AN ORDINANCE related to cable television; authorizing the Mayor or the Mayor’s designee to enter into a renewed Cable Television Franchise Agreement with Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC; and authorizing the Chief Technology Officer to enter into other agreements for the purpose of implementing or administering the renewed franchise.
Agenda item 11 Council Bill 118549. Related to cable television authorizing the mayor or the mayor's designee to enter into a renewed cable television franchise agreement with Comcast Cable Communications Management LLC, and authorizing the chief technology officer to enter into other agreements for the purpose of implementing or administering the renewed franchise. The committee recommends the bill pass. Thank you, Councilmember Harrell. Thank you very much. So basically, this legislation after, I would say months and months of negotiating and and hearing community concerns and advocates for the underrepresented communities and all those who use these kinds of con cap services that we can regulate. This legislation approves a renewed cable franchise agreement. This is a ten year Comcast franchise agreement. And I'll sort of go through the benefits that were struck in this kind of renewal, I should say, in the context of this, is that the city's goal is always to improve competition and have stronger customer service and consumer protections at the core of what we're trying to do. We're trying to protect our consumers from all kinds of practices that would result in their detriment. The key benefits of this particular agreement are that Seattle will join Comcast's pilot program, where low income seniors now are eligible for the Internet Essentials discounted Internet program. Now, I think you summarized from my discussion this morning that after actually our committee meeting, we continue to look at what Comcast does in other cities. And there were where there was an agreement reached in Philadelphia, where, of course, Comcast is headquartered that we continue to look at. And based on that, we actually modify through a letter agreement, a letter representations, other benefits. And that was one of them, making sure that the Internet Essentials program now is extended to low income seniors. So we're very happy to have that part of this this presentation. Comcast will also increase its previously announced digital equity grant offered to Seattle a from a one time 50000 to 100000 per year for five years grants for a total of $500,000. Again, these are investments from Comcast to programs and organizations that are help us helping us reach the digital divide. Comcast will partner with the city to help at risk youth obtain devices such as laptop computers for accessing the Internet. In terms of public educational and government access channel or P.G. or Peg's, we will be looking at at $8 million in revenue over the course of this contract. Again, that was negotiated very hard by our team and I'll thank them at the conclusion of my remarks. We will have free cable connections and TV service to city buildings and schools that's valued at approximately $2 million will have a 30% discount on basic Tier two low income subscribers. We'll have 600 modems, two nonprofit organizations that's about valued at approximately $10 million. So basically, again, to put it in the context of what we do as a city, we cannot control prices on what Comcast charges customers for cable modems or cable TV. And that's one of the things that people want us to do. And we all often concern ourselves with the prices that some of these large corporations can charge our consumers, but we can increase competition. And by increasing competition, they drive down prices, drive up service, and we regulate or we have three cable franchises, CenturyLink, Wave and Comcast , just again, to put it in the in the context of what we can or cannot do. So again, this particular set of community benefits, I would do want to thank Michael Matt Miller, director of the Department of Information Technology, and Tony Perez, who's actually nationally respected for his ability to advocate on behalf of consumers. We want to thank you for this negotiation. This package does come recommended by our Citizens Telecommunications and Advisory Board as well. And so we want to thank you for that work. This did pass out of committee and we recommended adoption of this ordinance. Thank you, Councilmember Harold, did we receive and maybe you distributed this and I just missed it. But did we have the letter from Comcast pledging these additional benefits? Yes, we have the letter. I, I was I was hopeful that everyone received a copy a letter. We did receive the letter and we sent our staff has reviewed it. And that becomes I shouldn't say not mislead anyone. That is not part of the legislation. That is sort of a side agreement. We have had side agreements like this before. We believe that the executive, a lot of people would suggest that this is a tool we can use to. I don't want to extract, but to gain the benefits that we do want. Questions or comments here. Councilmember Licata. Right. Thank you for jumping on this. And Mayor as well. At the last moment when we found out what Philadelphia. Had received from Comcast. I don't have that document in front of me. I thought it was a summary. I wasn't sure if it was actually a letter from Comcast, but I did notice and you read pretty much, I think from what I have seen that in particularly in the areas of greater assistance to seniors in particularly in low income areas for for youth, it seemed very aspirational and didn't seem as if there were any real measurements attached to it. I appreciate that being a door opener, but at the same time it doesn't seem that. I'm not sure how much leverage is provides us going beyond what we've already had per expectation. So if you could give me your impression what you think you and the mayor have received in those particular areas. Just so I understand the concern I have here, which is an attachment B, which is an attachment, a letter agreement to the document. I think that's the tool that was passed out. And I'm sure my my staff are following this conversation now and are preparing document to have you. So here's sort of the the short of it that we contact. I want to think since your staff contacted, a lot of parents really understand quite candidly, is this binding? I think that's the issue. Can we rest assured that these are the community benefits that are part that are part of this deal? And my interpretation of that opinion is this, that it is not nearly as ironclad as it could be in an ideal situation, that it is a letter agreement. And obviously, as policy leaders, we are relying on that agreement. But we may be hard pressed to prove that if there's a violation of the side agreement, we can revoke or penalize, if you will, the Comcast for a violation of the franchise agreement. That is not part. However, having said that, based on the experience of Do It and the executive on prior dealings and prior representations and our reliance as policy leaders, I think that they were comfortable enough that this side agreement, this letter agreement, sort of meets our needs and we can suspend the rules and hear from Michael Matt Miller directly, since they were sort of in an offhand comment on this issue, if you like, and maybe that might be a wise way to go. I would, because in particular, if we did allow Mr. Mettler to speak from what you said, it appears that even with the side agreement, that's not the same as a door opener for going back to and going back to these issues. Is that correct? Yes. So should the councilperson like to move this? Unless there's objection? Mr. Matt Miller feel come to the center microphone, please, Harry. No objection. And members of the council. Councilmember Carter, to answer your question. This letter we have received with additional commitments from Comcast represents several benefits, as Councilmember Harrell was describing, in particular for the low income seniors discount program. But Comcast has committed us to do is include the city of Seattle in a pilot program nationwide where the company is expanding the benefits or excuse me, expanding the populations eligible for their Internet essentials discounted Internet program to include seniors who are over the age of 62 and eligible for one of 13 federal, state or local programs. And one of those programs is the City of Seattle Utility Discount Program. So we expect to work with Comcast to implement this between now and mid 2016. And at that time, just as an example, if you are a senior who is enrolled in the utility discount program here in Seattle, you would be eligible for an Internet connection for $9.99 per month. And the other area. I believe we're dealing with youth in particular and what is happening with that particular program. So this weekend, as we were working with Comcast to increase their commitment to us for digital equity in the city, we recognized that one of the areas the Council on the Mayor are very focused on right now is homelessness and the state of emergency that has been declared on homelessness. We worked with Comcast to say if the city could put some of our franchise fee revenue into a commitment and Comcast could also make a commitment, what could we do together? And we thought one of the more impactful areas that we could focus on is making sure that housing insecure, housing insecure youth and youth who are at risk could get easier access to devices to help improve their educational outcomes. So what we've committed to do with Comcast is to work out the details because we couldn't get through everything this weekend, but to develop a program where the city and Comcast together would supply laptops to housing insecure youth over the next five years of the franchise. I don't want to go back to sound, but I'm curious, in the first program you mentioned it was a nationwide program that they had with seniors. So we did one of a number of cities participating in it. But what I find unusual is that this came up literally in the last 48 hours. Did we not know that they had this national aid program? I mean, what did it take for us to get access to it? When we worked with Comcast over the past several months. We put together a series of benefits that we found to be very good compared to other cities like Seattle, who have recently negotiated franchises that include cities like Denver and Portland that we benchmarked ourselves against. There were some things like the senior pilot that we were aware of and we asked Comcast about, but were unable to obtain as part of our package. What happened on Friday is Councilmember Harrell and Mayor Murray saw the franchise package that Philadelphia received and we asked Comcast to go back and look at their commitment to our community and to recognize that digital equity is one of our core values and see how they could improve the package of benefits offered to us. And it was in going back and reviewing the benefits offered that Comcast agreed to make us part of the senior citizen low income pilot. They also increased the value of the digital equity grant from a one time $50000 to $500000 or 100,000 each year for a five year period. And to develop this commitment to put together a program to increase device access. Mm hmm. And if there is any disagreement about the execution of the areas that we don't have measurement time, but we'll pursue with the assumption of goodwill, do we have any recourse? If there's a disagreement, this is a set of benefits that is separate from the franchise agreement itself. So we would not be able to use the mechanisms of enforcement in the franchise agreement in the same way we could if Comcast did not follow our Consumer Bill of Rights, like when a customer has an issue that they would call the cable office about. So so no, we wouldn't have that recourse. But I should point out, in the programs with which we've worked on Comcast in the past, we've found them to be a good partner. And Comcast has participated in our digital equity initiative over the last year to develop a sense of how we roll out more Internet service to different populations in the city. So we do expect them to continue working with us on that front. Other questions or comments? Councilmember Hill I'll. Just sort of close comments by saying I appreciate, as always, council member Lakatos concerned. If I were to be candid for the moment, we're prepared. We were prepared to pull the legislation. Comcast knew that we were I was prepared to move to late today to hold it if necessary. I think the executive and the Department of Information Technology are very comfortable and very proud of the benefits we were able to get. This is an ongoing working relationship, but I think that Comcast knew very clearly that certainly we were ready to hold the franchise agreement because these are ten year agreements. But we're comfortable with the representations and the commitments that are now made by Comcast. And with that, the committee recommends approval. Are the other benefits that are separate from the core franchise agreement. The other offers that Comcast made to us, are they part of the franchise agreement and therefore enforceable by the city? I could take a shot at Michael. You could come up and try to give a shout. The commitments Comcast is making to us that are directly related to cable television are included in the franchise legislation. So those would be benefits such as the PEG fees, franchise fees, commitments to the Seattle Channel and a low income discount for cable television service. The other benefits like the grant, the $500,000 digital equity grant, the device program, and the low income discount for seniors, as well as a program through which Comcast makes available 600 free cable modem connections to nonprofit organizations in our community are in that letter that are separate from the franchise. And how does the city memorialize those additional benefits? Those additional benefits in the letter are sent to do it, to memorialize that they will be provided to us. And in particular, the grant will need to be received by the Council through a supplemental budget, which is in process, I believe, for Q4 of this year. And what I would ask. In in asking the same question that Council President Burgess asked. I've made it clear at least, and there are theory of promissory estoppel that they have made promises, they made commitments. We are relying on these commitments in a letter of agreement, in my mind, that establish a contractual relationship, perhaps not as stringent as can be in the franchise agreement. But it is very clear that I look at this as consideration for us passing legislation today, and I must say that Comcast has stepped up to this. Two, what we need and what's happening in other cities as well. And but these are all great, great, great issues and great concerns. Comment. So whether it's Comcast or any other company, I just wonder, Councilmember Harrell, if that letter of agreement should be in our because we do not have that today. We have an offer letter from Comcast saying here's the things we'd like to do with you, but this would not be binding on them. I wonder if there's any any way that we could obtain that letter of agreement between the city and Comcast that would give us a stronger position going forward. In addition to the December 7th letter that you have. Yes, this is a letter that's from Comcast to the city. So you want to see it. But the city is not a party to this letter. Correct. We can do that. There's. Did you want to say something like. So we when we worked with the law department on this approach, our intent was to recognize these benefits in a letter from Comcast that would be separate from the franchise because the city is not putting up consideration per se. The letter was determined as the best way to memorialize this relationship. There is, as the council members have pointed out, some risk that without consideration, Comcast could change these benefits at some point. However, I should note that some of the benefits, like grants like the cable modem program we have been receiving since the last franchise, and we do not see we do not anticipate a change to these benefits. And again, it's. Is this what's the best business practice here? If we pass the franchise agreement and then next week, when you're trying to figure out this letter of agreement and Comcast says, well, that's not what we meant by that, then where are we? So that's my only question. Is there any time issue here in terms of whether this is executed today, whether we act on this legislation today or next Monday? From a timing perspective, we are getting close to the 30 day window in which the legislation we need to pass before it becomes effective and the current Comcast franchise would expire. That's right. I forgot about that. So that expires in January, right? It does. I can't say at the moment if wait until next Monday would put us over that deadline, but we would be very close. I would I would actually I. I first of all, I very much appreciate the effort Mike Lee put in. And because we are here on the mayor in recognizing what was being done with Philadelphia and trying to get a better deal. My concerns are very much reflective of the concerns of council. A member council president Burgess I personally I couldn't vote for this right now. If I my preference would be to hold it a week at least, then we'd have presumably time to get something in writing. Of course, our discussion of this is certainly a signal to Comcast and why our feelings about this. So I don't think and I'm not worried per se about this particular vendor. But Lauren, I just wonder if it's the right approach here. Councilmember Gonzalez Thank you, Counsel. President, I also want to express appreciation to to you, Michael, and to the mayor and to Councilmember Harrell for identifying this as a as an issue. I do think it's a significant issue. And that that I think those of us who sat in on committee last week would have benefited greatly from that particular information. In terms of the deal that was struck between Comcast and Philadelphia, I think that would have been helpful information to have during committee. Grateful that we have it. Now I share Councilmember Lakatos. Concerns with regard to. The enforceability of the particular December December 7th letter that was just handed out to us. And I'm also feeling discomfort in being able to have a clearer understanding of whether this is this is in the city's best interest. So what I'm hearing is a request for at least a one week hold on this. And I'm formal, if you. Why. Sure. I'll make it right now. I'll move to hold this for one week until I just moved. I'll say it's been second. It moved in second and that we hold item 11 until next Monday in the discussion. All in favor of the motion vote I. I oppose vote no. So this item will be held until next Monday. We'll move now to item 12. Please read this item into the record. Agenda item 12 Resolution 31637. Recognizing the obstacles faced by previously incarcerated individuals that often result in recidivism and the potential to reduce recidivism rates, criminal justice costs and incarcerations. Negative impacts on individuals, the community and the city of Seattle.