases where channel space is not available for the date and time requested, the system shall inform the applicants of the date and time available for their respective access cablecasts. An access user may specify alternative - 4 - dates and times in his initial request. 9. (a) The system shall maintain a complete record of the names and addresses of all persons (natural or otherwise), groups, organizations or entities requesting access time. Such records will be maintained in the Ithaca office of Ceracche Television Corporation and be available for public inspection between the hours of 9:00 a. m. to 5:00 p. m. , Monday-Friday, except on legal holidays. (b) Access channels will not be made available to any access user which refuses to have his identity maintained in the records and available for public inspection as required by this Section. 10. (a) No charge will be made for live public access studio presentations not exceeding five minutes. (b) No charge will be made for other public access programs beyond the actual cost to the company of presenting such programs. No charge will be made for the playing of tapes or films when no use of sys- tem production equipment is involved and the programming presented is in a format compatible with that of the system. (c) Rates for leased access programs shall be $100 per hour or fraction thereof for the first hour. i r ATTACHMENT NO. 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Ruth H. Wescott, a secretary in the law firm of Cohen and Berfield, Washington, D. C. , hereby certify that on the 1st day of March, 1977, I sent by U. S. mail, postage prepaid complete copies of Certificate of Compliance applications for the City of Ithaca; Village of Cayuga Heights; and Towns of Ithaca, Newfield, Danby, Dryden, Enfield, Caroline, Ulysses and Lansing, New York to: New York State Commission on Walter Schwan, Supervisor Cable Television Town of Ithaca Tower Building, Empire State Plaza 126 E. Senaca Street Albany, New York 12223 Ithaca, New York 14850 James Drader, Supervisor Fred C. Marcham, Mayor Town of Newfield Village of Cayuga Heights Pearl Street 836 Henshaw Road Newfield, New York 14867 Ithaca, New York 14850 Bruce M. Payne, Supervisor Harold Payton, Supervisor Town of Ulysses Town of Caroline Elm Street 736 Valley Road Trumansburg, New York 14886 Brooktondale, New York 14817 Francis Wright, Supervisor Wesley McDermott, Supervisor Town of Danby Town of Lansing 2350 Danby Road R. D. #2 Willseyville, New York 13864 Locke, New York 13092 Robert F. Linton, Supervisor Charles G. McCord, Supervisor Town of Enfield Town of Dryden R. D. #1 65 E. Main Street Trumansburg, New York 14886 Dryden, New York 13053 Edward J. Conley, Mayor City of Ithaca 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 and a copy of attached Notice of CATV Service to: T 2 -2- Chief, Bureau of Mass Communications WBJA-TV, Inc. State Education Department Box 813 Albany, New York 12224 Binghamton, New York 13902 Licensee of WBJA-TV Dow, Lohnes & Albertson 1225 Connecticut Avenue, N. W. Richard Backer Washington, D. C. 20036 Ithaca City Schools Counsel for WSYR-TV, WSYE-TV 400 Lake Street and WICZ-TV Ithaca, New York 14850 Haley, Bader & Potts William Deming 1730 M Street, N. W. Dryden Central School Washington, D. C. 20006 Dryden, New York 13053 Counsel for WTVH Dr. Lowell Foland Sudlun, Tirana & Scher Trumansburg Central School 600 New Hampshire Avenue, N. W. Trumansburg, New York 14886 Washington, D. C. 20037 Counsel for WNYS-TV Raymond Buckley Lansing Central School Public Broadcasting Counsel of Lansing, New York 14882 Central N. Y. , Inc. Old Liverpool Road Donald Hickman Liverpool, New York 13088 Newfield Central School Licensee of WCNY-TV Newfield, New York 14867 Southern Tier ETV Association, Inc. Leslie Graves P. O. Box 97 Groton Central School Endwell, New York 13760 Groton, New York 13073 Licensee of WSKG Harry Reinhart Cordon & Jacob George Junior Republic 2000 L Street, N. W. Freeville, New York 13068 Washington, D. C. 20036 Counsel for WENY-TV Wilner & Scheiner 2021 L Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20036 Counsel for WBNG-TV Ruh H. Wescott LAW OFFICES COHEN AND BERFIELD BOARD OF TRADE BUILDING LEWIS 1.COHEN 1129 20TH STREET, N.W. MORTON L.BERFIELD WASHINGTON, 0.C.20036 AREA CODE 202 ROY W. BOYCE 466-8565 March 1, 1977 NOTICE OF CATV SERVICE On behalf of Ceracche Television Corporation, 519 West State Street, Ithaca, New York 14850, this is to notify that Ceracche Television Corporation has filed applications for Certificates of Compliance for. existing cable television systems in the City of Ithaca; the Village of Cayuga Heights; and the Towns of Ithaca, Newfield, Danby, Dryden, Enfield, Caroline, Ulysses and Lansing with the Federal Communications Commission. The following signals are carried on these systems (those from New York City are carried via microwave): Station City WSYR-TV Syracuse, New York WCNY-TV Syracuse, New York WNEW-TV New York, New York WENY-TV Elmira, New York WTVH Syracuse, New York WSKG Binghamton, New York WOR-TV New York, New York WICZ-TV Binghamton, New York WPIX New York, New York WBNG-TV Binghamton, New York WNYS-TV Syracuse, New York WROC-TV Rochester, New York WHEC-TV Rochester, New York WOKR Rochester, New York WBJA-TV Binghamton, New York -2- WDAU-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WNEP-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WVIA-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WXXI Rochester, New York Sincerely, GU. Roy W. Boyce Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D. C. 20554 In re: ) CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION ) File No. Town of Ithaca, New York ) Code No. Application for Certificate of ) Compliance ) APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Submitted by: CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION By Anthony C racche, President Counsel: Cohen and Berfield 1129-20th Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20036 Date: a//8/7 7 t APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Section I - Statement of Incorporation by Reference Ceracche Television Corporation, 519 West State Street, Ithaca, New York 14850, hereby applies for a Certificate of Compliance for its existing cable television system in the Town of Ithaca, New York. The information in support of this application is the same as set forth in applicant's application for a system in the City of Ithaca, New York, filed simultaneously herewith, which is therefore incorporated herein by reference. This system is part of the same headend as the City of Ithaca system. The only difference is that this system commenced operation in February, 1954 and its franchise does not specify an expiration date. Section II - Certificate of Service There is attached hereto as Attachment No. 1 a Certificate of Service of the requisite information on the requisite parties, including a com- plete copy of this and the lead application on the franchising authority. Applicant will make these applications available for public inspection in the community if the franchising authority does not. ATTACHMENT NO. 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Ruth H. Wescott, a secretary in the law firm of Cohen and Berfield, Washington, D. C. , hereby certify that on the 1st day of March, 1977, 1 sent by U.S. mail, postage prepaid complete copies of Certificate of Compliance applications for the City of Ithaca; Village of Cayuga Heights; and Towns of Ithaca, Newfield, Danby, Dryden, EnfLeld, Caroline, Ulysses and Lansing, New York to: New York State Commission on Walter Schwan, Supervisor Cable Television Town of Ithaca Tower Building, Empire State Plaza 126 E. Senaca Street Albany, New York 12223 Ithaca, New York 14850 James Drader, Supervisor. Fred C. Marcham, Mayor Town of Newfield Village of Cayuga Heights tD. Pearl Street 836 Henshaw Road Newfield, New York 14867 Ithaca, New York 14850 Bruce M. Payne, Supervisor Harold Payton, Supervisor Town of Ulysses Town of Caroline Elm Street 736 Valley Road Trumansburg, New York 14886 Brooktondale, New York 14817 Francis Wright, Supervisor Wesley McDermott, Supervisor Town of Danby Town of Lansing 2350 Danby Road R. D. 02 Willseyville, New York 13864 Locke, New York 13092 Robert F. Linton, Supervisor Charles G. McCord, Supervisor Town of Enfield Town of Dryden R. D. #1 65 E. Main Street Trumansburg, New York 14886 Dryden, New York 13053 Edward J. Conley, Mayor City of Ithaca 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 and a copy of attached Notice of CATV Service to: -2- Chief, Bureau of Mass Communications WBJA-TV, Inc. State Education Department Box 813 Albany, New York 12224 Binghamton, New York 13902 Licensee of WBJA-TV Dow, Lohnes & Albertson 1225 Connecticut Avenue, N. W. Richard Backer Washington, D. C. 20036 Ithaca City Schools Counsel for WSYR-TV, WSYE-TV 400 Lake Street and WICZ-TV Ithaca, New York 14850 Haley, Bader & Potts William Deming 1730 M Street, N. W. Dryden Central School Washington, D. C. 20006 Dryden, New York 13053 Counsel for WTVH Dr. Lowell Foland Sudlun, Tirana & Scher Trumansburg Central School 600 New Hampshire Avenue, N. W. Trumansburg, New York 14886 Washington, D. C. 20037 Counsel for WNYS-TV Raymond Buckley Lansing Central School Public Broadcasting Counsel of Lansing, New York 14882 Central N. Y. , Inc. Old Liverpool Road Donald Hickman Liverpool, New York 13088 Newfield Central School Licensee of WCNY-TV Newfield, New York 14867 Southern Tier ETV Association, Inc. Leslie Graves - P. O. Box 97 Groton Central School Endwell, New York 13760 Groton, New York 13073 Licensee of WSKG Harry Reinhart Cordon & Jacob George Junior Republic 2000 L Street, N. W. Freeville, New York 13068 Washington, D. C. 20036 Counsel for WENY-TV Wilner & Scheiner 2021 L Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20036 Counsel for WBNG-TV Ruth H. Wescott J LAW OFrICES COHEN AND BERFIELD BOARD OF TRADE SUILDtNG Its I.COHEN 1120 2OT» STREET,N.W. RTON L.BERFIELD WASHINGTON, D.C.20036 AREA CODE 202 Y W. BOYCE 466_8565 March 1, 1977 NOTICE OF CATV SERVICE On behalf of Ceracche Television Corporation, 519 West State Street, Ithaca, New York 14850, this is to notify that Ceracche Television Corporation has filed applications for Certificates of Compliance for. existing cable television systems in the City of Ithaca; the Village of Cayuga Heights; and the Towns of Ithaca, Newfield, Danby, Dryden, Enfield, Caroline, Ulysses and Lansing with the Federal Communications Commission. The following signals are carried on these systems (those from New York City are carried via microwave): Station C WSYR-TV Syracuse, New York WCNY-TV Syracuse, New York WNEW-TV New York, New York WENY-TV Elmira, New York WTVH Syracuse, New York WSKG Binghamton, New York WOR-TV New York, New York WICZ-TV Binghamton, New York WPIX New York, New York WBNG-TV Binghamton, New York WNYS-TV Syracuse, New York WROC-TV Rochester, New York WHEC-TV Rochester, New York WOKR Rochester, New York WBJA-TV Binghamton, New York -2- WDAU-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WNEP-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WVIA-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WXXI Rochester, New York Sincerely, Roy W. Boyce Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D. C. 20554 In re: ) ) CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION ) File No. Town of Newfield, New York ) Code No. Application for Certificate of ) Compliance ) APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Submitted by: CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION By Anthony C racche, President Counsel: Cohen and Berfield 1129-20th Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20036 Date: APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Section I - Statement of Incorporation by Reference Ceracche Television Corporation, 519 West State Street, Ithaca, New York 14850, hereby applies for a Certificate of Compliance for its existing cable television system in the Town of Newfield, New York. The information in support of this application is the same as set forth in applicant's application for a system in the City of Ithaca, New York, filed simultaneously herewith, which is therefore incorporated herein by reference. This system is part of the same headend as the City of Ithaca system. The only difference is that this system commenced operation in March, 1963, and its franchise expires on April 27,1991. Section II - Certificate of Service There is attached hereto as Attachment No. 1 a Certificate of Service of the requisite information on the requisite parties, including a com- plete copy of this and the lead application on the franchising authority. Applicant will make these applications available for public inspection in the community if the franchising authority does not. ATTACHMENT NO. 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I. Ruth H. Wescott, a secretary in the law firm of Cohen and Berfield, Washington, D. C. , hereby certify that on the 1st day of March, 1977, I sent by U.S. mail, postage prepaid complete copies of Certificate of Compliance applications for the City of Ithaca; Village of Cayuga Heights; and Towns of Ithaca, Newfield, Danby, Dryden, Enfield, Caroline, Ulysses and Lansing, New York to: New York State Commission on Walter Schwan, Supervisor Cable Television Town of Ithaca Tower Building, Empire State Plaza 126 E. Senaca Street Albany, New York 12223 Ithaca, New York 14850 James Drader, Supervisor Fred C. Marcham, Mayor Town of Newfield Village of Cayuga Heights Pearl Street 836 Henshaw Road Newfield, New York 14867 Ithaca, New York 14850 Bruce M. Payne, Supervisor Harold Payton, Supervisor Town of Ulysses Town of Caroline Elm Street 736 Valley Road Trumansburg, New York 14886 Brooktondale, New York 14817 Francis Wright, Supervisor Wesley McDermott, Supervisor Town of Danby Town of Lansing 2350 Danby Road R. D. #2 Willseyville, New York 13864 Locke, New York 13092 Robert F. Linton, Supervisor Charles G. McCord, Supervisor Town of Enfield Town of Dryden R. D. #1 65 E. Main Street Trumansburg, New York 14886 Dryden, New York 13053 Edward J. Conley, Mayor City of Ithaca 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 and a copy of attached Notice of CATV Service to: e . -2- Chief, Bureau of Mass Communications WBJA-TV, Inc. State Education Department Box 813 Albany, New York 12224 Binghamton, New York 13902 Licensee of WBJA-TV Dow, Lohnes & Albertson 2225 Connecticut Avenue, N. W. Richard Backer Washington, D. C. 20036 Ithaca City Schools Counsel for WSYR-TV, WSYE-TV 400 Lake Street and WICZ-TV Ithaca, New York 14850 Haley, Bader & Potts William Deming 1730 M Street, N. W. Dryden Central School Washington, D. C. 20006 Dryden, New York 13053 Counsel for WTVH Dr. Lowell Foland Sudlun, Tirana & Scher Trumansburg Central School 600 New Hampshire Avenue, N. W. Trumansburg, New York 14886 Washington, D. C. 20037 Counsel for WNYS-TV Raymond Buckley Lansing Central School Public Broadcasting Counsel of Lansing, New York 14882 Central N. Y. , Inc. Old Liverpool Road Donald Hickman Liverpool, New York 13088 Newfield Central School Licensee of WCNY-TV Newfield, New York 14867 Southern Tier ETV Association, Inc. Leslie Graves P. O. Box 97 Groton Central School Endwell, New York 13760 Groton, New York 13073 Licensee of WSKG Harry Reinhart Cordon & Jacob George Junior Republic 2000 L Street, N. W. Freeville, New York 13068 Washington, D. C. 20036 Counsel for WENY-TV Wilner & Scheiner 2021 L Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20036 Counsel for WBNG-TV Ruh H. Wescott LAW OFFICES COHEN AND BERFIELD 80ARD OF TRADE BUILDING LEWIS I.COHEN 1120 2OTjq STREET,N.W. MORTON L.aERFIELD WASHINGTON,0.C.20036 AREA CODE 2o2 ROY W. BOYCE 466-8565 March 1, 1977 NOTICE OF CATV SERVICE On behalf of Ceracche Television Corporation, 519 West State Street, Ithaca, New York 14850, this is to notify that Ceracche Television Corporation has filed applications for Certificates of Compliance for existing cable television systems in the City of Ithaca; the Village of Cayuga Heights; and the Towns of Ithaca, Newfield, Danby, Dryden, Enfield, Caroline, Ulysses and Lansing with the Federal Communications Commission. The following signals are carried on these systems (those from New York City are carried via microwave): Station 2t—Y WSYR-TV Syracuse, New York WCNY-TV Syracuse, New York WNEW-TV New York, New York WENY-TV Elmira, New York WTVH Syracuse, New York WSKG Binghamton, New York WOR-TV New York, New York WICZ-TV Binghamton, New York WPIX New York, New York WBNG-TV Binghamton, New York WNYS-TV Syracuse, New York WROC-TV Rochester, New York WHEC-TV Rochester, New York WOKR Rochester, New York WBJA-TV Binghamton, New York -2- WDAU-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WNEP-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WVIA-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WXXI Rochester, New York Sincerely, W Roy W. Boyce Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D. C. 20554 In re: ) CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION ) File No. Town of Danby, New York ) Code No. Application for Certificate of ) Compliance ) APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Submitted by: CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION By �1 Anthony Ce acche, President Counsel: Cohen and Berfield - 1129-20th Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20036 Date: Z// ?1-7 7 APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Section I - Statement of Incorporation by Reference Ceracche Television Corporation, 519 West State Street, Ithaca, New York 14850, hereby applies for a Certificate of Compliance for its existing cable television system in the Town of Danby, New York. The information in support of this application is the same as set forth in applicant's application for a system in the City of Ithaca, New York, filed simultaneously herewith, which is therefore incorporated herein by reference. This system is part of the same headend as the City of Ithaca system. The only difference is that this system commenced operation in 1970 and is unfranchised. Section II - Certificate of Service There is attached hereto as Attachment No. 1 a Certificate of Service of the requisite information on the requisite parties, including a com- plete copy of this and the lead application on the franchising authority. Applicant will make these applications available for public inspection in the community if the franchising authority does not. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Ruth H. Wescott, a secretary in the law firm of Cohen and Berfield, Washington, D. C. , hereby certify that on the 1st day of March, 1977, 1 sent by U.S. mail, postage prepaid complete copies of Certificate of Compliance applications for the City of Ithaca; Village of Cayuga Heights; and Towns of Ithaca, Newfield, Danby, Dryden, Enfield, Caroline, Ulysses and Lansing, New York to: New York State Commission on Walter Schwan, Supervisor Cable Television Town of Ithaca Tower Building, Empire State Plaza 126 E. Senaca Street Albany, New York 12223 Ithaca, New York 14850 James Drader, Supervisor Fred C. Marcham, Mayor Town of Newfield Village of Cayuga Heights Pearl Street 836 Henshaw Road Newfield, New York 14867 Ithaca, New York 14850 Bruce M. Payne, Supervisor Harold Payton, Supervisor Town of Ulysses Town of Caroline Elm Street 736 Valley Road Trumansburg, New York 14886 Brooktondale, New York 14817 Francis Wright, Supervisor Wesley McDermott, Supervisor Town of Danby Town of Lansing 2350 Danby Road R. D. #2 Willseyville, New York 13864 Locke, New York 13092 Robert F. Linton, Supervisor Charles G. McCord, Supervisor Town of Enfield Town of Dryden R. D. #1 65 E. Main Street Trumansburg, New York 14886 Dryden, New York 13053 Edward J. Conley, Mayor City of Ithaca 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 and a copy of attached Notice of CATV Service to: -2- Chief, Bureau of Mass Communications WBJA-TV, Inc. State Education Department Box 813 Albany, New York 12224 Binghamton, New York 13902 Licensee of WBJA-TV Dow, Lohnes & Albertson 1225 Connecticut Avenue, N. W. Richard Backer Washington, D. C. 20036 Ithaca City Schools Counsel for WSYR-TV, WSYE-TV 400 Lake Street and WICZ-TV Ithaca, New York 14850 Haley, Bader & Potts William Deming 1730 M Street, N. W. Dryden Central School Washington, D. C. 20006 Dryden, New York 13053 Counsel for WTVH Dr. Lowell Foland Sudlun, Tirana & Scher Trumansburg Central School 600 New Hampshire Avenue, N. W. Trumansburg, New York 14886 Washington, D. C. 20037 Counsel for WNYS-TV Raymond Buckley Lansing Central School Public Broadcasting Counsel of Lansing, New York 14882 Central. N. Y. , Inc. Old Liverpool Road Donald Hickman Liverpool, New York 13088 Newfield Central School Licensee of WCNY-TV Newfield, New York 14867 Southern Tier ETV Association, Inc. Leslie Graves P. O. Box 97 Groton Central School Endwell, New York 13760 Groton, New York 13073 Licensee of WSKG Harry Reinhart Cordon & Jacob George Junior Republic 2000 L Street, N. W. Freeville, New York 13068 Washington, D. C. 20036 Counsel for WENY-TV Wilner & Scheiner 2021 L Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20036 Counsel for WBNG-TV Ruth H. Wescott LAW OFFICES COHEN AND BERFIELD BOARD OF TRADE BUILDING IS 1.COHEN 1129 2OTm STREET,N.W. ITON L.BERFIELO WASHINGTON,0.C.20036 AREA CODE 202 W. BOYCE 4668565 March 1, 1977 NOTICE OF CATV SERVICE On behalf of Ceracche Television Corporation, 519 West State Street, Ithaca, New York 14850, this is to notify that Ceracche Television Corporation has filed applications for Certificates of Compliance for existing cable television systems in the City of Ithaca; the Village of Cayuga Heights; and the Towns of Ithaca, Newfield, Danby, Dryden, Enfield, Caroline, Ulysses and Lansing with the Federal Communications Commission. The following signals are carried on these systems (those from New York City are carried via microwave): Station E]Lt-Y WSYR-TV Syracuse, New York WCNY-TV Syracuse, New York WNEW-TV New York, New York VTENY-TV Elmira, New York WTVH Syracuse, New York WSKG Binghamton, New York WOR-TV New York, New York WICZ-TV Binghamton, New York WPLK New York, New York WBNG-TV Binghamton, New York WNYS-TV Syracuse, New York WROC-TV Rochester, New York WHEC-TV Rochester, New York WOKR Rochester, New York WBJA-TV Binghamton, New York _2_ WDAU-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WNEP-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WVIA-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WXXI Rochester, New York Sincerely, Roy W. Boyce Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D. C. 20554 In re: ) CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION ) File No. Town of Ulysses, New York ) Code No. Application for Certificate of ) Compliance ) APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Submitted by: CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION By Anthony Ce acche, President Counsel: Cohen and Berfield 1129-20th Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20036 Date: .7- r/77 APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Section I - Statement of Incorporation by Reference Ceracche Television Corporation, 519 West State Street, Ithaca, New York 14850, hereby applies for a Certificate of Compliance for its existing cable television system in the Town of Ulysses, New York. The information in support of this application is the same as set forth in applicant's application for a system in the City of Ithaca, New York, filed simultaneously herewith, which is therefore incorporated herein by reference. This system is part of the same headend as the City of Ithaca system. The only difference is that this system commenced operation in April, 1964, and its franchise expires on February 8, 1991. Section II - Certificate of Service There is attached hereto as Attachment No. 1 a Certificate of Service of the requisite information on the requisite parties, including a com- plete copy of this and the lead application on the franchising authority. Applicant will make these applications available for public inspection in the community if the franchising authority does not. ATTACHMENT NO. 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Ruth H. Wescott, a secretary in the law firm of Cohen and Berfield, Washington, D. C. , hereby certify that on the 1st day of March, 1977, I sent by U.S. mail, postage prepaid complete copies of Certificate of Compliance applications for the City of Ithaca; Village of Cayuga Heights; and Towns of Ithaca, Newfield, Danby, Dryden, Enfield, Caroline, Ulysses and Lansing, New York to: New York State Commission on Walter Schwan, Supervisor Cable Television Town of Ithaca Tower Building, Empire State Plaza 126 E. Senaca Street Albany, New York 12223 Ithaca, New York 14850 James Drader, Supervisor Fred C. Marcham, Mayor Town of Newfield Village of Cayuga Heights Pearl Street 836 Henshaw Road Newfield, New York 14867 Ithaca, New York 14850 Bruce M. Payne, Supervisor Harold Payton, Supervisor Town of Ulysses Town of Caroline Elm Street 736 Valley Road Trumansburg, New York 14886 Brooktondale, New York 14817 Francis Wright, Supervisor Wesley McDermott, Supervisor Town of Danby Town of Lansing 2350 Danby Road R. D. #2 Willseyville, New York 13864 Locke, New York 13092 Robert F. Linton, Supervisor Charles G. McCord, Supervisor Town of Enfield Town of Dryden R. D. #1 65 E. Main Street Trumansburg, New York 14886 Dryden, New York 13053 Edward J. Conley, Mayor City of Ithaca 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 and a copy of attached Notice of CATV Service to: -2- Chief, Bureau of Mass Communications WBJA-TV, Inc. State Education Department Box 813 Albany, New York 12224 Binghamton, New York 13902 Licensee of WBJA-TV Dow, Lohnes & Albertson 1225 Connecticut Avenue, N. W. Richard Backer Washington, D. C. 20036 Ithaca City Schools Counsel for WSYR-TV, WSYE-TV 400 Lake Street and WICZ-TV Ithaca, New York 14850 Haley, Bader & Potts William Deming 1730 M Street, N. W. Dryden Central School Washington, D. C. 20006 Dryden, New York 13053 Counsel for WTVH Dr. Lowell Foland Sudlun, Tirana & Scher Trumansburg Central School 600 New Hampshire Avenue, N. W. Trumansburg, New York 14886 Washington, D. C. 20037 Counsel for WNYS-TV Raymond Buckley Lansing Central School Public Broadcasting Counsel of Lansing, New York 14882 Central N. Y. , Inc. Old Liverpool Road Donald Hickman Liverpool, New York 13088 Newfield Central School Licensee of WCNY-TV Newfield, New York 14867 Southern Tier ETV Association, Inc. Leslie Graves P. O. Box 97 Groton Central School Endwell, New York 13760 Groton, New York 13073 Licensee of WSKG Harry Reinhart Cordon & Jacob George Junior Republic 2000 L Street, N. W. Freeville, New York 13068 Washington, D. C. 20036 Counsel for WENY-TV Wilner & Scheiner 2021 L Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20036 Counsel for WBNG-TV Ruh H. Wescott LAW OrrICES COHEN AND BERFIELD BOARD OF TRADE BUILDING WIS 1.COHEN 1120 20TH STREET, N.W. DRTON L.BERFIELO WASHINGTON, 0.C.20036 AREA CODE 202 oy W. BOYCE 466-8S65 March 1, 1977 NOTICE OF CATV SERVICE On behalf of Ceracche Television Corporation, 519 West State Street, Ithaca, New York 14850, this is to notify that Ceracche Television Corporation has filed applications for Certificates of Compliance for existing cable television systems in the City of Ithaca; the Village of Cayuga Heights; and the Towns of Ithaca, Newfield, Danby, Dryden, Enffeld, Caroline, Ulysses and Lansing with the Federal Communications Commission. The following signals are carried on these systems (those from New York City are carried via microwave): Station city WSYR-TV Syracuse, New York WCNY-TV Syracuse, New York WNEW-TV New York, New York WENY-TV Elmira, New York WTVH Syracuse, New York WSKG Binghamton, New York WOR-TV New York, New York WICZ-TV Binghamton, New York WPIX New York, New York WBNG-TV Binghamton, New York WNYS-TV Syracuse, New York WROC-TV Rochester, New York WHEC-TV Rochester, New York WOKR Rochester, New York WBJA-TV Binghamton, New York -2- WDAU-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WNEP-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WVIA-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WXXI Rochester, New York Sincerely, Roy W. Boyce t Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D. C. 20554 In re: ) ) CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION ) File No. Town of Caroline, New York ) Code No. Application for Certificate of ) Compliance ) APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Submitted by: CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION By Anthony C racche, President Counsel: Cohen and Berfield 1129-20th Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20036 Date: 2-11/S17 7 APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Section I - Statement of Incorporation by Reference Ceracche Television Corporation, 519 West State Street, Ithaca, New York 14850, hereby applies for a Certificate of Compliance for its existing cable television system in the Town of Caroline, New York. The information in support of this application is the same as set forth in applicant's application for a system in the City of Ithaca, New York, filed simultaneously herewith, which is therefore incorporated herein by reference. This system is part of the same headend as the City of Ithaca system. The only difference is that this system commenced operation in February, 1962 , and its franchise expires on April 5, 1991. Section II - Certificate of Service There is attached hereto as Attachment No. 1 a Certificate of Service of the requisite information on the requisite parties, including a com- plete copy of this and the lead application on the franchising authority. Applicant will make these applications available for public inspection in the community if the franchising authority does not. ATTAClilyir,�-.,. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Ruth H. Wescott, a secretary in the law firm of Cohen and Berfield, Washington, D. C. , hereby certify that on the 1st day of March, 1977, I sent by U.S. mail, postage prepaid complete copies of Certificate of Compliance applications for the City of Ithaca; Village of Cayuga Heights; and Towns of Ithaca, Newfield, Danby, Dryden, Enfield, Caroline, Ulysses and Lansing, New York to: New York State Commission on Walter Schwan, Supervisor Cable Television Town of Ithaca Tower Building, Empire State Plaza 126 E. Senaca Street Albany, New York 12223 Ithaca, New York 14850 James Drader, Supervisor Fred C. Marcham, Mayor Town of Newfield Village of Cayuga Heights Pearl Street 836 Henshaw Road Newfield, New York 14867 Ithaca, New York 14850 Bruce M. Payne, Supervisor Harold Payton, Supervisor Town of Ulysses Town of Caroline Elm Street 736 Valley Road Trumansburg, New York 14886 Brooktondale, New York 14817 Francis Wright, Supervisor Wesley McDermott, Supervisor Town of Danby Town of Lansing 2350 Danby Road R. D. #2 Willseyville, New York 13864 Locke, New York 13092 Robert F. Linton, Supervisor Charles G. McCord, Supervisor Town of Enfield Town of Dryden R. D. #1 65 E. Main Street Trumansburg, New York 14886 Dryden, New York 13053 Edward J. Conley, Mayor City of Ithaca 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 and a copy of attached Notice of CATV Service to: -2- Chief, Bureau of Mass Communications WBJA-TV, Inc. State Education Department Box 813 Albany, New York 12224 Binghamton, New York 13902 Licensee of WBJA-TV Dow, Lohnes & Albertson 1225 Connecticut Avenue, N. W. Richard Backer Washington, D. C. 20036 Ithaca City Schools Counsel for WSYR-TV, WSYE-TV 400 Lake Street and WICZ-TV Ithaca, New York 14850 Haley, Bader & Potts William Deming 1730 M Street, N. W. Dryden Central School Washington, D. C. 20006 Dryden, New York 13053 Counsel for WTVH Dr. Lowell Foland Sudlun, Tirana & Scher Trumansburg Central School 600 New Hampshire Avenue, N. W. Trumansburg, New York 14886 Washington, D. C. 20037 Counsel for WNYS-TV Raymond Buckley Lansing Central School Public Broadcasting Counsel of Lansing, New York 14882 Central N. Y. , Inc. Old Liverpool Road Donald Hickman Liverpool, New York 13088 Newfield Central School Licensee of WCNY-TV Newfield, New York 14867 Southern Tier ETV Association, Inc. Leslie Graves P. O. Box 97 Groton Central School Endwell, New York 13760 Groton, New York 13073 Licensee of WSKG Harry Reinhart Cordon & Jacob George Junior Republic 2000 L Street, N. W. Freeville, New York 13068 Washington, D. C. 20036 Counsel for WENY-TV Wilner & Scheiner 2021 L Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20036 Counsel for WBNG-TV )J. Ruh H. Wescott • LAW OFFICES COHEN AND BERFIELD BOARD OF TRADE BUILDING LEWIS I.COHEN 1120 20TH STREET, N.W. MORTON L.BERFIELD WASHINGTON, D.C.20036 AREA CODE 202 ROY W. BOYCE 466-8565 March 1, 1977 NOTICE OF CATV SERVICE On behalf of Ceracche Television Corporation, 519 West State Street, Ithaca, New York 14850, this is to notify that Ceracche Television Corporation has filed applications for Certificates of Compliance for existing cable television systems in the City of Ithaca; the Village of Cayuga Heights; and the Towns of Ithaca, Newfield, Danby, Dryden, Enfield, Caroline, Ulysses and' Lansing with the Federal Communications Commission. The following signals are carried on these systems (those from New York City are carried via microwave): Station City WSYR-TV Syracuse, New York WCNY-TV Syracuse, New York WNEW-TV New York, New York WENY-TV Elmira, New York WTVH Syracuse, New York WSKG Binghamton, New York WOR-TV New York, New York WICZ-TV Binghamton, New York WPIX New York, New York WBNG-TV Binghamton, New York WNYS-TV Syracuse, New York WROC-TV Rochester, New York WHEC-TV Rochester, New York WOKR Rochester, New York WBJA-TV Binghamton, New York -2- WDAU-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WNEP-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WVIA-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WXXI Rochester, New York Sincerely, GU• Roy W. Boyce Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D. C. 20554 In re: ) CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION ) File No. Village of Cayuga Heights,New York ) Code No. Application for Certificate of ) Compliance ) APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Submitted by: CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION By Anthony C racche, President Counsel: Cohen and Berfield 1129-20th Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20036 Date: .�// 77 APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Section I - Statement of Incorporation by Reference Ceracche Television Corporation, 519 West State Street, Ithaca, New York 14850, hereby applies for a Certificate of Compliance for its existing cable television system in the Village of Cayuga Heights, New York. The information in support of this application is the same as set forth in applicant's application for a system in the City of Ithaca, New York, filed simultaneously herewith, which is therefore incorporated herein by reference. This system is part of the same headend as the City of Ithaca system. The only difference is that this system commenced opera- tion in December, 1954 and its franchise does not specify an expiration date. Section II - Certificate of Service There is attached hereto as Attachment No. I a Certificate of Service of the requisite information on the requisite parties, including a com- plete copy of this and the lead application on the franchising authority. Applicant will make these applications available for public inspection in the community if the franchising authority does not. ATTACHMENT No. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1,, Ruth H. Wescott, a secretary in the law firm of Cohen and Berfield, Washington, D. C. , hereby certify that on the 1st day of March, 1977, 1 sent by U. S. mail, postage prepaid complete copies of Certificate of Compliance applications for the City of Ithaca; Village of Cayuga Heights; and Towns of Ithaca, Newfield, Danby, Dryden, Enfield, Caroline, Ulysses and Lansing, New York to: New York State Commission on Walter Schwan, Supervisor Cable Television Town of Ithaca Tower Building, Empire State Plaza 126 E. Senaca Street Albany, New York 12223 Ithaca, New York 14850 James Drader, Supervisor Fred C. Marcham, Mayor Town of Newfield Village of Cayuga Heights Pearl Street 836 Henshaw Road Newfield, New York 14867 Ithaca, New York 14850 Bruce M. Payne, Supervisor Harold Payton, Supervisor Town of Ulysses Town of Caroline Elm Street .736 Valley Road Trumansburg, New York 14886 Brooktondale, New York 14817 Francis Wright, Supervisor Wesley McDermott, Supervisor Town of Danby Town of Lansing 2350 Danby Road R. D. #2 Willseyville, New York 13864 Locke, New York 13092 Robert F. Linton, Supervisor Charles G. McCord, Supervisor Town of Enfield Town of Dryden R.D. #1 65 E. Main Street Trumansburg, New York 14886 Dryden, New York 13053 Edward J. Conley, Mayor City of Ithaca 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 and a copy of attached Notice of CATV Service to: -2- Chief, Bureau of Mass Communications WBJA-TV, Inc. State Education Department Box 813 Albany, New York 12224 Binghamton, New York 13902 Licensee of WBJA-TV Dow, Lohnes & Albertson 1225 Connecticut Avenue, N. W. Richard Backer Washington, D. C. 20036 Ithaca City Schools Counsel for WSYR-TV, WSYE-TV 400 Lake Street and WICZ-TV Ithaca, New York 14850 Haley, Bader & Potts William Deming 1730 M Street, N. W. Dryden Central School Washington, D. C. 20006 Dryden, New York 13053 Counsel for WTVH Dr. Lowell Foland Sudlun, Tirana & Scher Trumansburg Central School 600 New Hampshire Avenue, N. W. Trumansburg, New York 14886 Washington, D. C. 20037 Counsel for WNYS-TV Raymond Buckley Lansing Central School Public Broadcasting Counsel of Lansing, New York 14882 Central N. Y. , Inc. Old Liverpool Road Donald Hickman Liverpool, New York 13088 Newfield Central School Licensee of WCNY-TV Newfield, New York 14867 Southern Tier ETV Association, Inc. Leslie Graves P. O. Box 97 Groton Central School Endwell, New York 13760 Groton, New York 13073 Licensee of WSKG Harry Reinhart Cordon & Jacob George Junior Republic 2000 L Street, N. W. Freeville, New York 13068 Washington, D. C. 20036 Counsel for WENY-TV Wilner & Scheiner 2021 L Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20036 Counsel for WBNG-TV <)J. Ruh H. Wescott LAW OFFICES COHEN AND BERFIELD BOARD OF TRADE BUILDING -rWIS I.COHEN 1129 20TH STREET,N.W. ORTON L.SERFIELD WASHINGTON,D.C.20036 AREA CODE 202 !OY W. BOYCE 4666665 March 1, 1977 NOTICE OF CATV SERVICE On behalf of Ceracche Television Corporation, 519 West State Street, Ithaca, New York 14850, this is to notify that Ceracche Television Corporation has filed applications for Certificates of Compliance for existing cable television systems in the City of Ithaca; the Village of Cayuga Heights; and the Towns of Ithaca, Newfield, Danby, Dryden, Enfield, Caroline, Ulysses and Lansing with the Federal Communications Commission. The following signals are carried on these systems (those from New York City are carried via microwave): Station City WSYR-TV Syracuse, New York WCNY-TV Syracuse, New York WHEW-TV New York, New York WENY-TV Elmira, New York WTVH Syracuse, New York WSKG Binghamton, New York WOR-TV New York, New York WICZ-TV Binghamton, New York WPIX New York, New York WBNG-TV Binghamton, New York WNYS-TV Syracuse, New York WROC-TV Rochester, New York WHEC-TV Rochester, New York WOKR Rochester, New York WBJA-TV Binghamton, New York -2- WDAU-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WNEP-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WVIA-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania VITXgI Rochester, New York Sincerely, (A&(ar Roy W. Boyce Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D. C. 20554 In re: ) CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION ) File No. Town of Enfield, New York ) Code No. ) Application for Certificate of ) Compliance ) APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Submitted by: CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION By Anthony C racche, President Counsel: Cohen and Berfield 1129-20th Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20036 Date: 2//1/7 7 APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Section I - Statement of Incorporation by Reference Ceracche Television Corporation, 519 West State Street, Ithaca, New York 14850, hereby applies for a Certificate of Compliance for its existing cable television system in the Town of Enfield, New York. The information in support of this application is the same as set forth in applicant's application for a system in the City of Ithaca, New York, filed simultaneously herewith, which is therefore incorporated herein by reference. This system is part of the same headend as the City of Ithaca system. The only difference is that operations -through the Town commenced in 1970 and this system is unfranchised. Section II - Certificate of Service There is attached hereto as Attachment No. 1 a Certificate of Service of the requisite information on the requisite parties, including a com- plete copy of this and the lead application on the franchising authority. Applicant will make these applications available for public inspection in the community if the franchising authority does not. ATTACHMENT NO. 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Ruth H. Wescott, a secretary in the law firm of Cohen and Berfield, Washington, D. C. , hereby certify that on the 1st day of March, 1977, I sent by U. S. mail, postage prepaid complete copies of Certificate of Compliance applications for the City of Ithaca; Village of Cayuga Heights; and Towns of Ithaca, Newfield, Danby, Dryden, Enfield, Caroline, Ulysses and Lansing, New York to: New York State Commission on Walter Schwan, Supervisor Cable Television Town of Ithaca Tower Building, Empire State Plaza 126 E. Senaca Street Albany, New York 12223 Ithaca, New York 14850 James Drader, Supervisor Fred C. Marcham, Mayor Town of Newfield Village of Cayuga Heights Pearl Street 836 Henshaw Road Newfield, New York 14867 Ithaca, New York 14850 Bruce M. Payne, Supervisor Harold Payton, Supervisor Town of Ulysses Town of Caroline Elm Street 736 Valley Road Trumansburg, New York 14886 Brooktondale, New York 14817 Francis Wright, Supervisor Wesley McDermott, Supervisor Town of Danby Town of Lansing 2350 Danby Road R. D. #2 Willseyville, New York 13864 Locke, New York 13092 Robert F. Linton, Supervisor Charles G. McCord, Supervisor Town of Enfield Town of Dryden R. D. #1 65 E. Main Street Trumansburg, New York 14886 Dryden, New York 13053 Edward J. Conley, Mayor City of Ithaca 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 and a copy of attached Notice of CATV Service to: -2- Chief, Bureau of Mass Communications WBJA-TV, Inc. State Education Department Box 813 Albany, New York 12224 Binghamton, New York 13902 Licensee of WBJA-TV Lbw, Lohnes & Albertson 1225 Connecticut Avenue, N. W. Richard Backer Washington, D. C. 20036 Ithaca City Schools Counsel for WSYR-TV, WSYE-TV 400 Lake Street and WICZ-TV ' Ithaca, New York 14850 Haley, Bader & Potts William Deming 1730 M Street, N. W. Dryden Central School Washington, D. C. 20006 Dryden, New York 13053 Counsel for WTVH Dr. Lowell Foland Sudlun, Tirana & Scher Trumansburg Central. School 600 New Hampshire Avenue, N. W. Trumansburg, New York 14886 Washington, D. C. 20037 Counsel for WNYS-TV Raymond Buckley Lansing Central School Public Broadcasting Counsel of Lansing, New York 14882 Central N. Y. , Inc. Old Liverpool Road Donald Hickman Liverpool, New York 13088 Newfield Central School Licensee of WCNY-TV Newfield, New York 14867 Southern Tier ETV Association, Inc. Leslie Graves P. 4. Box 97 Groton Central School Endwell, New York 13760 Groton, New York 13073 Licensee of WSKG Harry Reinhart Cordon & Jacob George Junior Republic 2000 L Street, N. W. Freeville, New York 13068 Washington, D. C. 20036 Counsel for WENY-TV Wilner & Scheiner 2021 L Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20036 Counsel for WBNG-TV `-j. 1� Ruh H. Wescott LAW OFFICES COHEN AND BERFIELD BOARD OF TRADE BUILDING LEWIS 1.COHEN 1120 20TH STREET, N.W MORTON L.BERFIELD WASHINGTON, D.C.20036 AREA CODE 202 ROY W. BOYCE 466-8565 March 1, 1977 NOTICE OF CATV SERVICE On behalf of Ceracche Television Corporation, 519 West State Street, Ithaca, New York 14850, this is to notify that Ceracche Television Corporation has filed applications for Certificates of Compliance for existing cable television systems in the City of Ithaca; the Village of Cayuga Heights; and the Towns of Ithaca, Newfield, Danby, Dryden, -Enfield, Caroline, Ulysses and Lansing with the Federal Communications Commission. The following signals are carried on these systems (those from New York City are carried via microwave): Station .City WSYR-TV Syracuse, New York WCNY-TV Syracuse, New York WNEW-TV New York, New York WENY-TV Elmira, New York WTVH Syracuse, New York WSKG Binghamton, New York WOR-TV New York, New York WICZ-TV Binghamton, New York WPIX New York, New York WBNG-TV Binghamton, New York WNYS-TV Syracuse, New York WROC-TV Rochester, New York WHEC-TV Rochester, New York WOKR Rochester, New York WBJA-TV Binghamton, New York -2- WDAU-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WNEP-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WVIA-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WXX'I Rochester, New York Sincerely, W� Roy W. Boyce Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D. C. 20554 In re: ) ) CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION ) File No. Town of Dryden, New York ) Code No. Application for Certificate of ) Compliance ) APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Submitted by: CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION By Anthony C racche, President Counsel: Cohen and Berfield 1129-20th Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20036 Date: ��j P/ 77 APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Section I - Statement of Incorporation by Reference Ceracche Television Corporation, 519 West State Street, Ithaca, New York 14850, hereby applies for a Certificate of Compliance for its existing cable television system in the Town of Dryden, New York. The information in support of this application is the same as set forth in applicant's application for a system in the City of Ithaca, New York, filed simultaneously herewith, which is therefore incorporated herein by reference. This system is part of the same headend as the City of Ithaca system. The only difference is that this system commenced operation in March, 1962 and its franchise expires on April 12, 1991. Section II - Certificate of Service There is attached hereto as Attachment No. 1 a Certificate of Service of the requisite information on the requisite parties, including a com- plete copy of this and the lead application on the franchising authority. Applicant will make these applications available for public inspection in the community if the franchising authority does not. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1, Ruth H. Wescott, a secretary in the law firm of Cohen and Berfield. Washington, D. C. , hereby certify that on the 1st day of March, 1977, 1 sent by U.S. mail, postage prepaid complete copies of Certificate of Compliance applications for the City of Ithaca; Village of Cayuga Heights; and Towns of Ithaca, Newfield, Danby, Dryden, Enfield, Caroline, Ulysses and Lansing, New York to: New York State Commission on Walter Schwan, Supervisor Cable Television Town of Ithaca Tower Building, Empire State Plaza 126 E. Senaca Street Albany, New York 12223 Ithaca, New York 14850 James Drader, Supervisor Fred C. Marcham, Mayor Town of Newfield Village of Cayuga Heights , Pearl Street 836 Henshaw Road Newfield, New York 14867 Ithaca, New York 14850 Bruce M. Payne, Supervisor Harold Payton, Supervisor Town of Ulysses Town of Caroline Elm Street 736 Valley Road Trumansburg, New York 14886 Brooktondale, New York 14817 Francis Wright, Supervisor Wesley McDermott, Supervisor Town of Danby Town of Lansing 2350 Danby Road R. D. #2 Willseyville, New York 13864 Locke, New York 13092 Robert F. Linton, Supervisor Charles G. McCord, Supervisor Town of Enfield Town of Dryden R. D. #1 65 E. Main Street Trumansburg, New York 14886 Dryden, New York 13053 Edward J. Conley, Mayor City of Ithaca 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 and a copy of attached Notice of CATV Service to: -2- Chief, Bureau of Mass Communications WBJA-TV, Inc. State Education Department Box 813 Albany, New York 12224 Binghamton, New York 13902 Licensee of WBJA-TV Dow, Lohnes & Albertson 1225 Connecticut Avenue, N. W. Richard Backer Washington, D. C. 20036 Ithaca City Schools Counsel for WSYR-TV, WSYE-TV 400 Lake Street and WICZ-TV Ithaca, New York 14850 Haley, Bader & Potts William Deming 1730 M Street, N. W. Dryden Central School Washington, D. C. 20006 Dryden, New York 13053 Counsel for WTVH Dr. Lowell Foland Sudlun, Tirana & Scher Trumansburg Central School 600 New Hampshire Avenue, N. W. Trumansburg, New York 14886 Washington, D. C. 20037 Counsel for WNYS-TV Raymond Buckley Lansing Central School Public Broadcasting Counsel of Lansing, New York 14882 Central N.Y. , Inc. Old Liverpool Road Donald Hickman Liverpool, New York 13088 Newfield Central School Licensee of WCNY-TV Newfield, New York 14867 Southern Tier ETV Association, Inc. Leslie Graves P. O. Box 97 Groton Central School Endwell, New York 13760 Groton, New York 13073 Licensee of WSKG Harry Reinhart Cordon & Jacob George Junior Republic 2000 L Street, N. W. Freeville, New York 13068 Washington, D. C. 20036 Counsel for WENY-TV Wilner & Scheiner 2021 L Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20036 Counsel for WBNG-TV r Ruh H. Wescott LAW OFFICES COHEN AND BERFIELD BOARD OF TRADE BUILDING LEWIS 1.COHEN 1124 20TM STREET.N.W. MORTON L.BERFIELO WASHINGTON,0.C.20036 AREA CODE 2o2 ROY W. BOYCE 466-8565 March 1, 1977 NOTICE OF CATV SERVICE On behalf of Ceracche Television Corporation, 519 West State Street, Ithaca, New York 14850, this is to notify that Ceracche Television Corporation has filed applications for Certificates of Compliance for. existing cable television systems in the City of Ithaca; the Village of Cayuga Heights; and the Towns of Ithaca, Newfield, Danby, Dryden, Enfield, Caroline, Ulysses and Lansing with the Federal Communications Commission. The following signals are carried on these systems (those from New York City are carried via microwave); Station C WSYR-TV Syracuse, New York WCNY-TV Syracuse, New York WNEW-TV New York, New York WENY-TV Elmira, New York WTVH Syracuse, New York WSKG Binghamton, New York WOR-TV New York, New York WICZ-TV Binghamton, New York WPIX New York, New York WBNG-TV Binghamton, New York WNYS-TV Syracuse, New York WROC-TV Rochester, New York WHEC-TV Rochester, New York WOKR Rochester, New York WBJA-TV Binghamton, New York -2- WDAU-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WNEP-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WVIA-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WXXI Rochester, New York Sincerely, W.� Roy W. Boyce Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D. C. 20554 In re: ) ) CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION ) File No. Town of Lansing, New York ) Code No. Application for Certificate of ) Compliance ) APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Submitted by: CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION By Anthony C racche. President Counsel: Cohen and }3erfield 1129-20th Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20036 Date: APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Section I - Statement of Incorporation by Reference Ceracche Television Corporation, 519 West State Street, Ithaca, New York 14850, hereby applies for a Certificate of Compliance for its existing cable television system in the Town of Lansing, New York. The information in support of this application is the same as set forth in applicant's application for a system in the City of Ithaca, New York, filed simultaneously herewith, which is therefore incorporated herein by reference. This system is part of the same headend as the City of Ithaca system. The only difference is that this system commenced operation in December, 1966, and its franchise expires on November 16, 1990. Section II - Certificate of Service There is attached hereto as Attachment No. 1 a Certificate of Service of the requisite information on the requisite parties, including a com- plete copy of this and the lead application on the franchising authority. Applicant will make these applications available for public inspection in the community if the franchising authority does not. ATTAUnivii,.— CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Ruth H. Wescott, a secretary in the law firm of Cohen and Berfield, Washington, D. C. , hereby certify that on the 1st day of March, 1977, 1 sent by U.S. mail, postage prepaid complete copies of Certificate of Compliance applications for the City of Ithaca; Village of Cayuga Heights; and Towns of Ithaca, Newfield, Danby, Dryden, Enfield, Caroline, Ulysses and Lansing, New York to: New York State Commission on Walter Schwan, Supervisor Cable Television Town of Ithaca Tower Building, Empire State Plaza 126 E. Senaca Street Albany, New York 12223 Ithaca, New York 14850 James Drader, Supervisor Fred C. Marcham, Mayor Town of Newfield Village of Cayuga Heights Pearl Street 836 Henshaw Road Newfield, New York 14867 Ithaca, New York 14850 Bruce M. Payne, Supervisor Harold Payton, Supervisor Town of Ulysses Town of Caroline Elm Street 736 Valley Road Trumansburg, New York 14886 Brooktondale, New York 14817 Francis Wright, Supervisor Wesley McDermott, Supervisor Town of Danby Town of Lansing 2350 Danby Road R. D. #2 Willseyville, New York 13864 Locke, New York 13092 Robert F. Linton, Supervisor Charles G. McCord, Supervisor Town of Enfield Town of Dryden R. D. #1 65 E. Main Street Trumansburg, New York 14886 Dryden, New York 13053 Edward J. Conley, Mayor City of Ithaca 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 and a copy of attached Notice of CATV Service to: -2- Chief, Bureau of Mass Communications WBJA-TV, Inc. State Education Department Box 813 Albany, New York 12224 Binghamton, New York 13902 Licensee of WBJA-TV Dow, Lohnes & Albertson 1225 Connecticut Avenue, N. W. Richard Backer Washington, D. C. 20036 Ithaca City Schools Counsel for WSYR-TV, WSYE-TV 400 Lake Street and WICZ-TV Ithaca, New York 14850 Haley, Bader & Potts William Deming 1730 M Street, N. W. Dryden Central School Washington, D. C. 20006 Dryden, New York 13053 Counsel for WTVH Dr. Lowell Foland Sudlun, Tirana & Scher Trumansburg Central School 600 New Hampshire Avenue, N. W. Trumansburg, New York 14886 Washington, D. C. 20037 Counsel for WNYS-TV Raymond Buckley Lansing Central School Public Broadcasting Counsel of Lansing, New York 14882 Central N. Y. , Inc. Old Liverpool Road Donald Hickman Liverpool, New York 13088 Newfield Central School Licensee of WCNY-TV Newfield, New York 14867 Southern Tier ETV Association, Inc. Leslie Graves P. O. Box 97 Groton Central School Endwell, New York 13760 Groton, New York 13073 Licensee of WSKG Harry Reinhart Cordon & Jacob George Junior Republic 2000 L Street, N. W. Freeville, New York 13068 Washington, D. C. 20036 Counsel for WENY-TV Wilner & Scheiner 2021 L Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20036 Counsel for WBNG-TV � c 1 Ruh H. Wescott LAW OFFICES COHEN AND BERFIELD BOARD OF TRADE BUILDING LEWIS 1.COHEN 1129 20TH STREET, N.W. MORTON L.BERFIELD WASHINGTON, D.C.20036 AREA CODE 202 ROY W. BOYCE 466-8565 March 1, 1977 NOTICE OF CATV SERVICE On behalf of Ceracche Television Corporation, 519 West State Street, Ithaca, New York 14850, this is to notify that Ceracche Television Corporation has filed applications for Certificates of Compliance for existing cable television systems in the City of Ithaca; the Village of Cayuga Heights; and the Towns of Ithaca, Newfield, Danby, Dryden, Enfield, Caroline, Ulysses and Lansing with the Federal Communications Commission. The following signals are carried on these systems (those from New York City are carried via microwave): Station City WSYR-TV Syracuse, New York WCNY-TV Syracuse, New York WNEW-TV New York, New York WENY-TV Elmira, New York WTVH Syracuse, New York WSKG Binghamton, New York WOR-TV New York, New York WICZ-TV Binghamton, New York WPIX New York, New York WBNG-TV Binghamton, New York WNYS-TV Syracuse, New York WROC-TV Rochester, New York WHEC-TV Rochester, New York WOKR Rochester, New York WBJA-TV Binghamton, New York r }. -Z- WDAU-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WNEP-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WVIA-TV Scranton, Pennsylvania WXXI Rochester, New York Sincerely, (A GV,a r . I Roy W. Boyce I MAS CITY OF ITHACA TOMPKINS COUNTY ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 OFFICE OF TELEPHONE: 272-1713 THE MAYOR CODE 607 MEMO TO: Mr . Joseph Rundle , City Clerk FROM: Mayor Edward J. Conley DATE: Tlarch 8 , 1577 SUBJECT: Ceracche Television Corporation - Application for Certificate of Compliance - Before the Federal Communications Commission, Washington, D. C . Attached hereto please find the above mentioned application for Certificate of Compliance that is to be filed in your office and accessible to whom ever may like to look at it . EJC : rb ATTACH. CC: Mrs . Ethel Nichols , Chairman - C F; 0 Mr . Dana I;lloth, Chairman - Cable Commission Mr . Martin A. Shapiro, City Attorney LAW OFFICES COHEN AND BERFIELD BOARD OF TRADE BUILDING LEWIS 1.COHEN 1129 20TH STREET, N.W. MORTON L,BERFIELD WASHINGTON,D.C.20036 AREA CODE 202 ROY W.BOYCE 466-SS65 March 21, 1977 Martin A. Shapiro, Esquire City Attorney City of Ithaca Tompkins County Ithaca, New York 14850 Dear Martin: Pursuant to our telephone conversation today, I am enclosing a copy of the State Commission's Order disposing of Ceracche Television Corporation's Petition for Reconsideration in the matter of Tompkins County Board of Representatives for a Declaratory Ruling. Sincerely yours, Lewis I. Cohen Enclosure cc: Anthony Ceracche (without enclosure) ter•- - ... _ . . f RFCE�D STATE OF NEW YOMN COM USSIOIJ Oil! CABLE TELEVISIO: 7-028 7 T kA'R Z 19� . J In the flatter of the request of Tompkins County Board of Representatives for) Docket PTo. 90099 a Declaratory Ruling ) ORDER GRANTING IIT PART AIM D�`TYn!G IF PART PETITIOU FOR RTCOtMIDEMATIOTI (Adopted: fiarch 7, 1977; Released: fiarch 10, 1977) The Cormu. ' ssion has before it a Petition for Reconsideration filed on February 0, 1977 by Ceracche Television Corporation request- ing that the Co*nission review and reverse its holding of January 19, 1977 regarding the above-captioned recruest of the ToTnpkins County Board of Representatives for Declaratory 'ruling. On December 27, 1976, we received the above-referenced rea_uest for Declaratory Ruling. In that pleading, the Tompkins County Board of Representatives requested a ruling "on the legal and regulatory acceptability of [an] enclosed 'Agreement of ?1unicipal Cooperation: Toopkins County Cable Television Com.ission. Pursuant to this proposal, the county and its incorporated munici- palities would establish a permanent county-gide cable television advisory comr•.i.ssion. This commission would not supplant any of the powers or duties of the participating municipal governments nor would its findings be binding in any way. The proposed cormission . would provide "expert" assistance in connection with the issuance { and continuing regulation of municipal franchises. Notice of the Tonpkins County request for Declaratory Ruling was published in our Weekly Bulletin on January 3, 1977. On January 19, 1977, the Commission issued a ruling indicating that the submitted proposal was "acceptable from both a legal and regulatory. standpoint."* Ceracche Television Corporation has filed the instant Petition for Reconsideration on two basic grounds. It claims that the Commission improperly acted on the Tompkins County request for Declaratory Ruling without giving interested parties an opportunity to express their cortunents or opposition. - In addition, it argues that the Commission' s approval of the Tormkins County proposal was ill-considered and not in the best interests of the public. -Letter from Robert F. Kellv, Chairman, to Air. John T•Tarcham, Chairman, Cable Television Task Force, Intergovernmental Relations Study Committee, Tompkins County Board of Representatives, January 19, 1977. • r Ceracche Television Corporation provides cable television service to many of the residents of Tompkins County pursuant to franchises from a substantial nunber of the incorporated munici- palities Within that county. It has been in operation providing cable television service within the county for almost 25 years. It argues that it has a clear interest with reaard to the establishment of any county-wide cable television regulatory program because, for the most part, it would be the only cable television company involved. Ceracche raises a number of policy argurents directed against the establishment of a county-wide regulatory program as proposed by the Board of Representatives. It notes that it presently is required to deal with three levels of regulatory authority (municipal, State and federal) - and that the establishrent of a county-wide regulatory ?:)ody would merely provide a needless and -•} burdensome "fourth tier`' of regulation. This additional regulatory . burden, it claims, [would be particularly egregious in view of the fact that the Proposed county cable commission T.,yould? not have the authority to supplant municipal regulatory powers and functions. Ceracche also argues that the establishment of a county forums for "expert" franchise analysis would be an open invitation for the expression of personal observations by a variety of individuals with their own particular interests to express and an "axe to grind. " The theory is advanced that the proposed county cable commission would provide a "duplication of presently available services," would be an "undue and unnecessary burden" upon existing and potential cable television operations and the public, would cause "undue delay" in the franchise process, and would fail to "provide. meaningful guidance to municipalities. " In addition, Ceracche argues that the creation of such a commission would be a violation cf its existing franchise rights because of the *procedural provisions contained in the binding bilateral contracts it. now holds with its various franchising municipalities in the county, and that this Commission' s approval of such a county-wide regulatory program would be in violation of Article 2.8 of the Executive Law because of the procedural requirements contained therein and the finding con- tained in Section 911 that cable operations `also must be protected from undue restraint and regulation . . . We find that Ceracche Television Corporation has raised .a valid point with respect to the procedures employed in connection with the issuance of our holding of January 19 , 1977. Consistent with standard Cortimission policy, our January 3, 1977 Weekly Bulletin indicated that public corments regarding the Tompkins County request for Declaratory Ruling could be submitted within 20 days of the date of the Bulletin. Clearly, the issuance of our Ruling on January 19 was inconsistent with this corment period. In view of the fact that Ceracche Television contacted our. staff within the appropriate comment period?, we shall consider the substance of the arguments presented by Ceracche in the instant petition. To this extent, this Petition for Reconsideration is granted. Having r6viewed the arguments of Ceracche Television with respect to the wisdori of our annroval of the Tompkins County proposal, we are unable to agree that our approval is unwarranted. Therefore, to the extent that Ceracche requests the reversal -of our approval of January 19 , 1977, its Petition for Reconsideration is denied. Although the policy arguments advanced by Ceracche have merit in many respects, these arguments should more properly be expressed to the people and governments of Tompkins County and its incorporates? munici- palities. This Cor-mission has not the authority, nor should it be its policy, to prevent a group of incorporated municipalities from establishing an on-going advisory group. As *presently proposes?, there is no basis to conclude that the establishment oftheTonpikins County Cable Television Comriission would be in violation of any existing franchise commitments or the provisions of Article 28 of the Executive Lasa. THE COIEHISSION ORDEIIS; The Petition for Reconsideration submitted by Ceracche Television Corporation in the matter of the request by the Tompkins County Board of Representatives for a Declaratory Ruling is hereby approved in part and denied in part as indicated hereinabove. i Commissioners participating, Robert F. Kelly, Chairman; 1 Jerry A. Danzig, Vice-Chairman; Albert A. Farone, TRalcolm Fein, } Michael H. Prendergast, Commissioners. n -�N\tiz ` APR 6 1671 CITY OF ITHACA TOMPKINS COUNTY ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 OFFICE OF TELEPHONE: 272-1713 THE MAYOR CODE 607 MEMO TO: Mr. Joseph Rundle, City Clerk Mrs. Ethel Nichols, Chairman of the C & 0 Mr. Dana Ulloth, Chairman of the Cable Commission FROM: Mayor Edward J. Conley DATE: April 5, 1977 SUBJECT: Cable Television Commission - Ceracche Attached hereto please find copies of Docket No. 50383 entitled "Order Approving Amendment" - in the Matter of the Application of the Ceracche Television Corporation for approval of amendment to its franchise for the City of Ithaca" along with Docket No. 21002 entitled "Comments on Federal Communications Commission request for Comments on proposed Cable Franchise Standards dated December 13, 1976" for your information. ATTACH. ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON CABLE TELEVISION City of Ithaca, New York r 1 � _ a �9 7 Comments on Docket No. 21002 Federal Communications Commission. ) FCC 76-1070 request for comments on proposed ) March 30, 1977 Cable Franchise Standards dated ) December 13, 1976 ) 1. As the body set up by the City of Ithaca, New York to recommend changes, additions, or deletions to the cable television franchise issued by the City, the Advisory Committee on Cable Tele- vision (hereinafter called Committee) and the City of Ithaca have had considerable experience in dealing with FCC regulations as well as other laws, since cable television has been a reality in Ithaca since the 1950's. We believe that the local municipality has a high stake -in -the -performance of the franchise holder and ,consequent- ly has- the greatest interest in- the- terms-of--a -franchise. In this regard both state and federal- agencies should perform supportative functions which assist the local municipality in the performance of its duties rather than to set the standards under which the franchise should be administered. On any other basis federal (and state) regulations function more to interfere with than to assist the municipality in the execution of its duties. Thus any FCC regulations which have the tendency to limit the municipality seem to us to be unacceptable. 2. On-the basis of the foregoing the -FCC can be of -greatest benefitto- a municipality-throughprescrib ing_minimums--in --areas in which-local officials generally--do not have--the--necessary expertise to establish-their own-standards. __ These-include-=technical, legal, and perhaps financial minimums under which a franchise will be acceptable. The FCC already has engineering standards which every cable system must meet. In addition there are standards which specify- the -stations which a cable operator must carry; there are legal-_standards--dealing with fairness,- political candidate use of local channels, and a variety of other areas. In general, we have no contest with these provisions. Furthermore they are not currently open for comment. 3. In direct response to the questions raised b FCC we have P q Y � comments on each of the questions. 4. FCC' s first question regarded the public proceeding require- ment which appears in 47 CFR 76.31 (a) (1) . We believe that the FCC cannot police such a requirement effectively, but we do not believe FCC should be in the business .of policing such a requirement. Rather the requirement should remain in the regulation, because it provides a mechanism through which members of the public may voice their -2- attitudes towards a proposed franchise. In addition, the public may be assured that the legal, financial, character, technical, and other qualifications are adequate. The regulation provides encouragement to the municipality to provide a public forum in which a proposed cable operator's qualifications are examined and provides citizens who feel their rights have been abridged a method of appeal. 5. In the same way as the above requirement 47 CFR 76.311 (a) (2) calling for a construction timetable provides two benefits which make desirable the retention of such a requirement. First, the regulation serves to remind municipalities that a franchise issued by them may be of little value of the operator fails to construct the proposed system. Thus the requirement makes it difficult for a municipality to fail to include a construction timetable which will control the operator's construction. This will benefit municipalities who have little or no experience in franchising cable operations. Second, the construction timetable specified in the regulation provides municipalities with a legal basis for enforcing a reasonable con- struction schedule. The benefit of the regulation is that franchise holders may not simply use them to trade as stock certificates with no intention of constructing a system. i, Although enforcement may be difficult for the FCC, municipal- ities may then appeal to the regulation in their own enforcement attempts. 6. Too many -franchises written prior to 1972 were for excess- iuely long periods and prevented municipalities from exercising their proper authority over franchise holders. ordinarily, these franchises may not be shortened or subjected to review with the intent of modifying the franchise prior to the natural expiration date of the franchise. In the interest of correcting errors which arose from lack of sufficient knowledge of the new industry, it is appropriate that all franchises written prior to 1972 expire 15 years from the date the franchise was written. The expiration should be structured in such a way that municipalities have an opportunity to thoroughly review the franchise and make amendments which new technologies, experience, or other factors may dictate. 7. Since municipalities, communities, cable operations, and other factors vary from community to community, it seems unreasonable that the FCC should promulgate any regulation which would specify the exact procedure whereby complaints shall be handled. Such a regulation fails to account for important local variations and places the FCC in the position of having to defend its regulations in un- tenable circumstances. r -3- More appropriately, 47 CFR 76. 31 (a) (5) should be amended to specify that each franchising authority shall establish an appeal process and that the process shall appear in the franchise. Then the franchisor shall have the freedom to enact provisions which take into account unique state and local conditions. 8. The regulation 47 CFR 76. 31 (b) specifying a franchise fee may be charged which is reasonable (e.g. in the range of 3% to 5%) is not a proper province for FCC regulation. : The local authority sets up the franchise, makes available easements, administers the franchise, handles local complaints, conducts hearings, and performs many other duties associated with the functions of a franchisor. Because the local municipality has primary responsibility in admin- istering the franchise, it should be in the sole province of the local authority to set what it determines to be an appropriate franchise -fee. This fee may be based upon actual regulatory costs . or upon other factors determined by the franchising organization within the_limits_of. appropriate state law. In no way should FCC even consider intruding into this important area in which the municipality may generate revenues. 9. It is our belief that FCC and state regulatory bodies should be set up primarily to assist local governments in their writing, setting up, and administering of franchises. FCC and state regulatory commissions may perform a valuable service by specifying technical, legal, financial, and other qualification minimums, but the choice of maximum limits should always be left to the franchising municipality. FCC-might-well-perform-a needed -service by -making av-aklabie a series--of policy options- to franchising -organization s-through-- information--bud etlns_�and_-the_=-Federal_-Register. RE(-FIVFr- MAS STATE OF NEW YORK C0124ISSION ON. CABLE TELEVISION 77-043 In the Matter of Application of Ceracche Television Corporation ) Docket No. 50383 for approval. of amendment to its franchise for ) the City of Ithaca, Tompkins County ) ORDER APPROVING AMENDNENT (Adopted: March .22, 1977; Released: March, 25, 1977) On February 17, 1977 we, received from Ceracche Television Corporation an application for approval of an amendment. to its fran- chise for the City of Ithaca, Tompkins County. A copy of the appli- cation was served upon the -Cty . and notice of the application was published in -.our weekly bulletin on February l8, 1977, -and in the State Bulletin on March 1, 1977. -t?o objections have beenreceived. • The purpose of the amendment is to (1) bring the franchise into compliance with Part 595 of our Rules, (2) establish a monthly: rate of $5.50 for basic service without a converter, $7.50 with converter, and (3) to prescribe rates for auxiliary service; -i.e.-; Home Box Office, at $6.00 per month. The amendment was adopted by the City of Ithaca Common Council after a public hearing held - pursuant to public notice. The application is governed by Section 822 of the Executive Law which requires us to approve applications thereunder except in certain specified circumstances. Applying the standards of Section 822, we find no basis for withholding approval of the instant application. However, certain matters require - our comment. 1. Part 595 As to Part 595.1 of the Commission's Rules, the instant appli cation brings the franchise into compliance with it. However, there are- some terms and conditions included beyond those required by 595.1. In dealing with these. additional terms and conditions the Commission applies Section 595.2 of its Rules, which provides: Any franchise may contain such additional terms and conditions as the municipality and the franchisee deem appropriate, provided such additional terms and conditions are con- sistent with all Federal- and State laws, rules, regulations and orders.' The franchise has been amended to provide a franchise fee payable to the City of Ithaca of 3% of Ceracche's "-gross revenues." We remind the parties that as a result of the provisions of Section 918 of, the Executive Lary and rulings of the Federal Communications Commission this new fee may not be fully enforceable. The franchise further provides' that- such franchise fees: Shall be and constitute a lien upon the property of the Grantee within the City prior and superior to all other debts, obligations, taxes, 'mortgages, *or"liens of whatsoever - nature regardless of the time of the creation thereof, excepting herefron any prior liens , on the ­- New' York State Cable Commission. :We note that 'in view'bf the=--provision§ of the liew. York State Lien the Uniform-Commercial Code, serious questions as to the-. enforceability- of this provision are raised.'-''In approving Ceracche's application for amendments to its franchise in,. Ithaca,. the Commission makes no judgment-as to the val.icity or invalidity of this provision: b. public 'Access Section 321a) -of the. franchise agreement provides that Ceracche will provide: . -one- full- separate single --channel--.for---- publ -c-zaccess�pr-ograrm ng--on=--a -demand ba-sks up-to and:--ineluding--an-amount of -time=ectual to the duplicated portion of a particular Channel. (Emphasis supplied. The exact meaning of this provision is unclear, but the language indicates-that Ceracche's agreement- to provide a channel for public access programming is being limited in sone way. Therefore, pursuant to Section 8?2.4 of the Executive Law, we approve this section-of -the -franchise-agreement- only to the extent it provides that Ceracche will provide one full separate single channel for public access programming. Tole also remind the parties at this Point that Section 33 (0 of the agreement, which provides that public access studio time shall be provided "at a cost not to exceed the actual cost of j operating the studio" , may not be fully enforceable in the light of the fact that the FCC requires the first five minutes of live studio time be provided free of charge. 2. Rates The amendment calls for a 55.50 charge for basic monthly service, without a converter (no increase) and $7.50 for basic monthly service with a converter. These basic rates are in line 3 - and, finding no basis upon which to withhold our approval, the Commission approves these rates. Section 11 (b) (10) of the franchise agreement permits the City ' of Ithaca to adjust rates unilaterally after a "rate investigation. " Section 025 of the Executive Law provides that the rates charged by a cable television company shall be those specified in the franchise, and that those rates may not be changed except by amend- ment to the franchise, and are subject to our prior approval. Accordingly, we withhold our approval of Section 11 (b) (10) of the instant agreement. Section 11 (c) of the franchise agreement states the Grantee shall not "directly or indirectly reflect the cost of installation in the price of sets sold by it. We note that this provision may prove to be unenforceable by the City of Ithaca, unless a complex system is devised to oversee the enforcement of it. Further, the Commission takes note that the attenpt to regulate the price of television, sets sold by Ceracche may well be without the scope of the City's authority to grant a cable television franchise. II 3. Auxiliary Services The amendment also prescribes rates for auxiliary services, i.e. , Home Box Office, at $6 .00 per month. Thus, for $11.50 per month, a subscriber can obtain 20 channels, including Home Box Office, if he furnishes the converter. These rates are in line, and we accordingly approve them. i THE COP7T?ISSION ORDERS: The application of Ceracche Television Corporation for approval of an amendment to its franchise for the City of Ithaca, Tompkins County is hereby granted, and subject to the understandings expressed hereinabove, the subject amendment is hereby approved. Commissioners participating: Robert F. Icelly, Chairman; Jerry A. Danzig, Vice-Chairman; Malcolm Fein, Commissioner. f i 1577 CITY OF ITHACA TOMPKINS COUNTY ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 OFFICE OF TELEPHONE: 272-1718 THE MAYOR CODE 607 MEMO TO: Mr. Ethel Nichols, Chairman of the Charter and Ordinance Comm. Mr. Dana Ulloth, Chairman of the Cable Commission Mr. Joseph Rundle, City Clerk Mr. Raymond Bordoni, Member of the Cable Commission-Alderman FROM: Mayor Edward J. Conley DATE: April 7, 1977 SUBJECT: TV - Cable Attached hereto please find a copy of a memo from Mr. John Marchum. Chairman of the Tompkins County Intergovernmental Relations Study Committee in regard to the above entitled matter for your information. EJC:rb ATTACH. i Tompkins County Intergovernmental Relations Study Committee rRECEI EC) APR 5 1977 MEMORANDUM April 1, 1977 TO: Members and Representatives to the Cable TV Task Force FROM: John Marcham, Chairman i We held a postponed meeting on March 30 of our task force. Present were representatives of the Towns of Caroline, Dryden, ,Enfield, Ithaca and Ulysses, and the Villages of Cayuga Heights and Trumansburg. We had also heard back from the Towns of-Danby, Dryden and Lansing, and the Villages of Groton and Lansing. Ceracche-lawyers petition: The State Cable TV Commission has responded to- the petition,-upholding its-early approval-of--our agreement- and_.offering_the opinion-that-our agreement did not violate "any existing franchise commitments." This clears the petition away as an impediment to our going ahead. A copy of the -. Cable :Commission's decision of March 7 is enclosed. -.proposed sale of Ceracche TV to a Denver firm The Denver firm has indicated it will: send representatives to a meeting of the Ulysses and Trumansburg -boards on April 11, making.cljear they are moving quickly to take over from Ceracche. There is a-question at --this dime whether their purchase of Ceracche TV will require them to apply to each municipality for a new franchise.- I am to ask the State Cable TV Commission if it has any opinion on the matter, and will report -to you on the matter. Whether -or -not.this.-prvves -to be the case, the municipalities present March 30 'said they -thought <.tlie:,proposed sale meant there was more urgent need to create an intermunicipal -.group 'such as our proposed commission, than if the sale were not in -the wind. Dryden town reported--that-doing business with a firm remote from this region has presenteCproblems to them. • i i Launching .the Tompkins County Commission: Dryden town has already approved the agreement. Ithaca and Groton towns were reported ready. Ulysses and Trumansburg awaited the outcome of the March 30 meeting, which was pretty much also the status of Cayuga Heights. To meet a number of questions about first-year costs, the group developed a new section for the agreement, which was approved unanimously and is enclosed. It becomes part of the agreement. The gist of it is that for the first year of the -county commission's life, there will be a single $50 assessment for any and. every participating municipality. Sec. 12a and its method of apportioning costs will not go into effect until the second year. Also, at the end of the first year, any municipality can pull out of the commission by action of its municipal board. The more lengthy method of withdrawal in Sec. 14 will also not go into effect until the second year. Vol. 1 Members and representatives - Cable TV Task Force Page 2 Everyone present thought this would both speed up formation of� the. commission and assure maximum participation while people got used to how -a commission operates. The new cover page, page 1 and 13 of the agreement are enclosed and should be made part of your records. j What to do once you approve the agreement: Several municipalities expect to approve the- agreement within the next several days. A master copy of-the agreement will be in the hands of the county clerk, so you should provide fora representative of your municipality to sign he master copy. Please notify me when amour board approves the amended agreement. (see below) Your municipality should appoint a person to represent it on the commission. There is not limit as to whom that might be, elected official or otherwise. It should, however, be someone who has the confidence of the municipal b ard, so he or she can keep the commission and board in close touch with one another First-.meeting: the provisions of-the agreement make it .likely he first .meeting will be held:between-May-1-5 and-June 15, most:-likely In-early June.-- t-is my--responsi- bility to call--the -f3Yst meeting. I will notify you as communities j in. You may I want to caucus at some point in advance of the first meeting, to be ce tain you have people ,rho-w 3_,7. :agree_to be officers, including someone eligible to 16 a treasurer, and to consider any at-large members needed to help constitute -the -Review Committee. = At least one town.-supervisor or municipal treasurer will greatly help in the organization. This mailing'-3s being sent not only to-persons•who- have represented . municipalities in ,the past, but to any supervisors or mayors who -are -themselves not task force representatives. The reason-is -that many-of them received copies of-the Ceracche lawyers petition but-did not -receive the -state -commission'_-s _responding opinion. To reach-me: 414 E. Buffalo Street,- Ithaca--273-5754, or Cornell Alumni News, 626 Thurston Avenue, Ithaca 14853--256-4121. /s , THIRD DRAFT Tompkins County : Intergovernmental Relations Study Committee 1 Cable Television Task Force 1. Purpose , 2. Name and Definitions 3. Composition of Commission 4. Officers 'I 5. Executive Committee •6. Review Committee �. Handling of-Proposed Franchise Changes ..8. Public Hearings -9. Commission Findings and Recommendations 10. Meetings i il. Office and Staff 12. Financing 13. Additional Members 14. Withdrawal from Agreement 15. Amendments 16. Illegality of Part 17. Effective Date: Duration 18. First Meeting 19. Interim Establishment of the Commission I THIRD DRAFT I AGREEMENT OF MUNICIPAL COOPERATION: TOMPKINS COUNTY CABLE TELEVISION COMMISSION It THE PARTIES hereto, recognizing the advantages of intermuni- cipal cooperation in the regulation of cable televisi n, do agree as -follows: 1. Purpose Pursuant to Article 5-G of the New York General $Municipal -- II Law, -.the parties hereto agree. to establish 'a Cable Television Commission to advise them on matters pertaining to -caple tele- vision franchising and service, and to hold public hearings where appropriate„ .in order to promote the provision of. good -cable television service- at reasonable rates to the rsidents ...of Tompkins County the Commission shall analyze financial, technicai, .and .legal issues related to cable televisi�lon regula- I tion, to enable the parties hereto to reach sound judgments in exercising their regulatory authority with regard to isuch mat ters as cable television rates, franchise fees, and mature and quality of service. I 2. Name and Definitions _ I The Commission shall be named the "Tompkins County Cable Television Commission. " For purposes -of this agreement, the I Linn "Commission" shall refer to the Tompkins County 'Cable Tele- vision Commission, and the term "participating municipality" shall refer to any party to this agreement. A "majority vote 'i 13 4(a) of this agreement. 19. Interim Establishment of the Commission Initial membership in the Commission shall be for a period of �ne year i from the,effective date of this agreement provided in paragraph 17(a) . The membership fee for this period shall be $50 per municipality, and n further assessment-may be made on any municipality during this period without the consent of its governing board. At the end of this period each mun�Lcipality ..shall determine whether to continue membership in the Commission un er the provisions of paragraphs-1 through 18. The provisions of -this paragraph shall superce`ae contrary provisions in the preceding paragraphs. THE..PARTIES below named hereby affirm that they are authorized repre- sentatives of ,the-municipalities indicated, and that the governing bodies the municipalities whichthey -represent have approved this agreent by majority vote: r I v. f I ' STATE OF I4EII YORK j COMMISSION ON CABLE TELEVISION 77-028 - . - - In the Matter of the -request of ) Tompkins County Board of Representatives for) Docket No.. 900 9 M a Declaratory Ruling ) ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART a - _ .PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION (Adopted: March 7, 1977; Released: !larch 101 197.7) The Commission has before it a Petition for Reconsidera ion filed on February 8, : 1977 by Ceracche Television Corporationlrequest=,: _' _ing-that the . Commission review and reverse its holding of Ja uary 19, 1977 regarding the--_.above-captioned_request-of _•the _Tompki s . County Board-of Representative's -for Declaratory Ruling. OnZecember 27, 1976, we received the above-referenced request for: Declaratory Ruling. - In that pleading, -the Tompkins County_ Board_.:: nf-YReprese�tIves requested -•,iaa=:ruling "on the legal and. reg latory- -acceptability .of [an I enclosed 'Agreement of Municipal'- - .. Cooperation: - .2ompkins unicipal _Cooperation: - -.2ompkins County-Cable Television Commission. Pursuant to this=Vroposal, the county and its incorporated. mnici-_ paliti-es would establish a permanent county-wide cable telev sion :advisory commission.. This commission would not supplant any of the-. powers=-_or._dut es-af the participating.-Tqunicipal-=governments Dior r: wound- its--findings�e-binding--in-�ny__wayy=-The proposed-_= ssion . woul&Vrovide_"expert" -assistance--ins-connection -with the- issuance _ and -coi�tinuing regulation-of -municipal--franchises - Notice --of- the Tompkins County. request for- Declaratory R�ling- was published in our-:Weekly Bulletin-on January -3, 1977.- O _ . January.-19, 1977, the Commission issued a ruling .indicating- at the submitted' proposal was `acceptable -from both a legal and.-reglulatory. standpoint.-"* Ceracche Television -Corporation has filed the instant etition ` for_Recons-ideration -on two_basic -grounds.- - It claims that- e. Commission mproperly .acted on the Tompkins County- request _ or i. Declaratory Ruling without giving-interested parties, an Opp rtunity to express them comments or opposition In.addition, it argues . that the Commission's approval of the-Tompkins- County proposal was ill-considered and--not in- -the best-interests the public. Letter from Robert F. Belly, Chairman; to Air. John March ,. " Chairman, Cable Television Task Force, Intergovernmental Re Ations- . Study Committee, Tompkins County Board of- Representatives, January 19, 1977. i 2 - Ceracche Television Corporation provides cable television service to many of the residents of Tompkins County pursuant to franchises from a :substantial number of the incorporated mu 'ici- palities within that county. It has been in operation -providing cable te-levisi.� service within the county for almost 25 ye rs. It argues that'.it.-bas a clear interest with regard to the establishment of any county-wide cable television regulatory program because, -for the most part, it would be the only cable television company, involved. , eracche raises a number of policy arguments 'directed gainst the:°establishment of a county-wide regulatory program as :pr osed by -the Board of Representatives. It notes that it -pro is required to deal with three levels of regulatory authority (municipal, State and federal) and'.that the establishment oa county-wide regulatory body.would merely-provide a •needless and _ burdensome "fourth. tier` of regulation. This additional re latory- burden, it claims, would be particularly: eVie'I gregious "in vif the fact that the- proposed county cable -commission--would not ha a the authority to;.supplant municipal regulatory powers and funct'ons. Ceracche also_:azgues that the e'stablishrment 'of =a' county for for "expert" frarichise . analysis woula-be an open invitation'�for ;the ' express1oa;,of.,<perso,_nal observations by a variety �of individ als - with their. a..m7particular interests to express and .an "axe o !grind." . -:the .-theory-Als advanced that the proposed county -c le commission'.aaou7 d provide a "duplication of presently availa�le ' _ ! services;-."wan "undue and unnecessary burden" upon xisting and potent�la1-;viable=.-televisioon operations and the public, w 'uld _ cause,+"undue -0e1:ay"-• in the franchise process, and would fai to - - "provide meaningful guidance to municipalities. " In additi n, Ceracche argues "that the creation of such a commission woul be a . . violation of its existing franchise rights because of the _p ocedural provisions contained in the binding bilateral contracts it ow holds with' its various franchising municipalities in -the -county, . nd that thi Commission's approval of such a county-wide regulatory program - would be in .violation of Article 28 of the Executive Law be ause of ,. the procedural requirements contained therein and the findi g%con tained in Section 811 that cable operations "also must be p otected ..- from undue restraint and regulation We find that Ceracche Television Corporation has raised a valid point with respect to- the procedures employed in conr_oction with the issuance of our -holding of 'January 19,- .197.7 ':Consstent - with standard Commission policy, our. January•.:3, "1977 -S�eeklylBulletin indicated that public comments regarding. the Tompkins_Count request for Declaratory Ruliftg -could -be submitted within 20 days of the date of the Bulletin. Clearly, the issuance of our Ruling n ! January 19 was inconsistent with this comment period-. In 'v ew of the fact that Ceracche Television'contacted our .staff withi the appropriate comment period, we shall consider the substance of the . arguments presented by Ceracche in.- the -instant petition. T _this extent, this Petition for Reconsideration is granted. j 'I ► . ell 3 - i Having reviewed the arguments of Ceracche Television with respect to the wisdom of our approval of the Tompkins County proposal, we are unable to agree that our approval is unwarranted. Therefore, to the extent that Ceracche requests the reversal of our approval of - January-19, 1977,. its Petition for Reconsideration is deni d. Although .--the policy arguments advanced by Ceracche have me it 'in many respects, these arguments should more properly be expresse to the people and governments of Tompkins County and its incorpor ted munici- palities. _ .This Commission has not the authority, nor show d it be its -policy, to prevent a group of incorporated municipalit'es from estail-ishing an on-going advisory group. As presently proosed, :there is no basis to conclude that the establishment of th Tompkins County Cable Television Commission would be in violation o any existing franchise commitments or the provisions of Articl 28 of the Executive Law. THE COT-MISSION ORDERS: The Petition-:for--:Reconsideration--submitted by Ceracch Televis3fln =�orporativn. in the matter of the request--by---the --Tompkins -:.-County Baard <of Representatives for a Declaratory Puling i hereby approved"in part``and -denied' in part as indicated hereinabo e. Com,Assioners _participating:. Robert F. Kelly, Chairman; -:Terry A- .:Danzig,7Vice-Chairman; Albert A. Farone, Malcolm rein, hichael °H. Prender,gast, Commissioners. I p I - _ - j I i I i I i I i i i I i I i i CITY OF ITHACA TOMPKINS COUNTY ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 oFcice OF TELEPHONE: 272-1713 THE MAYOR CODE 607 MEMO TO: Mr. Dana Ulloth, Chairman of the Cable Commission Mrs . Ethel Nichols, Chairman of the Charter and Ordinance Comm. Mr. Joseph Rundle, City Clerk Mr . Martin A. Shapiro, City Attorney FROM: Mayor Edward J. Conley fJ DATE: August 15, 1977 SUBJECT: Cable .Commission Correspondence Attached hereto please find correspondence received from the Federal Communications Commission and State of New 'York Cable Commission in regard to Ceracche Television Corporation for your information. EJC:rb ATTACH. � II i t Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D. C. 20554 In re: ) CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION ) CAC-09721 City of Ithaca, New York ) NY0092 Application for Certificate of Compliance ) TO: The Commission REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Ceracche Television Corporation (Ceracche Television), y its i attorneys, hereby opposes an opposition to the above Certificate of Compliance application filed by WENY, Inc. , licensee of station WENY-TV (VTENY-TV). WENY-TV's objection is premised solely on a nonduplication dispute presently pending before the Commission. I Since the matters raised by WENY-TV are presently pending before the Commission in other proceedings, no useful purpose would bel served by considering them again in the context of this proceeding. As dijcuissed in the various pleadings now pending before the Commission, it is technically impossible for Ceracche Television to provide the relief requested by WENY-T-V-since-the system involved-is an integrated system serv, ng several different communities in some of which conflicting nonduplication require- ments apply. I I -2- WENY-TV also suggests that Ceracche Television should be faulted for not mentioning in its application the pendency of these matters. This is without merit. Section 76. 13(c) of the rules lists with specificit the informa- tion required to be included in an application of the type filed by Ceracche Television. There is no requirement to report pending nonduplication dis- putes. In a footnote, WENY-TV relies on Section 76. 13(a)(5) which requires F news stems to demonstrate the compliance of their proposed c*rriage tii,ith Y the rules. This, however, is specifically limited to the rules contained in Subpart D, which do not include the nonduplication rules. Moreover, the I Ihstant application is not governed by Section 76. 13(a) but Secti n 76. 13(c), which requires the applicant only to list the signals carried, not to justify their carriage. It is accordingly urged that WENY-TV's opposition should be dismissed or denied. Respectfully submitted, CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION i By Morton E. 7-rfileld By R;<)y W. Boycg COHEN AND BERFIELD, '. C. Its-Attorneys 1129-20th Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036 August 8, 1977 t CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Rozlyn K. Watson, a secretary in the law firm of Cohen and Berfield, P.C. , Washington, D.C. , hereby certify that on the 8th day of August, 1977, I sent by U. S. mail, postage prepaid, a complete copy of. the foregoing "Reply to Opposition to Certificate of Compliance" to the following: New York State Commission on Fred C. Marcham, Mayor Cable Television Village-of Cayuga Heights Tower Building, Empire State Plaza 836 Henshaw Road Albany, New York 12223 Ithaca, New York 14850 James Drader, Supervisor Harold Payton, Supervisor Town of Newfield Town of Caroline Pearl Street 736 Valley Road Newfield, New York 14867 Brooktondale, New York 14817 Bruce M. Payne, Supervisor Wesley McDermott, Supervisor Town of Ulysses Town of Lansing Elm Street R. D. No. 2 Trumansburg, New York 14886 Locke, New York 13092 Francis Wright, Supervisor Charles G. McCord, Supervisor Town of Danby Town of Dryden 2350 Danby Road 65 East Main Street Willseyville, New York 13864 Dryden, New York 13053 Robert F. Linton, Supervisor Chief, Bureau ofiMassCommunications Town-of Enfield State Education Department R.D. No. 1 Albany, New York 12224 Trumansburg, New York 14886 John B. Jacob, Esquire Edward J. Conley, Mayor Cordon & Jacob City-of Ithaca 2000 L Street, N.W. 108 East Green Street Washington, D. C. 20036 Ithaca, New York 14850 Counsel for WENY-TV Walter Schwan, Supervisor Dow, Lohnes & Albertson Town of Ithaca 1225 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. 126 East Senaca Street Washington, D. C. 20036 _. Ithaca, New York 14850 Counsel for WSYR-TV, WSYE-TV, and WICZ-TV i -2- Haley, Bader & Potts Richard Backer 1730 M Street, N.W. Ithaca City Schools Washington, D.C. 20006 400 Lake Street Counsel for WTVH Ithaca, New York 14850 Sundlun, Tirana & Scher William Deming 600 New Hampshire Avenue, N.W. Dryden Central School Washington, D.C. 20037 Dryden, New York 13053 Counsel for WNYS-TV Dr. Lowell Foland Public Broadcasting Counsel of Trumansburg Central School Central N.Y. , Inc. Trumansburg, New York 14886 Old Liverpool Road Liverpool, New York 13088 Raymond Buckley Licensee of WCNY-TV Lansing Central School Lansing, New York 14882 Southern Tier ETV Association, Inc. Post Office Box 97 Donald Hickman Endwell, New York 13760 Newfield Central School Licensee of WSKG Newfield, New York 14867 Wilner & Scheiner Leslie Graves 2021 L Street, N.W. Groton Central School Washington, D.C. 20036 Groton, New York 13073 Counsel for WBNG-TV Harry Reinhart WBJA-TV, Inc. George Junior Republic Box 813 Freeville, New York 13068 Binghamton, New York 13902 Licensee of WBJA-TV x/ IA6IN zlyn K. Watson 77-148 STATE OF NEW YORK COMMISSION ON CABLE TELEVISION 1977 In the Matter of ) Billing Practices of Cable ) Docket No. 90040 Television Companies ) EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE COMMENTS (Issued: August 10, 1977) This is to advise that the date for filing comments concerning the Commission's Proposed Rulemaking on Billing Practices of Cable Television Companies (Docket No. 90040) has been extended to October 18 , 1977. The date for submission of replies to the comments has been extended to November 18, 1977. The extension has been granted at the request of the Executive Director of the New York State Cable Television Association. By Order of this Commission THOMAS E. RYAN CHIEF COUNSEL 77- 130 STATE OF NEV YORK COAi^'IISSION ON CABLE TELEVISION In the Matter of Billing Practices ) Docket No. 90040 of Cable Television Companies ) ERRATUM NOTICE July 25, 1977 " In the NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING issued July 19, 19772 E, E there is an error. On page 3 in 3. Advance Billing the formula at—the end of the third paragraph should read: [ ($ .06 x $7.00 = $ .42 = 12 months = $ .035 ; $ .035 x 6 (months to which advance billing applies) _ $ .21) ] f ,i CERACCHE TELEVISION CORPORATION UNAUDITED COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF INCOME & EXPENSES YEARS ENDED April 30, 1971 and 1974 1970-71 1973-74 INCOME Monthly cable fees 597, 603 823,507 Cable install. & transfer fees 64 ,454 71,064 Advertising 4 , 973 34 ,328 All other 22,862 24,338 689, 982 953,237 EXPENSES Salaries and wages 204,109 259,884 Depreciation 80,059 108,060 Bad debts 20,187 23,272 Cable maintenance contracted 1,589 30,010 Maintenance parts and supplies 49 , 215 77,701 Computer charges, office supplies 25,726 35,673 FCC fee 1,489 NYS Cable Commission 12 , 070 General Insurance 4 , 959 4 ,290 Interest 23,558 25,357 Legal and accounting 11,017 27,351 Microwave service 20,760 23 ,640 Payroll taxes and insurance 23,136 33,171 Pole rental 30,652 36,637 Building rental 31,445 31,762 Weather channel expenses 6, 311 6 ,064 Taxes- real estate, franchises; etc 33, 845 55,700 Telephone 4 ,526 9 ,831 Studio supplies and expenses 6, 289 9,853 Travel 2 ,637 6 ,531 Truck expense 14 ,039 16,499 Utilities 8, 892 10,098 Employees ' profit-sharing plan 21, 946 23,482 Federal income taxes 20,443 11,726 All other 8 ,457 7 ,015 655,286 885,677 NET INCOME 34,696 67,560 i CERACCHE T V Proposed Rate Increase 1/1/75 Projected no increase Projected increase 1/1/75 1970-71 1971-72 1972-73 1973-74 1974-75 1975-76 1976-77 1974-75 1975-76 1976-77 INCONE Cable rental 597 603 663 131 763 181 823 507 849 300 861 900 874 500 912 700 1 056 300 1 073 700 Cable install. & transfer 64 454 64 749 68 571 71 064 73 000 75 000 77 000 73 000 75 000 77 000 Advertising 4 973 18 732 37 692 34 328 40 000 50 000 60 000 40 000 50 000 60 000 Other 22 862 35 684 48 3022� 4 338 13 000 13 000 13 000 13 000 13 000 13 000 689 892 782 296 917 746 953 237 975 300 999 900 1 024 500 1 038 700 1 194 300 1 223 700 EXPENSES 612 897 693 044 724 264 850 469 962 500 1 079 200 1 173 200 962 500 1 079 200 1 173 200 P/S 21 946 25 070 45 279 23 482 - - - 5 000 22 000 - Fed. Income Tax 20 443 10 109 55 844 11 726 17 500 28 200 7 700 655 286 728 223 825 387 , 885 677 962 500 1 079 200 1 173 200 985 000 1 129 400 1 180 900 NET 34 606606 54 073 12 8000) $1Q ) 53 700 64 900 �2 $, Net of % of gross cable income 5.2% 7.4% 11.1% 7.6% 1.4% (8.5%) (15.6%) 5.4% 5.7% 3.7% Net as % of total income 5.0 6.9 10.1 7.1 1.3 (7.9) (14.5) 5,2 5,4 3.5 j Net as % of average capital 7.3 10.5 15.8 10.2 1.8 (11.9) (26.9) 7.4 8.3 5.1 $ return per subscriber 2.89 4:21 6.70 4.57 .82 (4.90) (8.96) 3.44 4.01 2.58 Cash flow from operations 114 907 147 231 198 100 172 488 130 800 48 700 (10 700) 171 700 192 900 180 800 Increase in fixed assets 136 542 160 348 106 829 192 402 231 000 246 000 246 000 231 000 246 000 231 000 Capital 5/1 457 821 492 850 538 839 631 198 4/30 492 850 538 839 631 198 694 190 Total 950 671 1 031 689 Average _335 15�4� 8512 Subscribers 5/1 11 504 12 425 13 241 14 343 15 201 16 000 16 400 4/30 12 425 13 241 14 343 15 201 16 001 16 400 16 800 Total Average 15 601 16 200 16 600 15 600 16 200 16 600 4' THE PARTIES below na e hereby affirm that they are authorized represent Ives of th municipalities indicated, . and that the gov . ning bodies of the nicipalities which they represent have approved this agreement by jority vote: TO1dN OF CAROLINE TO OF DANBY TOIJN OF MYDEN LLA E OF DRYDEN Ic :VILLLAIGOF FREEVILLE OWN OF ENFIEL J t L "v` T014N O01GROTON VILLAGE OF GROTON L _ TOWN KF ITHA A CAYUGA HEIGHTS 7 ` TOWN OF LANSING 4LAGE OF 'ANSING TOWN OF NEWFIELD F Y . ES VILLAGE Nr TRUMANSBUkG CITY OF ITHACA 1 I r APPENDIX B New York State Commission on Cable Television Form AFR - 1 Annual Financial Report for Period Beginning ,May 1_ , 19 74, and Ending April 30 , 19 75. Name Ceracche Television Corporation Full Name of Cable Television Company Address 519 W. State St.. Mailing Address Ithaca, New York 14850 City State Zip Code (607) 272 3456 Telephone No. (Include Area Code) i , 1 Notice This report shall be filed with the Commission by every cable television company required to maintain records , and adopt the accounts prescribed in the Uniform Account- 'I ing System, and may be filed by any cable television ' company which voluntarily uses the accounts specified in the Uniform Accounting System. This report shall be filed with the Commission within 90 days of the end of your fiscal year. Part I of this report consists of questions of a general informational nature; Part II consists of financial i statements and schedules based on the accounts specified in the UAS : Part III consists of consolidated financial statements and shall be completed by any company having an ownership interest of 20% or more in another company. General Instructions 1. All entries are to be in permanent form. Decreases r are to be shown enclosed in parentheses .- 2. The words "not applicable" are to be shown on any schedules or in reply to any question which does not apply to respondent. 3 . Additional explanations , schedules or statements may be attached to the back of this form by respondent for the purpose of further explanation if insufficient ' space has been provided on this form. The additional explanations , schedules or statements shall be cross- referenced to the question, statement or schedules to which they are related. 4. Amounts reported on this report shall be rounded to the nearest dollar. 5 . If you require assistance phone # (518) 474-2471 or write New York State Commission on Cable Television, E Alfred E. Smith Bldg. , Albany, New York 12225 . s• i ,- 2 PART I 1. To Whom Should Correspondence And Inquiries Concerning_ a , This Report Be Addressed? Anthony Ceracche 519 W. State Street ' i Name Mailing Address President . Ithaca, New York 14850 Title City State Zip Code (607) 272-3456 ' i Phone Number [Include Area Code] 2. List below the name of each locality granting a fran- chise and also each geographic area you serve in which a franchise has not been granted and show the Number of Subscribers for each area served, computed as of the end of your fiscal year in the same manner as for e the Federal Communications Commission. Indicate operations in a non-franchised area by placing the letter "n" after --the area served. Estimated Name of Franchise Number of Percentage of & or Area Served .-S.ubacribers Penetration 1. See Attachment 2 r 3 . 4. 5 . 6 . 7. 8. of 9. i 10. TOTAL PART II Statement of Profit and Loss Line No. Account No. Name Amounts 1. Operating Income 2. 4110.0 Installation Income $ 70 079 3. 4120.0 Regular Subscriber Charges $ 861 412 4. 4130.0 . Per Program or Per Channel Charges $ 103 222 5. 4140.0 Other Subscriber Revenues $ 6. Total Subscriber Revenues $1 034 713 7.. 4210.0 Advertising Income $ 42 625 8. 4220.0 Special Service Income $ 9. 4230.0 Other Non-Subscriber Revenues $ 26 140 10. Total Non-Subscriber Revenues $ 68 765 11. -Total Operating Income $1 103 478 12. Cost of Operations i 13. 5100.0 Service Costs $ 351 504 14. 5200.0 Origination Costs $ 101 347 15. 5300.0 Selling, General and Administrative Expense $ 450 346 16. 5400.0 Depreciation and Amortization $ 128 137 a 17.. Total Operating Costs 1 031 334 18. Total Oeerating Profit or Loss $ 72 144 (Line 11 Line 17 19. Other Income and Expenses 20. Other Income 21. 6110.0 Interest $ 5 285 22. 6120.0 Aididends $ 23. 6130.0 Other $_ 13 090 24. Total Other $ 18 375 Income 25. Other Expenses 26. 6210.0 Interest $ 34 149 27. 6220.0 Miscellaneous $ - 28. Total Other $ 4 149 `! Expense $ 29. Total Other Income or Expenses (Line 24 - Line 28) $ (15 774) 30. Profit or (Loss) Before Taxes $ 56 370 31. Provision for Federal and State Income Taxes 32 • 7100.0 Federal Income Taxes $ 5 513 t t" 33. 7200.0 State Income L Taxes $ 34. Total Income Taxes Payable $ 5 513 35. Total Profit or Loss Before Extraordinary Items (Line 30 Line 34) $ 50 857 36. 8000.0 Extraordinary Items* // $ 37. Total Profit or Loss (Line 35 - Line 3 ) $ 50 857 Please provide schedule of items and amounts. N aD BALANCE SHEET ASSETS Line No. Account No. Name Amounts 1. Current-Assets ; 2. 1110.0 Cash $77149 3. 1120.0 Short-term Investments $ - 4. 1130.0 Accounts Receivable - Trade $ 131 816- 5. 1139.0 Less: Allowance for Doubtful Accounts ($ _ 6. Accounts Receivable - Net $ 131 816 7. 1140.0 Other Receivables $ 8 710 8. 1149.0 Less: Allowance For Doubtful Accounts ($ - 9. Other Receivables - Net $ 8 710 10. 1150.0 Inventory $ 235 031 11. 1160.0 Broadcasting Rights $ 12. 1170.0 Prepaid Expenses y $ 16 996 13. 1180.0 Other Current Assets $ 14. Total Current Assets $ 469 702 15. Plant Assets 16. 1200.0 Fixed Assets $ 1 561 897 17. 1300.0 Construction Work in Progress $ - 18. 1500.0 Plant Adjustments $ ' 19. 1400.0 Less Allowance for Accumulated Depreciation and Amortization ($ 837 970) 20. Total Plant Assets $ 721 927 21. Other Assets 22. 1610.0 Intangible Assets $ 23. 1620.0 Deferred Charges $ ' 24. 1630.0 Long Term Investments (Subsidiaries) $ 354 026 25. 1640.0 Organization Costs $ _26. 1650.0 Other Assets $ 27. Total Other Assets $ 354 026 J 28. Total Non-Current Assets (Line 20 + Line 27). $ 'Z 077 953 29. Total Assets [Line 14 + Line 28] $ 1 547 655 LIABILITIES AND OWNERS' EQUITY 30. Current Liabilities 31. 2110.0 Loans Payable $ 69 402 32. 2120.0 Subscriber Advance- Payments and Deposits $ 149 980 33. 2130.0 Accounts Payable $ 151 200 34. 2140.0 Taxes & Other Withholdings $ 5 811 35. 2150.0 Accrued Expenses $ 6 630 36. 2160.0 Accrued Taxes $ 2 056 37. 2170.0 Other Current Liabilities $ 22 227 38. 2180.0 Dividends Payable $ - 39. Total Current Liabilities $ 407 306 40. Non-Current Liabilities 41. 2300.0 Long-Term Debt $ 315 837 42. 2400.0 Operating Allowances $ - Ak 43. 2500.0 Other Non-Current Liabilities $ 44. Total Non-Current Liabilities $ 315 837 45. Owners' Equity 46. ..3100.0 Common Stock - Issued $ 18 000 I '-' 47. 3200.0 Preferred Stock - Issued $ 17 900 48. 3300.0 Treasury Stock $ - 49. 3400.0 Proprietors' Equity $ - 50. 3500.0 Additional Paid-In Capital $ 500 51. 3600.0 Retained Earnings $ 788 112 52. TOTAL Owners' Equity $ 824 512 53. Total Liabilities and Owners' Equity $1- 547 655 INSTRUCTIONS - 1. If Line 43, Other Non-Current Liabilities, is significant in amount list the major items comprising it, and the amounts therein. 2. Furnish particulars as to any significant contingent assets or liabilities existing at year end or any- significant change in the financial condition of the company occurring after the end of the fiscal year Out prior to filing this report in the space below. 3. List below the total amount of subscriber Advance Payments, Account #2121.0 and the total amount of Subscriber Deposits, Account #2122.0 held by you and indicate if you pay interest on these am&nts and if so, how much. 3. 2121.0 $ 137,379 $ 3.00 discount for annual payment 2122.0 $ 12,601 Interest at 6% 12 STATEMENT OF SOURCE AND APPLICATION OF FUNDS LINE Source of Funds 1. I P.ro f it fxoT operat ions, . . $ 50 857 i 2. Add- .Depreciation . . . . . $ 128 315 3. Increase in Long-Term Debt . $ 62 979 Decrease in 'Investment in Subsidiaries $ 9 76-5 4. . . . . . . . . . s. . . . . . . . . . . $ ,I 6. $ 7. $ ' 8. $ I 9. $ 10. 11. $ 12. Total Available Funds $ 271 916 Application of Funds 13. Incxeasa in Plant.and Equipment . . . $ 198 555 14. 4djustment, o f Spbsidiaries', Prior Years Tax.Bengits 33 56-8 15. .Ijet. IpcKease,in WQrljing Qapital, , , , , , , $ 39 9 16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ P 17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ -1-9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ I 22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 24. Total Applied Funds $ 271 916 Increase/Decrease in Working Capital Components 25. Increase. in Cagh . . . . . $ 79 204 26 . decrease in Accounts Receivable.- Trade $ ) 1' 27o Decrease in Other.Receivables. . . . . . . $ (12 872) 2g. Increase in Inventory . $ 29. Decrease in Prepaid Expenses $ ) . . . 30. Decrease infLoans. Payable . . . . . $ 23 987 31. Decrease in Advance .Payments & Deposits . . . $ (18 927) ' 32. Increase in Acr-punts Payab],e . . . $-- (60 667) 33 . Decxease in Taxes. &.Other Withholdings . $ 3 051 34. AeCrease in Accrued Expense . . . . . . . . $ 35. Increase in Accrued Taxes $ (32) 36 , Dec.,rease. in Other, Ci}rrent Liabilities $ 047 37. Total Increase/Decrease in Working Capital Components $ 39 793 13 STATEMENT OF SOURCE AND APPLICATION OF FUNDS ' INSTRUCTIONS 1. Total available funds , line 12, must equal total applied funds , line 24. 6 2. The following will be individually listed on the schedule.: a. Net change in working capital. b. Profit or loss arising before extraordinary items. •c. Extraordinary gains or losses . d. Working capital provided by depreciation and amortization. e. The proceeds of stock issuances . f. The proceeds of new debt incurred. g. Significant increments of reduced debt. h. Acquisition of interest in parent, affiliated or other companies . i. All significant capital applications including dividends and other payouts and acquisition of treasury stock. J . All other items of significance not listed above shall be grouped or otherwise consolidated where possible . , ' 3. Indicate assets and liabilities which account for net change R. in working capital. 4. If space provided is insufficient lease attach additional P P � P sheets . 1k 3► 4 .a DETAILS OF SUMMARIZED EXPENDITURE ACCOUNTS A BC D LINE ACCOUNT SERVICE ORIGINA- SELLING, GENERAL & PAYROLL & EXPENSES NO. DESCRIPTION COSTS TION COSTS ADMINISTRATIVE EXP. CAPITALIZED 01.1 Salaries and Wages, Officers and $ $ $ $ Directors 1 51 118 01.2 Salaries and Wages, All Others 136 064 67 736f- 45 7121 42 919 02.1 Employee Benefits, Officers an Directors 6 618 11 02.2 Employee Benefits, All Others 28 060 8 779 5 9251 03.0 aintenance 73 691 1 866 Pole and Site Rentals 37 776 05.0 Microwave ServIce 26 280 06.0 Light, ..eat & Power. 10 902 � Vehicle xpenses X759 891 68.0 Rent 17 9 7 6_5 01 16 960 09.0 Travel & Entertainment 10.0 Dues ana Subscription 3 533 11.0 050 12.0 Professional 2 7771 ro :essiona Service �.... ( 53 777 13.0 Stationery & Supplies � I �� 26 530 14.0 Postage andfreight r— 2. 331 MO dvertising 6c Promotion r 2 912 e ephone be leiegraph10 774 17.0 Sun ry Office Expenses } Insurance 10 865 19.0 Provision for Doubttui AccounEs 71 61f6 20.0- L—o—c-a-1 Taxes 42 034 1.0 Franchise, License & Permit Fees _ 23 3481 22.0 Technical & Creative Service h 2-3.0 se 2 492 24.0 Studio Sets & Props 25.0 Program Material upp es 6 33 .0 News Services 5 702 21.0 Participation Expense 28.0 kees & Royalties 9.0 Tariff ease ac arges 30.0 Overhead Allocations _ 80 Other 2 790 - _ _ Sub-Total 351 504 1 1 347 5042 932 90.0 Capitalize; Cost Of ft etc _ `�— ot 1 351 504 101 347 1450 346 (-' 42 919 INSTRUCTIONS 1. Columns A, B, & C should agree with totals reported on Statement of Profit and Loss. 2. Amounts appearing in column D shall not be included in column A, B, and C. '3. Please provide details below-of Overhead Allocations, if any, as provided for in Section 599.40 (J) (5). PLANT, INTANGIBLES AND DEFERMENTS BALANCE -MITTMVT R iEA EGINNING DURING AND AT END DEPRECIATION F YEAR YEAR ADJUSTMENTS OF YEAR AND AMORTIZATION LINE ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION (A) (B) C D) (E (F Fixed Assets _ 1. 1210.0 .Land - XXXXXXXXX 2. 22 . Bui n s 3 59 - - 59 7 3. 123 Hea - n 89 - - 44 896 zi 4. 1241.0 Subscriber Devices --TO-T-0-90 I ]. 8 - { 150 40/ 5. 1242.0 Ot er 824 100 125 685, - - 949 785 6. Total Trunk and DistriBution (Lined Line 5 1 026 190-- - 135 973 U62 163 646 166 7. 1250.0 Test Eauipment and Tools 41 388 2 069 - 8. Procram Origination x'1-2 _ 6 221 - - 38 475 1 11 351 9. 1270.0 Vehicles 76 375 17 990 8 923 85 35 + 063 10. 1276.0 Furniture and Fixtures 59 659 659 - - ! 60 318 4 9-75- 11. Tota e is es, urns ure an Fixtures Line 9 and Line 10) 136 034 18 563 8 923 - 145 674 97 808 12. 1280.0 Capitalized Lease Property - - - _ ( - _ 13. IZ9Fold Improvements - - 14. 1299.0 Miscellaneous Equipment 80 988 { 42 785 - - { ITT 0 ' 15. Total Fixed Assets Total Lines 1 to 3 6 to 8 11 to 1411 365 209 205 611 8 923 11561 897 837 970 A. Line 14 Includes HBO converters with $68,805 cost at end of year. Not Applicable 16. 1300.0 Construction Work in Progress 17. '1' ant Adjustments . 18. 1510.0 Plant Adjustment Excess' Fair Value 19. 1520.0 Plant Adjustment Goodwill 20. Total Plant Adjustments LLine - Line 19 21. Total Plant Assets Line 15 + Line 16 + Line 201 22. Intangible Assets 23. .1611.0 Franchises, Licenses _ - and Permits 24. 1 12� 0 Other Intangible Assets 25. 1 l�3.0 co07%111 (---� 26. T—ot—aT Intangible Assets Mine Line 24 + Line 251 27. Deferred Charges 28. 1621.0 1621.0 Start-un Costs 29. 1622.0 Unamortized Debt ` —� 30. 1623 0 Other Deferred Charges 31. _ 1 Tot�Deterred�Ciarges Line Linn 29 + Tine 301 N i d ' I 9 i i .....• ._._...,..m.....,....:,ww.;,.,....._ .:;•ea.wawYhNYfrrt+ea lr.e; .. .., ,.:i�$5 're�:nei�.+�c. 00 PLANT, INTANGIBLES & DEFERMENTS Not applicable EXPLANATION OF ENTRIES LINE NO. INSTRUCTIONS 1. The balance at the beginning of the year, column A M6uld agree with the closing balances on last year's report; the balance at the end of the year should agree with closing balances on this year's balance sheet. 2. Amounts reported in column D, transfers and adjustments, should be explained in the space provided above. 3. The amounts shown in column E and F must agree with amounts shown on the balance sheet. 4. Unamortized Debt Expense is amortized by charging "interest expense", this will be reflected on this schedule by entering this amount in Column D. .t a 0% Long-Term Debt r4 PRINCIPAL PAYMENTS Due Within More than 2 Years 3 Years 4 Years 5 Years 5 Years TOTAL Line Description (A) (B) (C) D E F 1 Notes 2 Owed to Affiliates $ $ $ -$ $ S 3 Owed to Directors or Officers 4 All Others 64 341 70 735 77 749 85 180 17 832 315 837 5 Total Notes 64 341 70 735 77 749 85 180 17 832 315 837 6 Bonds 7 Owed to Affiliates 8 Owed to Directors or Officers 9 All Others 10 Total Bonds 11 Obligation on Capitalized Leases 12 Unamortized Premium & Discount ;n Outstanding Debt 13 Total Long-Term Debt (Total of Lines 5, 10, 11 +12) 64 341 70 735 77 749 85 180 17 8321 315 837 14 Interest to Be Paid 19265 12 251 4 440 850 62 465 15 TOTAL (Line 13 + Line 14) $ 90 000 $ 90 000 $ 90 000 $ 89 620 , $ 18 682 $ 378 302 INSTRUCTIONS 1. Determine the amount of principal and interest to be paid on all long-term debt. 2. On line 12 and 13 determine the amount to be amortized yearly and enter in the appropriate column. 3. Cross-foot all totals. The total amount of long-term debt entered on line 13, column "F" shall agree with the total amount of long-term debt entered on lire 41 of the balance sheet. J O N Operating Allowances Not Applicable (A) (B) (C) (D) B'alance Additions Deductions Balance Account Beginning During During at End Line Operating, Allowances Number of Year Year Year of Year zi Property Insurance Allowance 2410.0 $ $ $ $ 2 Injury and Damage Allowance 2420.0 3 Pension and Benefit Allowance 2430.0 4 Miscellaneous Operating Allowance 2440.0 a. b. C. d. 5 Total Miscellaneous Operating Allowance [line 4 a. to 4 d.] 6 Total Operating Allowance 2400.0 t $ INSTRUCTIONS 1. Enter above all information requested for Operating Allowances as entered on the accounts provided for in the UAS. 2. The total shown on line 6, column D, shall equal the amount entered on line 42 of the Balance Sheet. 3. If you have established one or more miscellaneous operating allowances list their titles on line 4 above, and briefly describe below their nature and purpose. + 21 x PART III Consolidated Financial Statements Instructions 1. Complete this section only if you have an equity interest of 20% or more in another company . Before preparing this section please read Section 599 .83 of the UAS . 2. The account balances and transaction totals included in Section II of this report shall be adjusted for inclusion in this Section only to the extent necessary to prepare consolidated financial statements and or to reflect investments using the equity method . 3 . Equity investments in another company shall be accounted for using (i) the cost method for investments of less than 20% and (ii) the equity method for investments of between 20% to 50% and (iii) the preparation of consolidated financial statements for investments of more than 50%. i a y 22 Consolidated Profit or Loss 1. Operating Revenues Total Cable Television " Revenue $ 1 034 713 t 2 . Other Operating Revenues [Itemize on Line 161 $ 145 535 3. Total Operating Revenues $ 1 180 248 4-. Operating Expenses 5 . Total Cable Television Expense $ 983 319 6 . Other Operating Expenses [Itemize on Line 161 , $ 90 921 7. Total Operating Expenses $ 1 074 240 8 . Total Operating Profit or Loss $ 106 008 9. Other Income $ 14 642 10. Other Expenses $ 71 019 Y' 11. Total Other Income or Expense $ 56 377 12. . Total Profit or Loss ', Before Income Taxes $ 49 631 13 . Total Income Taxes $ (516) 14. Extraordinary Income (Losses) 15 . Total Profit (Loss) $ 50 147 Instructions 16. Itemize, by major groups or categories , the amounts shown on line 2 and /or line 6 in the apace below. See Attachment 22 (Attachment) Line 16 Line 2: Other Operating Revenues Advertising Income $ 42 625 Real Estate Rental Income 68 020 , Microwave Fees 8 750 Other Non-Subscriber Revenues 26 140 $ 145 53 Line 6: Other Operating Expenses Real Estate Taxes - Real Estate Operations $ 22 180 Depreciation - Real Estate Operations 23 614 ' Maintenance and Cleaning - Real Estate Operations 14 161 Utilities - Real Estate Operations 11 049 Insurance - Real Estate Operations 8 335 Other Expense - Real Estate & Microwave Operations 11 582 4 • f S 90 921 Line 10: Other Expenses Interest S_ 71 019 Note: Eliminations on Consolidation Rent Paid by Ceracche Television Corporation to Ceracche & Co. , Inc. for shop, garage, parking, studio, warehouse and general office space (Lines 2 and 5) 39 615 Microwave Fees Paid by Ceracche Television Y Corporation to Ceracche & Co. , Inc. ' (Lines 2 and 5) 8 400 Interest Paid by Ceracche & Co. , Inc. and Westview Heights, Inc. to Ceracche Television Corporation ' (Lines 9 and 10) 3 013 Miscellaneous Office Charges Paid by Ceracche & Co. , Inc. to Ceracche Television Corporation ' (Lines 6 and 9) 720 # !i ii �I 5 23 . t Consolidated Balance Sheet Assets 1. Current Assets $ 534 857 2. Plant Assets $ 1 498 689 3. Other Assets $ 3 430 4. Investments $ 5. Total Assets $ 03 6 97A Liabilities & Equity 6. Current Liabilities $ 492 f601 7. Long-Term Debt $ 726 374 F1 `a 8. Other Liabilities $ - 9. Minority Interest in Subsidiaries $ _ 10. Total Liabilities $ 1 218 975 11, -Equity $ 818 001 t 12. Total Liabilities and Equity $ 2 036 976 INSTRUCTIONS 1. The accounts shown in Section 599.32 of the UAS should be used as .a general guide in preparing this statement. ` 2. The amounts shown shall be net of any allowance. 3 . The amount shown on line 5 shall equal the amount shown on line 12. f a Z4 CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF SOURCE AND APPLICATION OF FUNDS LINE Source of Funds l,Profit From Operations, , , , , , , , , , $' 50 147 2,Add,: ,Deprpci,atf oa , , , , , , , , $ 151 928 3 ,Increase in Lonjg-term Debt $ 134 616 . . . Debt . . . . . . . . 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 8. o . . . . . . . $ 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 12. Total Available Funds $ 336 891 Application of Funds 13 .IngreVLse i}1 rlant, and Equipment, $ 265 219 h O Increase in ter Assets $ 1 941 14. . . . . . . . 15 .Net, Ipc;ease,in Working Capital, $ 69 /3L 16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ p 18 . . . . . . . . . . $ 19. . . . . . . . . . $ 20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 2 $ 22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 23 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 24. Total Applied Funds $ 336 891 Increase/Decrease in Working Capital Components 25 . Increase in Cash $ 79 121 . . . . . . . . . . . 26 . Ingreasg to Regeivablgs . . . . . . . . . . . $ 13 9279- 27. 279-27, Ingrease in fnyentory , $ 72 294 28, Degrease to prepaid,Expenses , $ 30 997 29. Ingrease to loans Payable $ 30. Increase in Advance. Payments .& pepos,itg , . , . $ (18 927) 31. Ingrease in Accounts Payable . $ (42 998) 32o Degrease in Ta*es. acid AccxVed Expenses, , , , , $ 24 344 33. Degrease in Other Current Liabilities $ 4 047 34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 35. . . . . . . .. . . . . _$ 36 . . . . . . . . . . 0 $ 37. Total Increase/Decrease in Working Capital $ 69 731 0 25 STATEMENT OF SOURCE. AND APPLICATION OF FUNDS INSTRUCTIONS ' J; 1. Total available funds , line 12, must equal total applied funds , line 24. I . j .2. The following will be individually listed on the schedule.: a. Net change in working capital. b. Profit or loss arising before extraordinary items., -c. - Extraordinary gains or losses .- ` d. Working capital provided by depreciation and amortization. e. The proceeds of stock issuances . f. The proceeds of new debt incurred. g. Significant increments of reduced debt. h. Acquisition of interest in parent, affiliated or other companies . i. All significant capital applications including dividends and other payouts and acquisition of treasury stock. ' J . - All other items of significance not listed above shall be grouped or otherwise consolidated where possible . 3. Indicate assets and liabilities which account for net change working ca ' i g p�' tal 4. If space provided is insufficient, please attach additional VI sheets . 4 74 i � i � a I + I i R esidential Commercial Basic Service Additional Outlets Basic Service Additional Outlets Community Old New Old N ew Old New Old New L. Schuyler(T)1/ Marcy(T) $6. 00 $1. 50 $6. 00. $3. 00 Z. Amsterdam(C)2/ Hagaman(V) Fort Johnson(V) $5. 00 6. 00 $1.00 1. 25 1/3 3. Monticello(V) 6. 00 2. 50 1. Paris(T) Whitesboro(V) 5. 00 6. 00 1. 00 1. 50 $5. 00 6. 00 $2. 00 3. 00 5. Fayetteville(V)2/ DeWitt(T) Manlius(T) 5. 00 6. 00 1. 00 2. 00 S. Oswego(C)2/ 5. 00 6.00 1. 00 1. 25 1/ 2/ 7. Hammondsport(V) 5. 00 S. New Hartford(T) 5. 00 6. 00 1. 00 1. 50 5. 00 6. 00 2. 00 3. 00 9. Fallsburg(T)2/ 3. 50 or 5. 00 6. 00 1. 00 1. 50 0. Kirkland(T) Whitestone(T) 5.00 6.00 1. 00 1. 50 5.00 6. 00 2.00 3. 00 1. Islip(T)2/ 5. 00 6. 00 1. 00 No Change I / The order did not give the old rates. 2/ The order did not specifically state whether rates are commercial and/or residential. X 3/ The rate for two, three or four television sets is $8. 50 per month. z 0 R esidential Commercial Basic Service Additional Outlets Basic Service Additional Outlets Community Old New Old New Old New Old N ew 2. Deerfield(T) N.Y. Mills(V) New Hartford(V) Yorkville(V) $5. 00 $6. 00 $1. 00 $1. 50 $5. 00 $6. 00 $2.00 $3. 00 2/ 3. Kirkwood(T)- 4. 75 5. 75 Not Given 4. Salamanca(T, C)2/ Great Valle (T) 6. 50 7.00 Not Given 5. N.Y. City-/ 5. 00 7. 00 1. 00 2. 00 6. Watertown(C)-/ 5. 00 5. 75 . 2. 00 1. 15 1 /1/75 6. 25 1. 25 2/ 7. Seneca Falls(T) 5. 00 5. 95 No Change 8. Utica(C) 5. 00 6. 00 Not Given 1. 50 5. 00 6. 00 Not Given 3000 9. Brookhaven(T)2/ 5. 00 6.00 1. 00 No Chane 0. Unadilla(T, V)2/ Sidney(T, V) 4. 50 5. 50 . 50 1. 00 1. Massena(T, V)-/ Louisville(T) Potsdam(T, V) Canton(T, V) Norfolk(T) Norwood(V) 4. 95 5. 50 Not Given 1/ The order did not give the old rates. 2/ The order did not specifically state whether rates are commercial and/or residential. R esidential Commercial Basic Service Additional Outlets Basic Service Additional Outlzts Community Old N ew Old New Old New Old N ew 2. Walden(V) Montgomery(V,T) Crawford(T) Shawan nk(T) $5.00 $5. 95 Not Given $5. 00 $5. 95 Not Given 2 3. Seneca Falls(V) Waterloo(T, V) 5.00 5. 95 Not Given 1 4. Stanford(V)— Roxbury(T) Prattsville(T) Windham(T) 5.00 $1.00 7.00 $1. 25 5. Champion(T)2/ — Wilna(T) Deferiet(V) Herrings(V) 4. 95 5. 95 Not Given 1/ The order did not give the old rates. 2/ The order did not specifically state whether rates are commercial and/or residential. s CERACCHE T V Capital Expenditures Rate Increase 1974-75 1975-76 1976-77 Capital expenditures Trucks (2) 8 000 (1)15 000 (2) 8 000 (2) 8 000 Studio equipment 25 000 25 000 25 000 Tape machines Remote units Color cameras Lighting House drops replacement 1 600/year @ $15 24 000 24 000 24 000 Replace cable plant Cable 17 miles @ $ 4 000 68 000 68 000 68 000 Replace amplifiers 500 over 3 year period 168/year @ $ 350 58 000 58 000 58 000 183 000 198 000 183 000 Extensions 12 miles per year @ $ 4 000 48 000 48 000 48 000 231 000 246 000 23i 000 r CERACCHE T V Worksheet - 3 Year Projections With Rate Increase 1/1/75 1974-75 1975-76 1976-77 Income 1974-75 Subscribers 4/30/74 15 201 Dollar increase-1/1-4/30/75 $1.00/mo, x 4 mo. 60 800 Subscribers added-800 for 12 mo. -530 for 8 mo. $1.00/mo x 530 x 4 mo. at 1/1/75 2 100 1.00/mo x 130 x 4 mo. 1/1-4/30 500 Without increase 849 300 912 700 All other 73440+13 126 000 1 038 700 1975-76 4/30/75 15 201 + 800 16 000 Dollar increase @ 12/yr 192 000 Additions for year 400 $12 x 200 2 400 194 400 Without increase total 999 900 1 194 300 1976-77 4/30/76 16 000 + 400 16 400 Dollar increase @ 12 196 800 Additions for year 400 2 400 199 200 Without increase 1 024 500 1 223 700 Expenses before taxes and profit-sharing 962 500 1 079 200 1 173 200 Net before taxes and profit-sharing 76 200 115 100 50 500 Profit-sharing (5 000) (22 000) - Corporation taxes less invest. credit (17 500) (28 200) (7 700) Net retained35 700 64 900 42 800 CERACCHE T V Worksheet - 3 Year Projections Without Rate Increase 1974-75 1975-76 1976-77 Income Monthly cable fees 849 300 861 900 874 500 Installation, transfers 1973-74 71 064 73 000 75 000 77 000 922 300 936 900 951 500 Advertising 40 000 50 000 60 000 All Other 13 000 13 000 13 000 975 300 999 900 1 024 500 Expenses Salaries & wages 314 400 377 200 414 900 Depreciation 118 000 128 000 138 000 Bad debts - 27 800 28 700 29 600 Cable maint. contracted 33 000 36 300 39 900 FCC fee - - - NYS Cable Comm. 9 600 9 900 10 100 Interest 26 000 27 000 28 000 Legal & accounting 30 000 33 000 36 000 Microwave service 31 500 31 500 31 500 PR taxes & insurance 39 800 43 800 48 200 Pole rental 38 600 40 600 42 600 Taxes - real estate 28 700 31 700 34 700 Taxes - NYS franchise 7 100 7 500 7 700 Taxes - local franchise 9 500 10 500 11 500 Taxes - sales & use 12 000 13 000 14 000 Telephone 10 500 12 000 13 500 Utilities 11 000 12 000 13 000 All other 215 000 236 500 260 000 962 500 1 079 200 1 173 200 P/S plan - - - Federal income tax - - 962 500 1 079 200 1 173 200 Net 12 800 X79 s3Q0) 48 70Q) CERACCHE T V H B 0 Operations Rate Increase 4/30/74 4/30/75 4/30/76 4/30/77 Income 20 827 47 000 60 000 76 000 Expenses Salaries & commissions 7 824 7 800 8 600 9 500 Loss on convertors - 3 000 3 800 4 800 Advertising . 5 951 3 600 4 000 4 400 Computer services (est.) 2 700 6 800 9 000 10 800 Depreciation 4 347 13 300 17 500 21 000 Office expense 4 581 5 000 5 000 5 000 Other 2 693 28 096 39 500 47 900 55 500 Net income (loss) L] 269) 7 500 12 MO 20 500 CERACCHE T V Average Capital Rate Increase Without With increase increase Capital Capital 4/30/74 694 190 694 190 Add: Net income 1974-75 12 800 53 700 4/30/75 706 990 747 890 Net income 1975-76 (79 300) 64 900 4/30/76 627 690 812 790 Net income 1976-77 (148 700) 42 800 4/30/77 478 990 855 590 Average Year ended 4/30/75 700 600 721 000 4/30/76 667 300 780 300 4/30/77 553 300 834 200 Net income (loss) as % of average capital 4/30/75 1.8% 7.4% 4/30/76 (11.9) 8.3 4/30/77 (26.9) 5.1 EHIVED cn ,10V 30 1977 `a a City E'iark's Office IiHACA, N. Y. 629 Snyder Hill Road Ithaca, New York November 28, 1977 Mr. J. Rundle, City Clerk City Hall 108 E. Green Street Ithaca, New York Dear Mr. Rundle; I understand that you handle complaints about the Ceracche Television company, and I would like to tell you about the problems that I have been having with them. I have been a Ceracche customer since September, 1976, and when I was about to move to my present address I called Ceracche to arrange for a cable here. I was told that the installation cost would be about #12.00, and that the cable would be connected on Sept. 99 1977. The cable was not connected on that day, which was a Friday, nor was it ready on the following Monday or Tuesday. After several phone calls to Ceracche, they finally showed up on Wednesday, Sept. 14. These delays were inconvenient, but the real causes of my complaint came after the cable was installed. When I received my first bill from Ceracche it listed an installation charge of $25.00 -- about twice the figure that had been quoted to me originally. I wrote to the company on Oct. 119 complaining about the service and the Installation charge. I am writing to you now because Ceracche has ignored my letter and simply sent me another bill. They threaten to cancel my service if I don't pay their charges by Dec. 10, The Ceracche company has given me poor service and misleading price information, and has failed to respond to my written complaint. I think that these poor business practices should be brought to the attention of the City of Ithaca, and I hope that this will lead to better cable service in our area. Yours truly, _ 1 Eric W� J nson December 1, 1977 Mr. Dana Moth, Chairman Ithaca Television Cable Commission 564 Horton Road Newfield, Now York 14867 Dear Mr. Ulloth: Attached please find a complaint from Mr. Eric W. Johnson that I an forwarding to your committee for their consideration. Thank you very kindly. Sincerely, Joseph A. Rundle City Clerk JAR:hh Encl. (1) cc: Mr. Eric W. Johnson 629 Snyder Hill Road Ithaca, New York 14850