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