Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-48 - Rejecting Transfer of Cable Television FranchiseRESOLUTION NO. 2005- 48 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO THE CITY MANAGER TO REJECT ONE OR MORE FCC FORMS 394 RELATING TO THE TRANSFER OF THE CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE, AND /OR CONTROL THEREOF, TO AN ENTITY CONTROLLED BY TIME WARNER CABLE OR COMCAST CORPORATION WHEREAS, the City of Newport Beach (the "City ") has received one or more FCC Forms 394 (collectively, the "Application ") requesting consent of the City Council to the assignment of the Cable Television Franchise granted to Adelphia Communications (the "Franchisee "), or control thereof, to an entity ultimately controlled by Time Warner Cable or Comcast Corporation; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City has determined that the public interest is served by delegating to the City Manager, or a City staff member individual designated by the City Manager in writing and with the consultation of the Telecommunications Committee, the authority to deny and reject some or all of the Application without prejudice for certain reasons and upon certain grounds. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1: The City Manager, or a City staff member so designated by the City Manager, is hereby delegated the authority to reject the Application, or any portion thereof, without prejudice for one or more of the following reasons: Failure to timely provide information required by the terms of the Franchise Agreement or applicable state or local law; 2. Failure to timely provide any other requested additional information necessary to analyze the proposed transfer for compliance with or the transferee's ability to comply with the City's Franchise Agreement and Cable Ordinance; 3. Failure on the part of the Applicant to timely cooperate with Staff, its attorneys and consultants, in performing due diligence relating to the Application, the legal, technical, and financial qualifications of the proposed Transferee and /or the impact of the transaction upon cable television rates and /or services; 4. Failure to timely cure any outstanding breach of franchise prior to or as an express condition of approval of the transaction in a manner acceptable to the City Manager; 5. Failure to timely execute and deliver a Transfer Agreement acceptable as to form and substance by the City Attorney; 6. Failure to demonstrate the legal, technical and financial qualifications of the Transferee; 7. Failure to provide a written financial guarantee, acceptable as to form and substance by the City Manager, of the legal entity(s) for which financial disclosure was provided in the Application of and /or additional filings; and 8. Filing FCC Forms 394 providing for potentially different Transferees. If the City Manager, or his or her staff designee, determines that a rejection of all or parts of the Application is in the best interest of the city's subscribers, the City Manager shall present findings to the Telecommunications Committee and seek the Committee's advice in this regard. Section 2. The decision of the City Manager, pursuant to the authority delegated and provided by this Resolution, shall be made in writing and shall be deemed, without further action of the City Council, to constitute an act of the Franchising Authority within the meaning of 47 C.F.R. § 76.502 and a "final decision" of the City Council within the meaning of §§ 617(e) of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, Pub. L.No. 103 -385, 106 Stat. 1477 (1992). Section 3. Any denial, disapproval, or rejection issued pursuant to the authority of this Resolution shall be deemed "without prejudice" to the ability of the Applicant to file another FCC Form 394 relating to the same or a different transaction. However, nothing herein shall limit the authority of the City Council, the City Manager, or the City staff member so designated by the City Manager, to reject any subsequent FCC Form 394 based upon the same grounds set forth in the written notice of denial or such other grounds as might exist in relation to said future FCC Form 394. PASSED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach at a regular meeting held on the 13th day of September, 2005. ATTEST: pO,trlWZi2ML ���, , / City Clerk Ma o STATE OF CALIFORNIA } COUNTY OF ORANGE } ss. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH I I, LaVonne M. Harkless, City Clerk of the City of Newport Beach, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council is seven; that the foregoing resolution, being Resolution No. 2005 -48 was duly and regularly introduced before and adopted by the City Council of said City at a regular meeting of said Council, duly and regularly held on the 13th day of September 2005, and that the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote, to wi t: Ayes: Selich, Rosansky, Webb, Ridgeway, Nichols, Mayor Heffernan Noes: None Absent: Daigle Abstain: None IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the official seal of said City this 14th day of September 2005. (Seal) City Clerk Newport Beach, California