1983-06-08 PHr
A Public Hearing was held by the Town Board of the Town of
Wappinger on June 8, 1983, at the Town Hall, Mill Street, Village
of Wappingers Falls, Dutchess County, New York, on a Petition of
U. S. Cablevision Corporation for an Amendment to a Franchise to
Increase Rates of the CATV System Servicing the Town of Wappinger.
Supervisor Diehl opened the Hearing at 7:33 P.M.
Present:
Louis Diehl, Supervisor
Nicholas Johnson, Councilman
Gerard McCluskey, Councilman
Bernice Mills, Councilwoman
Frank Versace, Councilman
Elaine H. Snowden, Town Clerk
The Town Clerk offered for the record the Affidavits of Posting
and Publication duly signed and notarized. (These Affidavits are
attached hereto and made part thereof of the Minutes of this Hearing).
Mrs. Snowden also offered for the record the following letter from
Mr. and Mrs. John Villani, 7 Sherwood Heights, Town of Wappinger:
May 26, 1983
To: Town Board, Town of Wappinger
This letter is for recording our opposition to the request from
U. S. Cablevision for a rate increase.
1) Since U. S. Cablevision's inception we have lost
commercial channels 3, 6, 8 and 10. These channels have been
replaced with programming that allows U. S. Cablevision to sell
advertising and derive a substancial income. (Which I and my
wife feel is fair)
2) U. S. Cablevision has regularly been given rate increases
that far outpace inflation. (about 100%)
3) Picture quality on channels 5, 9, 11 and 13 are poor and
have not improved since U. S. Cablevision began.
4) Frequent outages are common, especially during normal
business hours.
5) U. S. Cablevision is making an exceptionally good return
on investment already.
I would appreciate your reading of this letter at the public hearing
so that it may be entered into the record.
s/ John S. Villani
Weslee Villani
Mr. Diehl then asked for any other letters or communications that
had been received from residents unable to attend the hearing.
Mrs. Mills had received a phone call from Mr. Louis DiCocco,
1 Dillon Court, Town of Wappinger, who expressed dissatisfaction
with the signal, it was not consistent; he also objected to the
program book the company was offering for a $1.00 fee ---feels they
should provide this information with the service as they have in
the past." Instead of concentrating on expansion, he contended
that the company should seek more ways to improve the present
service.
Mr. Diehl stated that he had been advised by the Attorney to the
Town that the Town Board could request a financial statement from
U. S. Cablevision and their satellite businesses; it appeared to
him that their financial status should be better than previously
due to advertising on Channel 10, Home Box and various other
services.
Mr. Diehl asked for comments from the public.
Gladys Ruit spoke on behalf of the Wildwood Manor Apartment Complex
and informed the Board that she had a call from Virginia Bennet,
Manager of the Apartments, complaining about the poor reception
and asked that the wiring be checked.
Howard Erichsen, General Manager of U. S. Cablevision Corporation
spoke first of the magazine that the company was offering for $1.00.
He explained that the HBO program listings would still be provided
by the company and this magazine was optional to the residents.
He was not knowledgeable of the contents of this new magazine.
Discussion followed on the confusion caused by this new publication
and,the present one now being received by those subscribing to
HBO and other services.
Mr. Erichsen told the Board that the company would be glad to
provide a financial statement to them in order to justify the
request for increased rates for the service. In response to the
complaint from Wildwood Manor, Mr. Erichsen said he would check
into the poor wiring but he believed that the wiring had been
done by the owners and it would be their responsibility if this
was true.
Mr. Erichsen then gave a history of the cable company in the Town
of Wappinger which started in 1966. He spoke of the added services
which have cost the company more money; he blamed inflation, parts,
materials, electricity, etc. He compared his telephone bill at
home with the cost of TV service and showed a chart of the rate
increases. He felt they were holding the line because of more
customers and other sources of revenue. He pointed out the hours
that consumers use TV as compared with the life of a daily news-
paper (approximately 20 minutes) and the fact that the paper went
up in price far more than the TV service; he pointed out that there
hasn't been an increase in five years. They were now requesting an
18.9% increase and another one in 1985 which would bring it up to
a total of 31.5% increase in five years. They expanded 6% in twelve
months and this expansion only provided 1/3 of the revenue they
would normally receive if they were providing service to populated
areas. He touched on the cost of extending the system which was
constantly going up and the fact that they have to provide for
increased revenue to offset this inflation and also provide funds
to upgrade the system. Commitments have been made to the Town and
in order to fulfill them, they have to have as reasonable rates as
possible. The proposed rate, he stated, was reasonable to the
subscriber and to the company.
Mr. McCluskey argued on the rate comparison made by Mr. Erichsen
with telephone rates. Each point raised by Mr. Erichsen was
challenged by Mr. McCluskey ---the signal for TV has to be provided
whether the customer uses it 10 minutes or six hours, it doemn't
cost the company more or less. The sparsely populated areas will
be built up eventually and the lines will already be there so the
company will reap a lot of -benefits from the growth of the area.
Mr. McCluskey pointed out that the extensions were promised by the
company during the negotiations for the franchise, now they want
more money to fulfill their commitments.
Mrs. Linda Pampalone, 53 Helen Drive was the next speaker and was
upset with this request for a rate increase because her service
was not acceptable at present. Any good rain storm will knock out
the television long before the electricity goes out and when you
call the company to determine if it is an individual problem or
an area problem, in most cases the information is not accurate.
Not enough lines available to handle incoming calls on complaints
or service. She also felt they should know more about the HBO
programs so she could determine if they were proper for her
children to view them.
Ellen Korz, Helen Drive, complained about the terrible service.
When she's stuck in the house in a rainstorm that's when the
cable goes off. She felt she was paying enough for the service
and couldn't see an increase.
Ed Skorynko, Dorett Drive, member of the Wappinger Cable Committee
added that the present rate structure should be reviewed. The
present proposal is the same as the previous one ---so much for one
set, extra for a second and other additional ones. Should the pay
services subsidize the basic services? There are over three hundred
homes not serviced ---does this increase include these homes.
He complained about reception on Channel 2 which he described as a
"real mess" and spoke of a recent survey done by the cable company
back in February or March which divulged that the number of signals
in the Town that were excellent was very small and the number that
were unacceptable or marginal was fairly large. If an increase
was considered, he continued, there must be an improvement of the
quality of the signal.
Mr. McCluskey reviewed the percentage of the proposed increase
and the number of customers and came up with a round figure of
$100,000.00 increase for the year then asked Mr. Erichsen what was
the customer getting for that increase.
Mrs. Mills questioned Mr. Erichsen on the quality of the service
and what they intended to do about it. On the subject of problems,
Mr. Erichsen noted that they had been using a company in California,
"Opinion Research", an independent research organization to determine
where the problems are. They conducted such a survey last year and
WO
he reported that 17% rated the service excellent, 55% rated it good,
10% rated it fair and 5% rated it poor.
Linda Pampalone commented that she was one of the customers questioned
in the survey and in many instances the answers to the specific questions
were not appropriate. She was told that was all they had when she
informed the interviewers of this fact.
Mr. Versace commented that all the complaints and answers that he
heard at the hearing were repeats of previous hearings and meetings.
Each time the representative of the cable company promised better
quality, they intended to improve the reception. The legality of
the franchise was questionable, he added, since an acceptable bond
has not yet been submitted to the Attorney. The questions and
complaints being heard at this hearing should have been aired at
the negotiations for the franchise and by this time should have
been taken care of. He did not feel that U. S. Cablevision has
ever fulfilled their obligation to the Town or to the residents
since they installed their lines in the Town.
Mr. Johnson had questions for Mr. Erichsen ----did the company profit
rate go up ---has the net rate gone up ---has the burden rate gone
up ---has the operation from the parent company gone up. These
items, he continued, should be included in the financial statement
submitted to the Town. He then asked how many additional subscribers
the company received during the same period of time that they put
in the six miles of line. The next item Mr. Johnson discussed was
the fact that Mr. Erichsen said the company needed a rate increase
for the line extension ---the Town Board was under the impression
that these extensions were part of the franchise agreement and a
commitment on the part of U. S. Cablevision ---now they tell us they
need additional money to continue. If that be the case, he added,
he would consider the franchise agreement null and void. In
conclusion he pointed out that the company has not honored the
agreement to keep the Board informed of their activities and when
the lines would be completed. He thought they would get an update
every month so they would be informed.
Charles Cortellino, Chairman of the Cable TV Committee arrived
and was asked if he any comments to add to the hearing. He spoke
of the poor signals and a financial statement from the company
which had already been discussed. He then mentioned that there
were 32 channels available but not to the Town of Wappinger; however
these channels were costing the cable company money and this fee
was being absorbed by the consumers ---he could care less whether
he had 32 channels but he objected to being charged for them even
if it was indirectly.
Mr. Diehl asked for further comments from the public.
No one had any comments to add either for or against the petition
from U. S. Cablevision Corp. for an increase in the rates.
The following letter was received after the public hearing and
submitted to the Town Board at their regular meeting of June 13,
1983. The Town Board directed that this letter be made part of
the record of the public hearing on the proposed increased rates
for cablevision.
Mark J. Liebermann
Hopewell Road Box 344
Hughsonville, New York 12537
Town of Wappinger
Mill Street
Wappingers Falls, New York
Gentleman:
Due to my work schedule t cannot attend the meeting on
June 8, 1983 when U. S. Cablevision is going to ask the Town
Board for an increase, however there are a few points the board
should get straight with U. S. Cablevision. In March of 1982
they stated that their "sports package" would include USA, ESPN,
and MSG. The charge was to be 6.00 per month. For three months
I paid the 6.00 and never received the MSG. The rate was then
reduced to 3.00 per month to compensate for the MSG. In my bill
of May 1983 I am again being charged 6.00 per month for the
"sports package" but still no other channel to replace MSG. I
have written and called U. S. Cablevision but as always just
get shuffled from person to person put on hold etc. There service
and attitude to it's subscribers stinks.
Also the sports that are televised from Madison Square Garden
via USA Network are all of a sudden being blacked out in our area.
A spokesman from Colony Comm. told me that they are only supposed
to be blacked out within 50 miles from NYC, the New York Metropolitan
Area. Why are we being considered this area by U. S. Cablevision.
Also our expanded channel reception is lousy, the USA, HBO,
constantly rolls and you can't adjust it, the same goes for the MTV.
We recently changed converters and told the repair man this. He
stated nothing could be done, it was in the lines. This is the
reason we have cable tv, to put up with interference, if I wanted
this I would install an antenna. We also were told in May 1983
that in June we would receive the Sports Channel, haven't seen it
yet has anyone else?
I suggest that before there is any increase granted to U. S.
Cablevision, they first get their act together.
Yours truly,
s/ Mark J. Liebermann
Mr. McCluskey moved to close the Public Hearing, seconded by Mrs.
Mills and unanimously carried.
The Public Hearing closed at 8:41 P.M.
�L a41,00kat„
Elaine H. Snowden
Town Clerk