Cable TV ballot in the mail...who lied?

[Luke]

I can't vouch for the accuracy of the lists. I'm just going off what is promoted on the RMA website for cable offerings.

The first group is "basic cable channel line-up (without converter box") and the second group is "enhanced digital channels (launched)."

As I understand it, you have to pay extra (or will have to pay) if you want the "enhanced digital channels."

So to make the question even simpler (and to not pick a sports channel). Why is "Home & Garden" mandated to be subscribed to by the CC&Rs as part of our dues, but "Fine Living" is not? What justifies the distinction from a governing documents perspective?

[Wilbur]

The question is not individuals' policy preference for which way it should be. That's what the election is for and a majority have already "voted" yes by giving a yes proxy. Rather, the question is this assertion (which you'll note RMA didn't repeat this time in its ballot argument) that it would somehow violate the "common facility" provisions of the CC&Rs to pay its costs of operations - providing programming - with voluntary user fees. Julie has repeatedly asserted that this would violate the CC&Rs. The unanswered question is where in the CC&Rs it says that some, but not all, costs of receiving programming may be recovered by voluntary users' user fees. Where does it say that the collective obligation to preserve the physical assets may not be supplemented with user fees (when the Bylaws and CC&Rs clearly authorize such user fees). Where does it say that some channels of TV are mandatorily paid for and some are not.

The answer, which is being skirted around, is that NOWHERE in the CC&Rs are any of these things said.

[Zebra Top]

Originally Posted by Luke

I can't vouch for the accuracy of the lists. I'm just going off what is promoted on the RMA website for cable offerings.

The first group is "basic cable channel line-up (without converter box") and the second group is "enhanced digital channels (launched)."

As I understand it, you have to pay extra (or will have to pay) if you want the "enhanced digital channels."

So to make the question even simpler (and to not pick a sports channel). Why is "Home & Garden" mandated to be subscribed to by the CC&Rs as part of our dues, but "Fine Living" is not? What justifies the distinction from a governing documents perspective?

I don't know how they decide which channels are included in basic and which are premium. It doesn't really matter though to the question that is before us now. It may very well be something that should be addressed in the future but it has no bearing on if the membership should be able to opt out of paying for a community asset.

Now, before you launch, remember I don't believe the Bylaw Amendment differentiates between "Infrastructure" and "Service" the way it currently is written.

[Wilbur]

The operative phrase in the amendment is "All costs of providing television service, including maintenance and equipment, must be borne solely by user fees paid by voluntary subscribers." As requested by RMA's counsel when the ballot arguments were being composed we provided written assurances to RMA's counsel that we interpret this as leaving reserving for replacement of infrastructure assets as they age out to the BOD's discretion to include in general dues (not prohibiting same). They thereafter omitted the "common facility" CC&Rs argument from their "frighten the natives" ballot argument letter. I believe but do not know that this question was what prompted them to ask about the reserves exclusion.

This leaves major infrastructure repair funding in the collective pile, while requiring "costs of providing television service - programming (2/3 of budget) and service call labor costs - to be paid for with user fees.

[feistylady]

maybe it has to do with how much certain companies are charging for their channels being put on our system. Which channels are included free with more expensive channels. It is mostly about cost. You would be surprised how much some companies want for their channels.

[Wilbur]

Originally Posted by feistylady

It is mostly about cost. You would be surprised how much some companies want for their channels.

One of the things which i found particularly offensive and a perfect example of why FOC is needed was the decision, on which the membership was never polled, to add the Comcast Sports package, which if renewed will run to over six bucks a house a month, one fifth of the cost of basic cable operations per the budget. A "company" which has to think about customer price resistance doesn't just add 20% to its pricing because some important people think it's a good idea. It thinks about what its customers want and are willing to pay for.

[Zebra Top]

Originally Posted by Wilbur

The operative phrase in the amendment is "All costs of providing television service, including maintenance and equipment, must be borne solely by user fees paid by voluntary subscribers." As requested by RMA's counsel when the ballot arguments were being composed we provided written assurances to RMA's counsel that we interpret this as leaving reserving for replacement of infrastructure assets as they age out to the BOD's discretion to include in general dues (not prohibiting same). They thereafter omitted the "common facility" CC&Rs argument from their "frighten the natives" ballot argument letter. I believe but do not know that this question was what prompted them to ask about the reserves exclusion.

This leaves major infrastructure repair funding in the collective pile, while requiring "costs of providing television service - programming (2/3 of budget) and service call labor costs - to be paid for with user fees.

LOL, I know your position Wilbur, I have heard you in the past. I'm just not (still not) convinced.

[Wilbur]

I think RMA's counsel are, or they would have repeated Julie's argument, which they formerly asserted. They know that by excluding the reserves we gutted that argument (which was already inordinately flimsy)

[Zebra Top]

Originally Posted by Wilbur

One of the things which i found particularly offensive and a perfect example of why FOC is needed was the decision, on which the membership was never polled, to add the Comcast Sports package, which if renewed will run to over six bucks a house a month, one fifth of the cost of basic cable operations per the budget. A "company" which has to think about customer price resistance doesn't just add 20% to its pricing because some important people think it's a good idea. It thinks about what its customers want and are willing to pay for.

I agree except for the "why the FOC was needed." I do think if FOC fails we, as a community, need to take a hard look at how a lot of the decisions are made to make sure these kinds of things don't happen again.

[JT Weatherford]

The FOC amendment will solve that probem once and for all.