CC SR 20200204 H - Cox Communications Town Hall Meeting
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 02/04/2020
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Calendar
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action to authorize Staff to participate in and contribute City
resources to a Cox Communications town hall meeting with the cities of Palos Verdes
Estates and Rolling Hills Estates
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
(1) Authorize Staff to participate in and contribute in-kind City resources to a Cox
Communications town hall meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
Amount Budgeted: N/A
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s): N/A
ORIGINATED BY: Kit Fox, AICP, Interim Deputy City Manager
REVIEWED BY: Same as above
APPROVED BY: Ara Mihranian, AICP, Interim City Manager
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
In 1998, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 339, the City’s Telecommunications
Regulatory Ordinance, which was codified as Chapter 13.12 of the Rancho Palos
Verdes Municipal Code (RPVMC). The ordinance established regulations for cable
television systems, open video systems, and other telecommunications services and
systems, including procedures for granting local franchise agreements. RPVMC Section
13.12.310(C) provided the authority for the City to enact an ordinance to establish
monetary penalties for a video provider’s material breach of customer service standards
set forth in the Cable Television and Video Customer Service and Information Act and
the Video Customer Service Act, although this authority has been superseded by more-
recent legislation discussed below. Under the terms of the City’s previous local
franchise agreement with Cox Communications (Cox), the City Council did not feel the
need to enact such an ordinance since the agreement generally provided the City with
the necessary leverage to ensure that Cox dealt with residents’ customer service issues
appropriately.
1
In 2006, this all began to change with the enactment of the Digital Infrastructure and
Video Competition Act (DIVCA). DIVCA shifted franchise agreement authority from local
agencies to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), but obliged local
agencies to retain responsibility for enforcing customer service standards. Since the
City’s franchise agreement with Cox expired in October 2015, Staff has received
anecdotal reports that Cox does not address residents’ customer service complaints
timely.1 From time to time, Staff has reached out to Cox’s Government Affairs Division,
which has advised that the City retains the option to adopt an ordinance to impose
monetary penalties for material breaches of Cox’s customer service standards under
DIVCA.
In 2017, Staff presented a proposal to the City Council to initiate a video provider
customer service standards ordinance. As proposed at that time, the ordinance would
have constituted a complete overhaul of RPVMC Chapter 13.12. The City Council
authorized Staff to initiate the ordinance in May 2017, and reviewed a draft in October
2017. However, due to concerns about the cost and staffing demands associated with
implementing and enforcing the ordinance, it was tabled in 2018.
Recently, the City was approached by elected officials and Staff from other Peninsula
cities about convening a “town hall meeting” with Cox. Cox has tentatively agreed to
host a "pop-up"-type open house, which would include booths representing product
marketing, construction, field operations/network operations, customer care, public
affairs, and Cox business services. The Peninsula cities are exploring the availability of
Hesse Park, the Peninsula Center Library, or a school site as a venue. The open house
is expected to occur in late February or early March, and will be scheduled to avoid
conflicts with Peninsula cities’ city council meetings. Ideally, there would be at least two
sessions offered — one late afternoon and one early evening — so as to accommodate
the greatest number of residents’ schedules.
Based upon the scope of the proposed open house described above, Staff anticipates
that the City’s contributions of in-kind resources to this event would consist of Staff time
and (possibly) the use of Hesse Park, if available. Once the date, times and location of
the open house are confirmed, Staff would also promote the event to residents using
the City’s website and social media outlets.
ALTERNATIVES:
In addition to the Staff recommendation, the following alternative action is available for
the City Council’s consideration:
1. Do not authorize Staff to participate in and contribute City resources to a
Cox Communications town hall meeting.
1 Resident complaints about video service providers have not been limited to Cox. There was also a
substantial spike in customer service complaints in early 2016 when Frontier Communications took over the former
Verizon FiOS service. Staff has also received sporadic reports of customer service issues and lack of access to
AT&T’s U-Verse service on the east side of the City. Neither Verizon (formerly GTE) nor AT&T (formerly Pacific Bell)
ever had franchise agreements for video service with the City.
2