03/08/1982 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e of rate adjustments and performance reviews. The issue at the time of rate review will be whether Teleprompter is performing the franchise. One of the elements of Teleprompter's performance will be whether it is providing program- ming, channels, and technology comparable with what is being offered in other communities similarly situated. The other criteria include the introduction of new technology, technical adequacies of the system, etc. Mr. Martin said the commission at any time can invoke franchise review and is not required to do it only every three years. He believes the commission needs permanent staff to continually monitor Teleprompter's performance. The important decision at the time of rate review concerning what the rate of return will be has been left with the commission. The commission can look at the rate of return of other companies and, using the calculation agreed to in the franchise amendments, can determine what Teleprompter's rate of return ought to be when compared to other operations and when compared to Teleprompter's performance. The rate of return can be calculated either on the assets or equity and Mr. Martin said both methods can be manipulated. The commission must be sure that when they compare this operation with similar operations they are comparing apples with apples. Mr. Martin said that it was an accounting problem and not a policy problem. Mr. Obie said that assets are more stable than equity. e Mr. Martin said that on page 14, the ordinance states that the requirement for renewal at the end of 15 years will be based on whether Teleprompter has imple- mented the programs and policies as well as the franchise. However, if Tele- prompter is not performing, the company should hear about it long before the fifteenth year. This particular system of evaluation of performance as written into the franchise three years ago places a responsibility upon the commission to be continually evaluating Teleprompter. Ms. Miller felt it was reasonable to expect the franchise itself (user fees) to pay for the staff to monitor it, and not the general fund. Ms. Smith noted that the increased responsibility given to the commission would indicate adequate staff was important. Mr. Martin said that currently three percent goes into the general fund as the fee for using the right-of-way. The Federal government has set up a system where if the jurisdictions go beyond the three percent, then all of the revenue must be dedicated for management of the franchise not just in excess of the three percent. Mr. Martin indicated that the commission did not wish to put the jurisdictions in that position by increasing the franchise fee to five percent because it would mean the loss of general fund revenues. Mr. Martin said that the remaining changes in the ordinance relate to the access center and define the Federal regulations which basically restrain how access channels may be used. Ms. Miller questioned why reference to "age of the franchise" was included in the agreement. Mr. Martin said it was included because the ongoing relationship between the parties in a different community may affect what is happening in that community, positive or negative. How long a company has been in a com- munity would affect the rate of return~ for example. Mr. Lindberg referred to the listed public access costs which figured out to $40 an hour for production costs. He wondered if there were figures available for e MINUTES--Eugene City Council Work Session March 8, 1982 Page 4