A decision from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California suggests that many California cities are receiving less than the full cable franchise fee to which they are entitled.
The decision in Comcast of Sacramento I, LLC, et al v. Sacramento Metropolitan Cable Television Commission, issued Aug. 11, may also have implications for cities in other states that passed franchising legislation at the behest of AT&T. It may suggest that a broader set of companies are subject to franchise fees in those states as a matter of state law than would be subject to franchise fees under the federal Cable Act.
California communities that wish to recover amounts that may have been deducted from their payments should consider demanding payment from their video service providers, keeping in mind that California cable franchising law limits the period for recovery of franchise fee underpayments. Communities in other states where a public utilities commission regulates cable in whole or in part may wish to investigate whether their fees are being improperly reduced by regulatory fees paid to the utilities commission. The decision is likely to be appealed.
Learn more about the decision by clicking here.
(Best Best & Krieger represented the Sacramento Metropolitan Cable Television Commission in this case.)
[View source.]
