10 FCC Red No. 13 Federal Communications Commission Record DA 95-1235 TCI Cablevision of San Jose, CA Before the Redwood City, CA, et al. DA 95-656 Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 TCI Cablevision of Northwestern Ohio, Inc. Archbold, OH, et al. DA 95-657 In the Matter of TCI Cablevision of Merced County Petitions for Stay of Action Merced, CA DA 95-715 Pending Resolution of TCI of Central Florida Applications for Review or Altamonte Sp, FL, et al. DA 95-815 Petitions for Reconsideration TCI of South Dade Bresnan Communications Kendall, FL DA 95-818 Sault Ste. Marie, MIDA 95-534 TCI Cablevision of California. Inc. Cablevision/V Cable Redlands, CA, et al. DA 95-828 Brook Park, OH et al. DA 95-487, DA 95-485, DA 95-484, DA 95-501. DA95-486 Time Warner Champaign-Urbana. IL DA 95-290 Comcast Queens, NY DA 95-429 Baltimore, MD DA 94-1153 Tallahassee, FL DA 94-1480 Times Mirror Orange County, CA DA 94-1335 Cox Cable Hampton Rds., VA DA 94-1288 United Cable TV of East San Fernando Ocala, FL DA 95-661 Los Angeles, CA DA 94-1286 Roanoke, VA DA 95-678 University City, FL DA 95- 696 ORDER Harron Communications Rockland, MA DA 95-558 Adopted: June 5,1995; Released: June 15,1995 Harrison, MI et al. DA 95-546 By the Chief, Cable Services Bureau: Marcy, NY et a/. DA 95-476 New Hartford, NY DA 95-562 1. Each of the parties noted above ("Operator" or, to E. Whiteland, PA DA 95-528 gether, "Operators") has filed with this Bureau a motion, petition, or request for stay of the Bureau©s action in Kansas City Cable Partners ordering refunds, modification of FCC Form 1200, and d/b/a American Cablevision reduction in current rates, pursuant to a finding by the Kansas City, MO DA 95-284 Bureau that the Operator was charging a price for cable services programming (CPS) that was in excess of its maxi mum permitted rate, for the review period of September 1, King Cable 1993 to May 14, 1994. Attachment A shows each party, the Ellensburg, WA DA 95-341 citation to the relevant Bureau order, and the actual and maximum permitted rates for each during the period in TCI Cablevision of Greater Michigan, Inc. question. Vergennes, MI DA 94-1632 2. On two recent occasions, under similar circumstances, Muskegon, MI, et al. DA 95-271 this Bureau has granted an emergency request for stay of Mackinaw, MI, et al. DA 95-316 action.1 In each case, there was no opposition to the re quest. In each, we found that the Operator could suffer Fremont, MI, et al. DA 95-318 irreparable harm if it were required to comply with the Petoskey, MI, et al. DA 95-814 requirements of the Bureau©s refund order during the pen South Haven, MI, et al. DA 95-856 dency of its petition for reconsideration or application for review, since it appears that expenditures made in such TCI Cablevision of West Michigan, Inc. compliance could be unrecoverable. We also noted that Wyoming, MI, et al. DA 95-819 any refunds and adjustments would be due from the release 1 Newhouse Broadcasting Corp., Order, DA 95-621 (Cab. Serv. Bur., released March 28, 1995); Paragon Cable Manhattan, Or der, DA 95-816 (Cab. Serv. Bur., released April 12, 1995). 6567 DA 95-1235 Federal Communications Commission Record 10 FCC Red No. 13 date of the refund order, regardless of any stay of effective Cablevision DA 95-487 4/14/95 City of ness, and would include interest amounts, so that no party IV Cable Cleveland would be harmed by such a stay. Because the equities Cleveland Heights justify granting a stay of the order©s refund and rate reduc Heights, OH 5/1/95 tion provisions, and there is no harm to subscribers or to Cablevision/ DA 95-484 4/14/95 any other party from such a stay, we found we did not V Cable need to reach the question of the likelihood of the oper Euclid, OH ator©s success on the merits of the issues it raises on reconsideration or application for review. Cablevision/ DA 95-501 4/14/95 3. We find that each of the requests before us is substan V Cable tially similar to the requests from Paragon Manhattan and Willowick, OH Newhouse Broadcasting, which we granted. Although in Comcast DA 94- 1153 12/23/94 two cases here, oppositions to the requests have been filed. Baltimore, MD we find that these oppositions are not persuasive. 2 We accordingly grant the above-noted requests for stay of ac Comcast DA 94- 1480 1/31/95 tion pending resolution of Operators© petitions for reconsi TaUahassee, FL deration or application for review. Cox Cable DA 94- 1288 1/17/95 4. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections Hampton Rds., 0.321 and 1.43 of the Commission©s rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ VA 0.321, 1.43, that the requests for stay of action pending resolution of petitions for reconsideration or applications Cox Cable DA 95-661 5/15/95 for review filed by ARE GRANTED. Ocala, FL FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Cox Cable DA 95-678 5/15/95 Roanoke, VA Cox Cable DA 95-696 5/15/95 University City, FL Meredith J. Jones Harron DA 95-558 4/24/95 Chief, Cable Services Bureau Communicatio ns Rockland. MA Attachment A - Harron DA 95-546 4/24/95 Richmond, Request for Refund Order date filed opposition Communi Memphis, Stay Filed by filed by cations Casco Twp. Harrison, 5/1/95 Bresnan DA 95-534 4/19/95 Ml et al. Communicatio- ns3 Harron DA 95-476 4/18/95 Sault Ste. Communicatio Marie, MI ns " Marcy, NY Cablevision/ DA 95-485 4/14/95 et al. V Cable4 Bedford Harron DA 95-562 4/24/95 Heights, OH Communicatio ns Cablevision/ DA 95-486 4/14/95 New Hartford, V Cable NY Brook Park, OH et al. Harron DA 95-528 4/19/95 Communicatio ns E. Whiteland, PA 2 The City of Cleveland Heights opposes Cablevision©s stay was closed on April 21, and filings due that day were accepted request in that community, arguing on the merits that the on April 24. As noted above, the Cities© other arguments are not Bureau©s order is correct. The Cities of Richmond and Mem determinative here. phis and Casco Township ("the Cities") oppose Harron©s Michi 3 Bresnan has filed its modified FCC Form 1200, with no rate gan request for stay, arguing that it was filed more than 30 days change, and requests a stay of our requirement that it develop after the release date of the Bureau©s order, and that Harron has and file a refund plan. failed to show that it is likely to prevail on the merits or that 4 Bedford Heights has two CUID areas, and two relevant the economic harm of paying refunds would be irreparable. We periods of time. Each of the Cablevision/V Cable orders is note that Harron©s pleading was timely filed, as the Commission similarly structured. 6568 to FCC Red NO. 13 Federal Communications Commission Record DA 95-1235 Kansas City DA 95-284 3/27/95 Cable Partners American Cablevision Kansas City, MO King Cable DA 95-341 3/24/95 Ellensburg, WA Time Warner DA 95-290 3/27/95 Champaign- Urbana, IL Time Warner DA 95-429 4/6/95 Queens, NY Times Mirror DA 94-1335 12/29/94 Orange County, CA TCI Cablevision of Greater Michigan, Inc. Vergennes, MI DA 94-1632 5/24/95 Muskegon, DA 95-271 5/24/95 MI, et al. Mackinaw, DA 95-316 5/24/95 MI. et al. Fremont, DA 95-318 5/24/95 MI, et al. Petoskey, DA 95-814 5/24/95 MI, et al. South Haven, DA 95-856 5/24/95 MI, et al. TCI Cablevision of West Michigan, Inc. Wyoming, DA 95-819 5/24/95 MI, et al. TCI Cablevision of San Jose, CA Redwood City, DA 95-656 5/24/95 CA, et al. TCI Cablevision of Northwestern Ohio, Inc. Archbold, DA 95-657 5/24/95 OH, et al. TCI Cablevision of Merced County Merced, CA DA 95-715 5/24/95 TCI of Central Florida Altamonte DA 95-815 5/24/95 Sp, FL, et al. TCI of South Dade Kendall, FL DA 95-818 5/24/95 TCI Cablevision of California, Inc. Redlands, DA 95-828 5/24/95 CA, et al. United Cable TV of East San Fernando Los DA 94-1286 5/24/95 Angeles, CA 6569.