That's what we're responsible for, our employees, and they are all members of the IBEW.
Well, see, I'm responsible to make sure these contracts get out of here the right way and make sure everybody's not like shucking and jiving, although which I don't think you're doing --
But I think what you need to understand is that you have Local 98 members that work for you and Local 98 members -- I'm still a member of Local 98 so I think I can still install cable. Why wouldn't you use Local 98 members to install the cable?
CCG does not install cable. 63 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847
And all those things I asked you for, you can give them to the chairwoman of the committee? Those questions like --
It would be very helpful if you could submit those questions to us in writing. It would help us to know exactly what you want to know.
Thank you. Thank you for your patience. No further questions, Madam Chairwoman. CHAIRWOMAN CLARK: Thank you. Are there other questions? Mr. Nutter?
Good afternoon. I may have missed at the start your respective responsibilities, so I'd like to go back to that part so I have a better understanding of who I'm 64 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 talking to.
Okay. I'm John Pitts, P-i-t-t-s, the vice president and general manager for the Philadelphia Cable System.
I'm Barbara Burns. I am vice president and general counsel for Greater Media, Inc., which is the parent company of Greater Philadelphia Cable.
I am Joe Neff, N-e-f-f, director of business operations here at the Philadelphia Cable office.
So can someone give me just a very brief explanation of your, I guess, your corporate arrangement, because you made mention of a parent company and then I guess it's the company that actually operates the franchise. 65 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 Someone just very briefly tell me a little bit about Greater Philadelphia Media.
Greater Media, Inc., is the parent company. It owns a number of businesses. Among them are the cable system in Philadelphia. We also operate four radio stations in Philadelphia, in addition, radio stations and cable systems in -- cable systems in Massachusetts, radio stations in Boston, Massachusetts and Detroit, Michigan, and also in Middlesex County, New Jersey. We also have a printing and publishing business in Middlesex and Monmouth County, New Jersey.
So your cable franchise areas are in Philadelphia and Massachusetts, is that correct?
Radio in Detroit, Massachusetts, Middlesex, which is somewhere in New Jersey, and four radio stations here in Philadelphia?
That's correct. 66 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847
And Greater Media is the parent company of Greater Media Cable?
And Mr. Pitts, you are the day-to-day general manager of the cable franchise here in Philadelphia?
And then I guess you have a number of either other vice presidents or some other level of management that do other day-to-day things, some of whom may or may not have been able to more directly answer some of the questions from Councilman Mariano.
Now, what's the expiration date of the current franchise?
And why is it you're attempting to renew at this point in time?
Well, we are in the early stages of our upgrade, and we wanted to get this process out of the way and be able to fully focus on doing the things that we're committing to in the proposal. 67 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847
And you wanted to know that you had another 15, 16, years to do it? 4
What's the 6 difference in your perspective between this proposed 7 agreement and the current agreement that you're 8 operating under? 9
We think that in the 10 proposed agreement we're offering more things. The 11 upgrade, for instance, is something that is 12 significantly different, better than in the current 13 franchise agreement. The fact that we are 14 offering -- 15
But you're not just 16 upgrading just to make us happy, right? 17
No. But we think it's good for the City, it's good for us, it's good for everyone.
I understand. It helps to serve the business interest as well.
Yes. The cable modem services that we will be offering, the fact that we're going to offer it to schools libraries, public and private, we think is something that is in 68 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 addition to what we're doing in the current franchise. There are some things that we've adopted along the way that are being memorialized into the agreement such as some things in customer service. An on-time guarantee was something that was developed during the life of this franchise, and we've committed to doing that going forward.
Does your system provide if a customer has some problem at 10 o'clock at night or 2 o'clock in the morning, can they call somewhere 24 hours a day and get service to their problem, or is it just someone takes the information and you basically have people out in the normal operating hours?
Well, the way we're operating now, we will respond to a system outage, like if a street goes down we'll respond to that at any time. But if there is one person that has a problem with the television set, that information is taken by answering service and it's dispatched the next day.
In Mr. James' testimony on behalf of Mr. Perez you made reference 69 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 to you're going to freeze your basic tier B1 programming service rates from January 1, '99 through January 1, 2000. What is the rate now and when was your last increase?
The rate now is $15. It will be $15 effective January 1st, from $14.86 to $15. The last time we adjusted the rate was November of '97. CHAIRWOMAN CLARK: Was when, November '97?
So you went to the $14.86 rate in November of '97 and you're going to $15 even on January 1, '99?
And you're going to stay at the 15 until January 1, 2000?
Your video presentation, I took down a figure that talked about $450,000 for public access. I couldn't figure out in the presentation by Mr. James where that figure came from. Can you explain to me where that comes 70 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 from?
There is a series of lump sum contributions that total $450,000, and in addition to that, there is also some expense contributions that's from 75 to $125,000 per year that can be requested by the Commissioner. And the lump sum amount is to fund the capital expenses, the facilities, the equipment, et cetera.
I believe there are two neighborhood access facilities, a mobile production van and equipment for both of those.
They haven't been located anywhere yet. They need to be located. This is 71 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 just the capital to fund that.
Was this something that you were supposed to do in the current agreement? I'm not understanding something here.
For public access in the current agreement, we had agreed to the same funding pending the --
No, I'm not talking about that yet. I'm still at the two access stations. You said that they're not anywhere.
We weren't to build them, we were to fund the building of them.
So if they happen, I mean, is this all a part of the issue of public access and lack of a Publishing Access Corporation?
All right. On of Mr. James' testimony, it talks about annual operating funds obligation deductible from franchise fees paid to the City total 75 to $125,000 as directed by Council. Can you explain what that means?
Once the corporation has been founded and the capital dollars are funded, my 72 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 understanding is that the operating expenses can be deducted from franchise fees in an amount from 75 to $125,000 as directed by City Council.
Based on that kind of formula, that essentially means that you don't pay anything for that, right?
The expenses we don't pay. The $450,000 has nothing to do with franchise fees.
And, again, tell what composes the $450,000. How does that break out?
The $450,000; 250,000 of it is for the two access facilities and the remainder of it is for the mobile van and the equipment that goes into both of those, the access studios and the mobile van.
What's the purpose 73 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 of mobile van? Why do you need two studios and to have a mobile van? What would the mobile van do?
I would imagine that the users of public access would take that on location to produce public access programming.
May I answer? The money is to be provided to a public access corporation, and then once the public access corporation has been funded, we give them the money. They decide what to do it.
So this $450,000 is just sitting off to the side waiting for some other action to be taken somewhere?
Right. And that's just our portion. It's going to be combined with the other franchisees' portion.
Can I have Mr. James and probably Ms. Lasota up to the table? Mr. James or Mr. Lasota, could you give a relatively brief explanation of the state of the public access issue and I guess a definitive statement on who has the responsibility for what at this point in time? The two parties being either the City or the various franchise operators, all 74 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 three of them City wide.
I can answer that question, Councilman. Deputy City Solicitor Marie Lasota from the Law Department. The franchise agreements provide for capital and funding commitments from each of the franchisees for the each of the franchised areas for public access. However, none of that money is payable until the City Council determines pursuant to the terms of the franchise agreements that it desires to have public access in the City of Philadelphia. The manner in which the City Council would determine that would be by passage of articles of incorporation of a public access corporation. That particular act has not yet taken place. It is up to the City Council to decide if and when it wants to do so.
Was such a bill ever introduced during the current franchise term?
My records indicate that a bill was drafted. I do not know if one was ever formally introduced.
And is an accurate statement to say that even when the cable companies, 75 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 and it's my understanding that they have either put their money in reserve somewhere or possibly given us the money where it's sitting somewhere in reserve or we at least have access to it because we certainly use some of it to cable this room and put cameras in this room on the government side, but notwithstanding, their putting their dollars aside, until the City of Philadelphia actually does something, it virtually doesn't matter what three cable companies do if the City doesn't take some action and formally establish the public access corporation; is that accurate?
Yes, that is. The cable do not have -- they are required by the agreements to have the money available should the City Council say, "Okay, now is the time to fund the corporation."
Was there a point in time when the cable companies actually had more responsibility for the funding and start-up activities of public access that may have been affected by FCC action or a congressional action?
Director of communications, Vince Costello might be able to answer that a little 76 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 more better than I just because he has the historical knowledge of it. But it's my understanding, not so much as from a funding perspective or from a yes or no go or not go forward with public access perspective, there's some first amendment issues that have come up in the past.
I wasn't so much talking about the first amendment issues. There apparently is some information out in the public that has to do with the impact of either one or two cable acts of Congress on the issue of public access and who pays for what and whether the municipality can cause the cable company to take certain actions or are those responsibilities on the municipal Government's side as result of various telecommunications acts, either of '92 or '96.
There have been some changes in the law. I think that the changes are questions about capital funding versus operational funding. But as long as the cable franchisees agree to the funding schemes that are set forth in the franchise agreements, that's still acceptable.
It's my understanding that I believe on March 1, 1999, there 77 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 is deregulation coming to cable; is that correct?
I believe it was a Telecommunications Act of '96 there is a sunshine provision -- sunset provision on rate regulation by the FCC for cable. So that does effect March of next year.
So does that then mean that the consumers are just subject to whatever rates the cable companies determine with no one having any oversight on the rates?
My reading of it would be that, yes, the consumer is always subject to the rates that the cable operator can charge. I believe the thinking might have been that there is apparent competition that's going happen in the particular industry that will make it more market driven and not necessarily make it a free willing exercise on the cable operators to charge whatever they see fit.
Let's talk about competition. In the environment of virtual 78 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 deregulation of everything, banking, electricity, possibly soon to be gas, and a couple other utility-type service, telephone, although they seem to be getting back together, why in this day and age with television or with television services are we still in cable working with franchises? What cable service you get is a function of where you live somewhere particular in the City versus your ability to have whatever cable company you want.
I'm not sure if I understand. Is the question whether do we need to have a franchising scheme to provide cable in Philadelphia? Or should it just be a mechanism --
Well, the present scheme is you get what you get based on where you live by a cable company, you don't have any choice.
I believe that in some cases, and I'm not here to defend the cable companies, but there is competition for people who wish to have cable-like services and not necessarily have to be dependant upon the local franchising authority. And that's been part of the reason why there's been changes in the Telecommunications Act and the cable operators are being impacted by direct 79 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 broadcast, whether it's Prime Star and another DBS type industries that provide people who want to have cable services and not have to buy that service from the franchising authority. And there is also a lot of talk in the marketplace about the advent from HDTV and other opportunities for more competition. And, of course, the telephone company has always talked about entering the marketplace to provide further opportunities for consumers.
If I could just add, Councilman, the franchises in the City under the Telecommunications Act, no franchise may be exclusive. So if another cable company wanted to build their own infrastructure and cable system to deliver services to the communities, the City would negotiate with them and reach probably a very similar franchise agreement with that other cable company.
But they would have to build up their own system in that area?
Unlike phone competition, I mean, there's essentially an infrastructure in place and everybody's using 80 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 everybody's infrastructure and just kind of charging each other back and forth.
That's true, but that's also another alternative for video services that eventually any phone company may want to start delivering similar services.
That's what they keep talking about. Don't seem to be delivering. Mr. Pitts, let me ask you lastly, there were a lot of questions about more the operational side of Greater Media with regard to either your employees or contractors, subcontractors, and the like. Would you expect -- because I have to admit that I lost track at some point of what you were in control of, what you're not in control, what you do monitor, what you don't monitor. Would you be in a position to try to more formally respond to the questions that were raised by way of the record and make it clear as to what you do monitor, what you don't monitor? You seem possibly not to be aware of all of the intricacies of the questions that were being asked. Again, assuming that you have staff who have more direct responsibility for those areas -- 81 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847
Presently we have a number of contractors, as vice president of corporate counsel said, we make requests of them to adhere to the same standards. We don't monitor them. We had a minority contractor doing our installs up until 1996, and they left. They decided to leave so they left. We are going to work closely going toward to make sure that we meet the commitments that are enclosed in our proposal. And I think our positive record stands for itself.
I appreciate it. Thank you. CHAIRWOMAN CLARK: Mr. Kenney?
Thank you very much, Madam Chairperson. Mr. Pitts, so we have a better idea as to the exact boundaries of Franchise Area I, could you kind of give us the southerly, northerly, easterly and general westerly borders by street as to what exactly the area is that's served?
Pretty much we go from 82 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 Susquehanna Avenue in the north down to the airport area in the southwest and river to river.
So primarily, I guess it would be the First Councilmanic District and a little portion of the Second and a piece of the Fifth also.
And please don't take this to be offensive because it's not meant to be. In the spirit of Councilman DiCicco who always asks this question, how many people are on your executive staff, the top executives of the company at Columbus Boulevard.
There's myself -- actually, we're pretty much all present. Director of marketing, business operations, technical operations, human resources, and programming.
And of those top five or six people, how many of those people 83 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 actually reside in the City.
I don't need to know their addresses, I'm just curious as to the five or six.
When you had come around and talk about the upcoming legislation, I generally expressed a positive response to the service because I am a Greater Media customer myself, and I guess nobody's happy with the bill no 15 matter if it's you or Comcast or whoever. But one of the things that I expressed to you at the time was a concern that I have, that Councilman DiCicco has, that some other members of this Council have relative to who does work where and where they come from. And while I recognize through my conversations with you and through what you presented here that from Greater Media, quote unquote, specific employees that work specifically for the company, there seems to be a pretty decent diversity and residential component to the community 84 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 that Greater Media's serving. I think that the problem comes in and the suspicion comes in relative to that next tier of employee that you term and we all term as contractors who do actual work in the community that Greater Media's serving. And even though there may not be a requirement, and this is I think a paraphrase of a discussion we've had, there's not a requirement for to you require that individuals who do subcontracting work who's actually pulling wire, repairing service, fixing cable boxes, doing those kinds of things in the community that Greater Media serves, for the most every effort should be made and could be made to make sure that they are from the area and that they are diverse enough and well trained enough to be a good representative of the company even though they are subcontractors. And I think the real rub is, is what responsibility does the cable franchise holder have when it gets to that level of employee? And what I'm suggesting as a member who will eventually vote on this is that I think you should have more than simply hiring the cheapest or the person who wins the bid if they happen to be from Wilmington or from New York or from wherever. And for me it's an 85 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 issue of the money that the citizen and cable ratepayer spends to the company for their service and what goes back in the community in this arrow and what may leave the community in this other arrow. And I think in the long run, and I've had this discussion, not just with companies like yourself, but with the City in general. The Rendell administration to their credit has tried to be extremely conservative and fiscal responsible when it comes to contracting out services, hiring companies to do certain work. But my argument with them has been that the bottom line number isn't always as important as to whether or not that money gets piled back in the community at the Pathmark down the street from Greater Media, at the Home Depot or at the stores around the area and whether or not the people who are actually working for the company, whether they're the Greater Media employees themselves or whether they're subcontracted employees, come from the neighborhood or at least from the City so that the economic multiplier benefit of the dollars that are spent go back in the neighborhood. And I'm not questioning in any way your 86 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 commitment to the community. I think you've done through your presentation and lots of other things that I know personally you've done have shown that commitment to the community. I think the next step needs to be getting ahold of who's doing that subcontracting work and trying to maximize the benefit from a diversity standpoint and from a residential standpoint as to who's actually going and taking those paychecks and buying groceries and paying tuitions and buying cars and buying appliances in the community. I think that's the real economic benefit from my perspective as to when we grant franchises, when we give contracts. Those are the things that I look to try to accomplish. I expressed that to you at meeting that we had.
I'm going to express it to you again here publicly. I don't think you're bad people. I find you decent, responsive people, and I think that if you really try and pay attention to it, you can be responsive and accomplish the goals we want to set.
I agree. I share in those concerns. And there is language in the agreement 87 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 that speaks to that, and we do plan -- I do plan, I commit here today to focus on that going forward. CHAIRWOMAN CLARK: Tell me how you're going to do that.
Well, in the selection process -- well, actually two ways. CHAIRWOMAN CLARK: Walk me through a for instance, "This way I am going to have greater assurance that the people who subcontract with me will hire people who live in the area," walk me through an example of that.
Madam Chairwoman, in the proposed franchise agreement, there are some numerical targets, so that's the overriding. CHAIRWOMAN CLARK: Tell me now. Pull out a little example, a little hypothetical. Tell me how you're going to do that.
Okay, we're sitting down looking at another installation contractor. And just as in the last time when we were looking for an installation contractor, Local 98 will be contacted to submit -- to help us in the selection process.
If I can just interrupt for second. 88 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 CHAIRWOMAN CLARK: Sure.
The issue of representation, labor representation or other representation, I don't think is germane to the issue, and I don't want to see the record burdened with it because what an issue is for me is whether a person's a union worker or non-union worker, for me it's whether they live in the community, whether they are young people who need opportunities to learn trades and to move forward, to get married, to buy houses and to raise children. Representation is I think everyone should have an equal opportunity to bid and to try to get that work as long as, again, the workers aren't coming up from North Carolina and spending two weeks in a Red Roof motel, taking those dollars back in their van to North Carolina to spend their paychecks.
I understand. What I can say is that in choosing someone to do work for us, whatever it is, we don't just chose the person that has the lowest bid. There are a number of factors we consider, and residency is something that we will put in our factor going forward. So back to that meeting where we're 89 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 sitting down, I brought up 98 just as a resource to bring people to the table that we can evaluate. But someone who has no local residents working for them versus someone that has a lot would be at a disadvantage in the selection process. CHAIRWOMAN CLARK: Councilwoman Miller?
Thank you, Madam Chair. In your agreement Appendix I, Section 2, where it talks about employment and you lay out goals to minority and woman participation goals, is this new, or was this in your old agreement? Is this a new section?
This section is different. It's pretty much the same language from the Comcast agreement.
Did Greater Media have this in this old agreement, or is this a new portion here?
Correct. During the initial phase of construction through now we have been tracking the minority and women-owned businesses that we use. And totaling those capital expenditures against total expenditures and we did meet the targets that were set out.
Looks pretty much, too, like it's employment opportunities in-house, not contracting.
In that area, we have exceeded the numbers both in woman and minority employment. CHAIRWOMAN CLARK: Where is that chart that says that you exceeded it?
No, there's not a chart that says that, but I can tell you what the statistics are now. Currently of our work force, 38 percent is African- American0 -- 91 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 CHAIRWOMAN CLARK: Are you reading from a report that we have?
No, I am not. I'm reading just from some notes that I have. CHAIRWOMAN CLARK: Are you going to provide us with them?
I can. CHAIRWOMAN CLARK: Because we can't process numbers like that orally.
Okay. CHAIRWOMAN CLARK: You can a read it, but you should also provide copies.
I will provide copies for you. 38 percent of our work force is African-American; 11 percent, Hispanic; and 46 percent are women.
Does your chart also list levels of employment, classifications, senior level, beginners, entry level, intermediate?
I have those numbers, not with me. But what I can tell you is that in comparing our -- those numbers reflect the neighborhood that we serve. That's how we track against. 92 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 CHAIRWOMAN CLARK: I have nothing but your word to say that. What you need to do, in the old parlance we used to have something we call an EEO1 spread sheet, an equal opportunity spread sheet. And it would then go from officials and managers down to laborers. That would be your vertical split. Then horizontally, you would go total percentage numerical, minority, women. And in the minority split we use something I call the "NOIS" code, Negro, black, colored, African-American what you call people who descend of African slaves, I put that under N; O, oriental; I, Indian; S, spanish; N-O-I-S. And if you spread that out across your EEO1 spread sheet, I could then read it down and across and get a comparison number that is relevant. And then I don't need you to tell me whether you think it fits because we'll all be looking at same numbers and can draw the same conclusions.
Yes, Madam Chair. The reason I say I know that we are is because we produce that report once a quarter, the FCC 393 reports. CHAIRWOMAN CLARK: Then I guess I'm 93 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 asking you to share that spreadsheet with us so that we can make that informed decision. And as much as we like you, we'd have something other than your word to go on.
In addition, can you give us information, too, on the demographics of your customers in the Greater Media service area? I have a couple more questions.
That's information we would have loved to have received in our packet, in the testimony packet.
In our area 54 percent white, 39 percent African-American, a 4 percent Hispanic, and 3 percent Asian or other.
When you submit that, can you tell us the geographic boundaries? I live in Comcast and I'm more familiar with the Comcast boundaries. I only am familiar with Greater Media because we have cable here in this building. 94 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 Other than that, I have no idea where Greater Media serves.
Is one modem per school sufficient, or can the schools itself kind of split it up and service -- because one modem to me sounds like one classroom or one lab. Can other people, other classrooms kind of plug into that?
In the traditional sense of a modem, one modem would be one computer. But in utilizing cable modems, it can feed several. So we think the best application would be in a cable lab with 8 to 10 computers running off of it simultaneously. And in other areas of the country that have tried that, it has worked successfully.
With your intern training program or with your training program, period, because we have two. Employment training program, and that's on for your present employees?
So you won't be out recruiting? Like, it's not going to be a Welfare to Work Program or anything like that? You won't be out recruiting new employees, the training 95 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 program is for your present employees?
What is the dollar amount that you will be spending on training and education annually for the upgrading of your staff?
I don't have the training budget in front of me, but we have tuition reimbursement program, we have in-house correspondence training. The National Cable Television Institute provides training at pretty much all levels of technical competencies and also customer service, and we provide that to all of our employees at no cost to them and we've been doing that for years in addition to increasing the salary upon completion. So I haven't totaled up the total amount that has spent there, but it has been significant.
Okay. In the last agreement, how come -- is there a particular reason why you didn't contribute to PCDC's contractors loan, revolving loan or whatever, and other people did? Why was that eliminated in your contract?
Well, we weren't aware of PCDC until just recently. I'm not sure how close 96 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 the agreements between the City between Comcast as a franchisee and Greater Media was, but there may have been some things -- since I wasn't in the negotiations in first go-round, there may have been some things that we agreed to do that they didn't and in lieu of those things, they did that. But now presently we see it as a good thing, the right thing to do, and that's why we're supporting it in the amount of $250,000.
Madam Chair, I don't have more any questions. Thank you. CHAIRWOMAN CLARK: Thank you very much. I have a few questions. I know that there's some union people here, and I have promised to put you on. I just want to clear up a couple of things. When will there been free cable modems in schools and libraries? When is that going to be available?
We project that the system will be completed October -- I'm sorry. March of 2001. And sometime around that time, we will launch the cable modem service. And as soon as it's launched in an area, we will wire that school and that library in that particular area for the free 97 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 cable modems. So as soon as it's available in an area. CHAIRWOMAN CLARK: Aside from the cable modems, what else if anything will Greater Media do for the school district?
Well, we are going to contribute the $250,000 in the lump sum as a donation to the school district, and also the closed digital channel. CHAIRWOMAN CLARK: I thank you. Mr. Rizzo.
I'd like to talk a minute about your billing. You basically agree to maintain the very basic rate, which I don't believe most of your customers just have, the vanilla rate, the B1 rate for one more year?
Could you just tell me briefly your classes of service basic, value pack, what is your next tier of service?
We designate the service 98 COM. ON PUBLC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS-980847 levels as basic, being the B1; the CPS tier we call our standard tier. That's where CNN, ESPN, those channels are. Then we have a new product here which we have labeled great times, and then there's premium and pay per view above that.
Could you tell us what your plans are for those other classes of service? I understand there's been some announced price increases for those?