Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 4.05 DIVCA and Comm Access Preserv Act~~~~ OF Dp~~ 19~ ~ ~~~ `82 ~~~~~~~ STAFFREPORT CITY CLERK ~c~~L,~~l DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL File # 00~~-00 DATE: July 20, 2010 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: - Joni Pattillo, City Manager SUBJE : Report on the Digital Infrastructure and Video Competition Act (DIVCA) and Support for the Community Access Preservation Act (HR 3745) Prepared By: Roger Bradley, Senior Administrative Analyst EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City Council will receive a report on the Digital Infrastructure and Video Competition Act of 2006 (DIVCA) and its impact on local access programming within the City of Dublin. In addition, the City Council will be informed about federal legislation (HR 3745 - The Community Access Preservation Act) being considered that will affect the provision of local cable television programming, and consider adopting a Resolution is support of this legislation. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council receive the report and adopt the Resolution supporting HR 3745, the Community Access Preservation Act. Submitte By Sr. Administra ive Analyst Assistant City Manager Page 1 of 5 ITEM NO. '~ DESCRIPTION: Local entities within the State of California have traditionally had the authority to regulate, in accordance with federal, state and local law, certain aspects of the provision of video service, including the authority to award franchises. In 2006, the California State Legislature adopted the Digital Infrastructure and Video Competition Act of 2006 ("DIVCA"), which became effective January 1, 2007. The purpose of DIVCA was to streamline the franchising process for video service providers and to provide for the convergence of technologies. For instance, telephone companies-such as AT&T- developed integrated products that use existing telephone networks to provide cable-like services, and cable companies-like Comcast-are using their networks to provide telephone services. This technology allows telephone, cellular phone, audio, Internet, and video services to be provided by one company. To facilitate the provision of such integrated services, the Legislature enacted DIVCA. DIVCA substantially changed California law by establishing a statewide franchising process for video service providers to be administered by the California Public Utilities Commission ("CPUC"). DIVCA established that the CPUC is the sole authority to award franchises for the provision of video services, which preempts local franchising authority. Further, DIVCA established limited authority for local entities to exercise control over State franchise holders. Consequently, the City is now prohibited by DIVCA from awarding new local franchises or regulating State franchise holders, except to the extent permitted by DIVCA, which amounts to monitoring and enforcing customer service standards. Presently, there are two State franchise holders operating within the City of Dublin: AT&T and Comcast. AT&T received a State franchise on March 30, 2007, and began offering its U-Verse service pursuant to that State franchise sometime after March 30, 2007. The City's incumbent cable provider, Comcast, which operated pursuant to a franchise agreement with the City for many years, received a State franchise on January 2, 2008; under DIVCA, Comcast was entitled to seek the State franchise beginning as of January 2, 2008 due to AT&T's entry into the video programming market in Dublin. Comcast's State franchise became effective in Dublin, and the franchise agreement between the City and Comcast was terminated when Comcast notified the City that it began providing video service in Dublin under the State franchise. The City received this notice from Comcast on January 14, 2008. While DIVCA constituted a sea change relative to local involvement in the regulation of video programming, it does contain a number of provisions designed to maintain operational and financial support for franchising agencies like the City of Dublin. Thus, the City will continue to receive equivalent franchise fees from State franchise holders as it received under the local agreement, which amounts to five percent of gross revenues received for services provided within the City of Dublin. The amount of franchise fees estimated for FY 2009-10 from these service providers is $615,000, and those funds are General Fund revenues. State franchise holders are also required to provide public, educational and governmental channel access and support. In addition, DIVCA contains provisions designed to ensure that neighborhoods are not discriminated against on the basis of household income. DIVCA's lmpact on Tri-Valley Community Television (TV30) As part of the now-expired franchise agreement with Comcast, the City of Dublin received, in addition to the franchise fee, a public, education, and governmental ("PEG") fee in the amount of $0.50 per Dublin subscriber. The revenues from that fee were passed on to N30, which used the revenues to fund capital and operating expenses incurred by the station in producing Page 2 of 5 locally-focused programming for the Tri-Valley communities of Dublin, Livermore, Pleasanton, and San Ramon. While DIVCA allowed Comcast to opt out of its agreement with the City, it did not allow Comcast to abrogate its responsibility to pay PEG fees. Specifically, DIVCA requires that incumbent cable operators that choose to opt out of a local agreement, as well as any subsequent providers that choose to provide service under a State franchise, to pay any and all PEG fees negotiated as part of the local franchise agreement until the expiration date of the local agreement. The City of Dublin's agreement with Comcast would have expired on June 1, 2011. Comcast and AT&T are required to pay the $0.50 per month per subscriber fee until this date. Thus, the City is passing on this per-subscriber fee (approximately $70,000 in FY 2010- 11) to TV30 to fund local cable operations, which include the airing of City Council meetings. For jurisdictions that did not have a PEG fee in place as part of a local franchise agreement, DIVCA allows a local jurisdiction to adopt a PEG fee to fund local access programming in an amount of one percent of gross revenues received by the cable operator. Additionally, this fee can be adopted by jurisdictions that had a fee in place but have passed the date when the local franchise agreement would have expired. Previously, the City Council adopted a one percent fee for use after June 1, 2011. As a result, PEG fees will continue to flow to TV30 after what would have been the expiration date of the local agreement originally negotiated with Comcast. It is important to note that a fee of one percent of gross revenues would increase the amount of funding available for pass through to TV30. Staff estimates that it would increase this revenue by approximately 50%. While this may be a favorable situation for TV 30 operations, there is a problem with the eligible use of funds under DIVCA. While the now-expired franchise agreement with Comcast was explicitly negotiated to allow PEG fees to be used for operating and capital expenses, PEG fees under DIVCA are only allowed to be used in accordance with the Federal Communications Commission's ("FCC") guidelines, which limits the use of PEG fees to only capital expenses. Approximately 75% of TV30's annual budget ($555,795) is funded by PEG fees received from the member agencies of Dublin, Livermore, Pleasanton, and San Ramon. As a result, TV30 will have to find a funding mechanism, other than PEG fees, for a significant majority of its budget after June 1, 2011. Prior to the local franchise agreement with Comcast, TV30 made annual requests to the Tri- Valley cities for general fund support. If the rules for PEG fee use are not adjusted prior to June 2011, the City Council can expect to receive a similar request as part of the Fiscaf Year 2011- 2012 budget cycle. Given the current economic times, the City Council may find itself in a difficult situation as it will be forced to weigh the importance of TV30's services against other General Fund services provided by the City. Currently, there is federal legislation being proposed, known as the Community Access Preservation Act of 2009 ("CAP", H.R. 3745), to change the FCC rule, allowing the use of PEG fees for operating expenses, which, if passed, would remove the need for a future general fund request from TV30. An additional difficulty with DIVCA has been experienced by subscribers of AT&T's U-Verse service. On January 27, 2009, AT&T began offering access to TV30 programming as part of its U-Verse service platform. In order to get access to TV30 programs on the U-Verse service, subscribers must navigate through a web application that is available on U-Verse channel 99. Viewers then have to select the City of Dublin - Tri-Valley Community Television link, after which they will be able to select the channel of preference or the Comcast equivalent of 28, 29, and 30. Unfortunately, as this is a web application service, viewers are unable to utilize DVR services to record TV30 programming. Questions have arisen about whether the provision of local access channels through a web application complies with State and federal laws and regulations. The CAP Act would clarify that such is not the case. Page 3 of 5 Community Access Preservation Act of 2009 The Community Access Preservation Act of 2009 (HR 3745) has been introduced in the United States House of Representatives, and if enacted, would provide for the carriage and display of PEG channels in a manner consistent with local or cable commercial channels. Current federal law and many states' laws do not mandate even the most basic requirements for PEG broadcasts, nor do they require dedicated funding for PEG programming beyond an "adequate assurance of financial support." The CAP Act seeks to close and remove many of the loopholes and obstacles that exist to preserve the future of access to PEG programming. Historically, funding for PEG broadcasts has been negotiated as part of local franchise agreements between cable companies and local franchise authorities as was accomplished with the now-expired local franchise agreement with Comcast. However, more than half of the states have enacted telecommunications laws that shift the franchising authority to the state level. As a result, due to a lack of adequate federal protection, these new statewide agreements create significant broadcast and funding obstacles for some PEG channels, and have created the problems mentioned above with DIVCA. Furthermore, the transition to digital television has allowed some franchised cable companies to carry PEG channels differently than commercial channels, whether broadcasting them in reduced resolution, displaying them in menu-only format, or simply moving them to a digital-only tier, rendering them inaccessible to the average cable customer. In the worst case, customers are now required to pay extra fees to access PEG channels, or operators refuse to broadcast closed captioning for PEG channels unless a special request is made. The end result is an undervalued broadcast that does not benefit the public as is the intention of PEG programming. Specifically, the CAP Act would address the immediate issues facing PEG channels by: • Allowing PEG fees to be used for any PEG-related purposes; • Requiring PEG channels to be carried in the same manner as local broadcast channels; • Requiring the FCC to study the effect state video franchise laws have had on PEG channels, and requiring operators to provide the greater of the support required under state laws, or the support historically provided for PEG; and • Making cable television-related laws and regulations applicable to all landline video providers. The important point to note is that the CAP Act does not assume a"one-size-fits-all" solution for the issue of PEG broadcasts. Rather, the decisions about PEG broadcasting is left to negotiations between franchising authorities and the local communities they serve. Letters urging support for the CAP Act were sent in October and November of 2009 and in March of 2010 to the Tri-Valley's Congressional Representatives by the Tri-Valley Mayors of Dublin, Danville, Livermore, Pleasanton, and San Ramon (Attachments 1-5). In addition, Staff is recommending that the City Council adopt a Resolution supporting the passage of the legislation (Attachment 6). NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH: None. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Letter of Support for CAP Act (November 2009) - Congressman Garamendi 2. Letter of Support for CAP Act (October 2009) - Congressman McNerney Page 4 of 5 3. Letter of Support for CAP Act (October 2009) - Congressman Stark 4. Letter of Support for CAP Act (March 2010) - Senator Boxer 5. Letter of Support for CAP Act (March 2010) - Senator Feinstein 6. Resolution supporting the Community Access Preservation Act. Page 5 of 5 1~~~~ ~~~ ~ November 18, 2009 The Honorable John Garamendi U.S. House of Representatives 2459 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Garamendi: We write to you today to express our ~ 2009 (CAP, H.R. 3745), as introduced (D-Wisc.). If enacted, this bill would pi and government (PEG) channels in a i channels. ' PEG stations and channels are locally' many states' laws do not mandate eve do they require dedicated funding for F financial support." Community Access Preservation Act of ~f Representatives by Rep. Tammy Baldwin ~arriage and display of public, educational, tent with local or cable commercial ~duced, and viewed. Current federal law and basic requirements for PEG broadcasts, nor mming beyond an "adequate assurance of Historically, funding for PEG broadcasts has been negotiated as part of local franchise agreements befinreen cable companies and local franchise authorities. However, twenty-three states have enacted recently new telecommunication laws that shift franchise authorities to the state level. As a resul#, due to a lack of adequate federal proteetion, these new,state-wide agreements create significant broadcast and funding obstacles far some PEG channels. Furthermore, the transition to digital television has allowed some franchised cable companies to carry PEG channels differently than commercial channels, whether broadcasting them in reduced resolution, displaying them in menu-only format, or simply moving them to a digital-only tier, rendering them inaccessible to analog cable customers. In the worst case, customers are now required to pay extra fees to access PEG channels, or operators refuse to broadcast closed captioning for PEG channels unless a special request is made. The end result is an undervalued broadcast that does not benefit the public. Specificaily, #he CAP Act would address the immediate issues facing PEG channels by: • Allowing PEG fees to be used for any PEG-related purposes; • Requiring PEG channels to be carried in the same manner as local broadcast channels; • Requiring the FCC to study the effect state video franchise laws have had on PEG channels, and requiring operators'to provide the greater'of the support required under ' st~te laws, or the support historically provided for PEG; and • Making cable television-related laws and regulations applicable to all landline video providers. The important point to note is that the CAP Act does not assume a"one-size-fits-all" solution for the issue of PEG broadcasts. Rather, the decisions about PEG broadcasting is left to negotiations befinreen franchising authorities and the local communities they serve. ~.-~m ~;S ~~~.~J- I C~ Attachment 1 ~ ~ ~~ We encourage you to examine the provisions of this bill and consider signing on as a co- sponsor. Preserving the arts, educational, and informational broadcasts provided by PEG broadcasts is important to our community and the residents we serve. We thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. Sincerely, ~~~~~~~ r~. ~~~~~ ~~~~~~. ~ttay~r, ~it~ ~f ~~~ F~atr~~r~ ~_~ ~~. .a.~~ _~... ~u ~~~ ~~~~~~~ ~~~~~. ~~ty ~~ ~~,~~,-~ ~,~~,~..,~-~. , ~st~r af Pl~~;~~n~~s~ ,~ ~1 ~,,~ ,,~ C~t~r~t~~ll t~arr~~n~ Pv1a~t~r, ~rty t~f ~.~+~~~`tt~r~ .~~"/~~ ~ October 26, 2009 The Honorable Jerry McNerney U.S. House of Representatives 312 Cannon House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman McNerney: We write to you today to express our su 2009 (CAP, H.R. 3745), as introduced ir (D-Wisc.). If enacted, this bill would pro and government (PEG) channels in a m channels. Community Access Preservation Act of ~f Representatives by Rep. Tammy Baldwin ~arriage and display of public, educational, tent with local or cable commercial PEG stations and channels are locall many states' laws do not mandate ev do they require dedicated funding for financial support." , and viewed. Current federal law and ~quirements for PEG broadcasts, nor beyond an "adequate assurance of Historically, fundir~g for PEG broadcasts has been negotiated as part of local franchise agreements be#ween cable companies and local franchise authorities. However, twenty-three states have enacted recently new telecommunication laws that shift franchise authorities to the state level. As a resu,lt, due`to a lack of adequate federal protection, these new state-wide agreements create significant broadcast and funding obstacles for some PEG channels. Furthermore, the transition to digital television has allowed some franchi~ed cable companies to carry PEG chanr~els differently than commercial channels, whetherbro~t~casting them in reduced resolution, displaying them in menu-only format, or simply moving them to a digital-only tier, rendering them inaccessible to analog cable customers. In the worst case, customers are now required to pay extra fees to access PEG channels, or operators refuse to broadcast closed captioning for PEG channels unless a special request is made. The end result is an undervalued broadcast that does not benefit the public. Specifieaity, the CAP Act would address the immediate issues facing PEG channels by: • Allowing PEG fees to be used for any PEG-related purposes; • Requiring PEG channels to be carried in the same manner as local broadcast channefs; • Requiring the FCC to study the effect state video franchise laws have had on PEG channels, and requiring operators to provide the greater'of the support. required under state laws, or the support historically provided for PEG; and •°Making cable television-related laws and regulations applicable to all landline video providers. The important point to note is that the CAP Act does not assume a"one-size-fits-all" solution for the issue of PEG broadcasts. Rather, the decisions about PEG broadcasting is left to negotiations befinreen franchising authorities and the local communities they serve. Attachment 2 ~ (G~ ~ We encourage you to examine the provisions of this bill and consider signing on as a co- sponsor. Preserving the arts, educational, and informational broadcasts provided by PEG broadcasts is important to our community and the residents we serve. We thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. Sincerely, ~ ~~~~ ~~- ` ~. ~br~rrs U1li~~c~r~ F,~t~}r~r. ~ity c~f Sa~ F~ar~~r~ ~~~.~ ~.. ~,.~ ~~ e,~-~= ~~,,~.~ ~ ~'ir~r Sbr~nt~ d~~~rt~~: ~ity ~af ~u~lin ~~~~~~~ m `, G~ c~f Pl~~~~ntt~n ~ ~ ~ ~N~. h~f~~~h~ll ~a~~t~~ t~~~~zr, ~~t~' t~f ~i+~~m't~~~ 5~ /L~ October 26, 2009 The Honorable Fortney "Pete" Stark U.S. House of Representatives 239 Cannon House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Stark: We write to you today to express our sup 2009 (CAP, H.R. 3745), as introduced in (D-Wisc.). If enacted, this bill would prov and government (PEG) channels in a ma channels. Community Access Preservation Act of ~f Representatives by Rep. Tammy Baldwin ~rriage and display of public, educational, t~nt with local or cable commercial PEG stations and channels are locally f~nded, produced, and viewed. Current federal law and many states' laws do not mandate even the most basic requirements for PEG broadcasts, nor do they require dedicated funding for PEG pragramming beyond an "adequate assurance of financial support.° Historically, funding for PEG broadcasts has been negotiated as part of local franchise agreements befinreen cable companies and local franchise authorities. However, twenty-three states have enacted recently new telecommunication laws that shift franchise authorities to the state level. As a result, due'#o a lack of adequate federal proteetion, thes~ new state-wide agreements create significant broadcast and funding obstacles for some PEG channels. Furthermore, the transition to digital television has allowed some franchised cable companies to carry PEG channels differently than commercial channels, whether broadcasting them in reduced resolution, displaying them in menu-only format, or simply moving them to a digital-only tier, rendering them inaccessible to analog cable customers. In the worst case, customers are now required to pay extra fees to access PEG channels, or operators refuse to broadcast closed captioning for PEG channels unless a special request is made. The end result is an undervalued broadcast that does not benefit the public. ~pecificaily, the CAP Act would address the immediate issues facing PEG channels by: • Allowing PE~ fees to be used for any PEG-related purposes; • Requiring PEG channels to be carried in the same manner as local broadcast channels; • Requiring the FCC to study the effect state video franchise laws have had on PEG channels, and requiring operators to provide the greater of the support required under state laws, or the support historically provided for PEG; and • Making cable television-related laws and regulations applicable to all landline video providers. The important point to note is that the CAP Act does not assume a"one-size-fits-all" solution for the issue of PEG broadcasts. Rather, the decisions about PEG broadcasting is left to negotiations befinreen franchising authorities and the local communities they serve. Attachment 3 ~ ~ l~~ ~ We encourage you to examine the provisions of this bill and consider signing on as a co- sponsor. Preserving the arts, educational, and informational broadcasts provided by PEG broadcasts is important to our community and the residents we serve. We thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. Sincerely, ~~~~~: F~. ~br~~ra t~als~ar~ t~t~}r~r:, +~ity ~f ~ar~ ~~r~~~ ~ ~ ~..~,~.. ..~.. ~ ; ~ ~.,,.,~ . T~m ~br~nt~ ~16~~r~~, ~it~r €~f ~?~E~I~rr ~~~~~+~N~ :, ~~t~r c~f Pl~~~~r~t~s~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~r~E~~II 1~~~~€~~ ~r'~~~+`t~r: ~~ty ~f ~i+re~~t~`rt~r~ ~~ ~~~ ~ March 31, 2010 The Honorable Barbara Boxer United States Senate 112 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 Dear Senator Boxer: We write to you today to express our support for preserving public, educational, and government (PEG) channels in our community. As you may know, Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D- Wisc.) introduced tlie Cc~mmunity Access Preservation Act of 2009 (CAP, H.R. 3745) in the House of Representatives last year. If enacted, this bill would provide for the carriage and display of PEG channels in a manner consistent with local ar cable commercial channels. Our purpose in writing you tod~y is to ask that you take steps to ensure thaf a com~anion bill is introduced in the Senate, and is acted upon promptly. PEG stations and channels are locally funded, produced, and viewed. Current federal law and many states' laws do not rnandate even the most basic requirements for PEG broadcasts, nor do they require dedicated funding for PEG programming beyond an "adequate assurance of financial support.° Historically, funding for PEG broadcasts has been negotiated as part of local franchise agreements befinreen cable companies and local franchise authorities. However, finrenty-three states have recently enacted new telecommunication laws that shift franchise authorities to the state level. As,a result, due to a lack of adequate federal protection, these new state-wide agreements create significant broadcast and funding obstacles for some PEG char~nels: Furtherrnare, the transition to digital television has allowed some franchised eable companies to carry PEG channefs differently than commercial channels, whether broadcastir~g them in reduced res~lution, displaying them in menu-only format, or simply moving them fo a digital-only tier, rendering them inaccessible to analog cable customers. In the worst case, customers are now requiretl fo pay extra fees to access PEG channels, or operators refuse to broadcast closed captioning for PEG channels unless a special request is made. The end result is an undervalued broadcast that does not benefit the public. Specifically, we are requesting legislation similar to the CAP Act that would address the immediate issues facing PEG channels by: • Allowing PEG fees to be used for any PEG-related purposes; • Requiring PEG channels to be carried in the same manner as local broadcast channels; • Requiring the FCC to study the effect state video franchise laws have had on PEG channels, and requiring operators to provide the greater of the support required under state laws, or the support historically provided for PEG; and • Making cable television-related laws and regulations applicable to all landline video providers. Attachment 4 ~~ 1~ ~ It is important that any PEG legislation not assume a"one-size-fits-all" solution for the issue of PEG broadcasts. Rather, the decisions about PEG broadcasting is left to negotiations between franchising authorities and the local communities they serve. We encourage you to examine the provisions of the CAP Act as introduced in the House and consider introducing a companion bill in the Senate. Preserving the arts, educational, and informational broadcasts provided by PEG broadcasts is important to our community and the residents we serve. We thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. Sincerely, ~ ~ ' ~ Tim Sbranti H. Abram Wilson Mayor, City af Dublin Mayor, City of San Ramon ~~ ~ ~ ,~ ~~ nnifer ayor, City of Pleasanton ~;~~ ~~,~ ~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~ .~ Marshall Kamena Mayor, City of Livermore ~~ ~~ March 31, 2010 The Honorable Dianne Feinstein United States Senate 331 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 Dear Senator Feinstein: We write to you today to express our support for preserving public, educational, and government (PEG) channels in our community. As you may know, Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D- Wisc.) introduced the Carnmunity Access Preservation Act of 2009 (CAP, H.R. 3745) in the House of Representatives last year. If enacted, this bill would provide for the carriage and display of PEG cF~anneks-- in a manner consistent with local or cable commercial channels. Our purpose in writing you tod~y is to ask that you take steps to ensure that a companion bill is introduced in the Senate, and is acted upon promptly. PEG stations and channels are locally funded, produced, and viewed. Current federal law and many states' laws do nat rriandate even the most basic requirements for PEG broadcasts, nor do they require dedicated funding for PEG programming beyond an "adequate assurance of financial support.° Historically, funding for PEG broadcasts has been negotiated as part of local franchise agreements befinreen cable companies and local franchise authorities. However, twenty-three states have recently enacted new telecommunication laws that shift franchise authorities to the state level. As a result, due to a lack of adequate federal protection, these new state-wide agreements cr~ate significant broadcast and funding obstacles for some PEG channels: Furthermore, th'e transition to digital television has allowed some franchised eable companies to carry PEG channefs differently than commercial channels, whether broadcasting them in reduced resolufion, displaying them irr menu-only format, or simply moving them #o a digital-only tier, rendering them inaccessible to analog cable customers. In the worst case, customers are now required'fo pay extra fees to access PEG channels, or operators refuse to broadcast closed captioning for PEG channels unless a special request is made. The end resulfis an undervalued broadcast that does not benefit the public. Specifically, we are requesting legislation similar to the CAP Act that would address the immediate issues facing PEG channels by: • Allowing PEG fees to be used for any PEG-related purposes; • Requiring PEG channels to be carried in the same manner as local broadcast channels; • Requiring the FCC to study the effect state video franchise laws have had on PEG channels, and requiring operators to provide the greater of the support required under state laws, or the support historically provided for PEG; and • Making cable television-related laws and regulations applicable to all landline video providers. Attachment 5 ~a~ ~'~ It is important that any PEG legislation not assume a"one-size-fits-all" solution for the issue of PEG broadcasts. Rather, the decisions about PEG broadcasting is left to negotiations between franchising authorities and the local communities they serve. We encourage you to examine the provisions of the CAP Act as introduced in the House and consider introducing a companion bill in the Senate. Preserving the arts, educational, and informational broadcasts provided by PEG broadcasts is important to our community and the residents we serve. We thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. Sincerely, ~ , ~ Tim Sbranti Mayor, City of Dublin ,~'~~ ' ~ ~ ~.~ i f' ~~! ~ ~ ~~,~.~ ~r __ .l nnif~r HQSt rrnan ayor, City of Pleasanton ~ j~ ~~ ~~,. g ~~,,.~i~ ~;~~~c. ~- Marshal( Kamena Mayor, City of ~ivermore ~, ~,`~ H. Abram Wilson Mayor, City o# San Ramon / ,~ ~ RESOLUTION NO. XX - 10 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN **~*~**~**~ SUPPORTING HR 3745, THE COMMUNITY ACCESS PRESERVATION ACT WHEREAS, public, educational and government (PEG) channels play a significant role in the City of Dublin; and WHEREAS, PEG channels are a unique and valuable resource for local information and discourse for Dublin residents; and WHEREAS, PEG channels televise local government meetings, including City Council and Dublin Unified School District Board Meetings, so that citizens are informed about the actions taken by local elected officials; and WHEREAS, PEG channels provide a window through which residents can view the diversity of cultures, recreational activities and artistic endeavors in their local community; and WHEREAS, PEG channels reflect the unique identity of the communities they serve; and WHEREAS, it is important to preserve PEG channels and funding for PEG channels, and to ensure that the channels continue to be available to the entire community to serve the residents of Dublin; and WHEREAS, HR 3745, the Community Access Preservation Act, addresses critical and immediate threats to PEG. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Dublin supports immediate passage of HR 3745. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Dublin calls on its Congressional delegation to take all possible actions in support of the passage of HR 3745, including but not limited to endorsing, co-sponsoring and voting for HR 3745, and to work for its rapid passage. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of July, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ATTACHMENT 6 /~ ~~~~ ~~ ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk