2026-09-17 - Public Service and Transportation Committee

0:00Hi everyone. Uh thank you for joining

0:02for the city of Worcester city council

0:04public service and transportation

0:06committee. Uh my name is councelor

0:07Robert Bada. I'm the chairman. I'm

0:09joined to my right by councelor uh

0:11district 3 councelor uh John Fzola and

0:14joined online by district 4 counselor

0:16Luis O'hada.

0:19Um

0:21>> Claire, could we start with the reading

0:22of the

0:24the virtual attendee call-in information

0:27>> through the chair? Prior to doing so,

0:28I'll take a roll call for attendance.

0:30>> Yes, thank you. We'll start a roll call.

0:31Thank you.

0:32>> Councelor Folo

0:33>> here.

0:34>> Councelor O'Ja

0:37>> here.

0:38>> And chairperson councelor Bada

0:40>> here.

0:41>> Great. Pursuant to chapter 20 of acts of

0:442021 and in order to ensure active

0:46public engagement, the city of Worcester

0:49currently allows for both in-person and

0:51remote participation at all city council

0:53and standing committee meetings. To

0:55partake in the meeting, you may attend

0:57the meeting in person within the meeting

0:59location, which is here in the Levi

1:00Lincoln Chamber of Worcester City Hall,

1:02or follow the link on the city's

1:04website, to join via Zoom, or dial the

1:06direct line. If you join a Zoom meeting

1:09by dialing in with a phone number, you

1:10can raise your hand by dialing star9.

1:13The public service and transportation

1:14committee zoom phone number is

1:1716468287666

1:23and the access code is 1613790984.

1:33>> Thank you Claire. Uh we'll move on to

1:35item 2, approval of the minutes.

1:38uh order that the city council standing

1:40committee on public service and

1:41transportation hereby approves the

1:43minutes of the public service and

1:44transportation committee meeting. I will

1:46do roll call.

1:48>> Councelor Folo.

1:50>> Yes.

1:51>> Councelor O'Hara.

1:57>> Councelor O'Hada

2:01>> and chairperson and chairperson

2:03councelor Bada.

2:04>> Yes. All right. We'll move on to it.

2:07Item 3A, report of the committee on

2:09public service and transportation upon

2:10the order of councelor Morris A. Bergman

2:13and councelor Candy Mero Carlson.

2:14>> Yes.

2:15>> Request standing committee on public

2:16service and transportation committee

2:18hold a public discussion with the WRTA

2:20administrator relative to the removal of

2:22a bus route that passes the Eotarium at

2:25222 Harrington Way. Um today we're

2:29joined by the DTM commissioner Steve

2:31Raleigh and uh the WRTA Superintendent

2:34Josh Rickman. want to thank you both for

2:36coming. Um I thought we could open up

2:38with comm uh superintendent rigman if

2:41you wanted to or administrator excuse me

2:43if you'd want to just talk a little bit

2:44about what's going on I think with that

2:46bus route and what the might be some

2:48future plans.

2:50>> Absolutely and thank you so much for

2:51having me today. Uh Joshin administrator

2:53WRTA. Um so yes there was a bus route

2:56that uh operated in that area. Uh it

2:58operated in September of 2018 for about

3:0118 months. I think it was removed in

3:04January 2020. Uh basically there was

3:06some service up from the central hub. Um

3:09it would go uh to North High and would

3:11start provide some service to the

3:13Eotarium. It was about I think there was

3:15two trips in the morning and two trips

3:16in the afternoon and weekdays. So so not

3:18not a ton of service levels. Um there

3:21wasn't a lot of ridership at that time.

3:23In fact, the only real ridership we saw

3:24was to North High. I'm understanding

3:27that um there was some service that was

3:30uh changed on uh route five now provides

3:32services to north high for school

3:35dismissal purposes and that has

3:36continued through through to today. Um

3:38when I came on board a few years ago,

3:40the city was wrapping up the mobility

3:42action plan and one of the um uh

3:45findings in that study was a concept

3:47about microransit and they identified

3:49two areas. One is Salisbury Street and

3:51the other is uh Plantation Street. Um so

3:53that has been front of mind and has been

3:55in conversations that uh Commissioner

3:56Raleigh and I have been having uh since

3:58I' I've gotten on board WRTA. Um we've

4:01been making advancements in the back end

4:03um on this project. Uh, one thing that

4:05we've done is we've gone out to bid for

4:07a new uh, demand response software.

4:09That's be really advantageous for us for

4:11all of our ADA and demand response and

4:14COA services that we operate. Um, but it

4:16was also a really good opportunity for

4:18us to include in that procurement a

4:20microtransit module. Um, so we issued

4:23that procurement earlier this summer.

4:24Uh, we received proposals in September

4:26and we are uh, actively going to provide

4:29award by October 7th on that. And so

4:32that for for for us and for in terms of

4:34plantation street that means we're now

4:35going to have an actual software and a

4:36mechanism that we can deploy to actually

4:39make this possible whereas before we

4:40didn't have a way to actually uh obtain

4:43that. Um, in relation to all of that, we

4:47also have an on call planning firm

4:48called Nelson Nygard, and they

4:50specialize in um, transit planning, and

4:53we brought them on board about a about a

4:55year and a half ago. And we just uh,

4:57issued a task order to them. And that

4:59task order is going to be taking in a

5:01lot of these um concepts we developed

5:03through our five-year vision which

5:04includes span of service improvements,

5:06frequency improvements on fixed route um

5:10uh microtransit concepts and we

5:12specifically called out this one study

5:14for that uh study as as well. So as we

5:18uh take the next couple of months to

5:19kind of refine all that data, refine all

5:21the information, a lot of the public

5:23outreach is going to circle right around

5:24this strategy um and and this concept.

5:27Um so in short order in the next four

5:29months or so we'll see more developments

5:31on this specific initiative. A couple of

5:34things that we are talking about

5:36internally and you'll see the public

5:37outreach process is going to be also

5:40thinking about ways in which we can

5:42think about that zone that that was

5:43established in the mobility action plan.

5:45Um some areas we're also thinking about

5:47going beyond that zone. So, not just

5:50Plantation Street in in in that

5:51district, but also thinking make sure we

5:53provide direct drop offs to the central

5:54hub where for for for pickup and drop

5:56off, UMass Medical, a lot of lot of

5:58medical appointments, the senior center,

6:01uh Lincoln Park Towers, and Billing

6:02Square to really provide more

6:04connectivity for those residents to

6:06common, you know, hotspots they're

6:07trying trying to travel to. Um, so we

6:09are looking at uh rolling that out. We

6:11will have to think about um uh assets or

6:14vehicles to operate that service.

6:16Typically those are wheelchair

6:18accessible vehicles that we we procure

6:20or purchase or flex some of the service

6:22that we already have. Um so this is

6:24front of mind for us. We are procuring a

6:27service to make this a possibility. We

6:29are actively bringing on a consultant to

6:32talk to the public about this type of

6:33concept and that's going to put us in a

6:35really good position for future grant

6:36opportunities. The state has been

6:38issuing microtransit grants the last

6:39couple of years and this is a way in

6:41which we can put ourselves right to that

6:43front order where we have strong support

6:44from the city, strong support from the

6:46public and a mechanism to to achieve all

6:48of these things.

6:49>> Okay. No, that's really great that

6:51that's great to hear. Um I'll just open

6:53up to questions for my uh co co- members

6:56first if they had any. Um, but no, it's

6:59it's really great to hear that this is

7:00moving forward and again having that

7:02that information that technology on the

7:04back end is I know is key and I know

7:07it's going to help with the on demand

7:08pair transit too when that comes to

7:10fruition. So that's that's great to

7:11hear. Um, do you have a question or Mr.

7:15Chairman council? Sorry,

7:17>> I have one question. It's not related to

7:20the item here, but our friend uh

7:23mentioned a few other uh and I know if

7:26it's not an agenda item, but it is a bus

7:28stop. And

7:31I don't know, it's got to be 10 plus

7:33years. I put in a petition to remove a

7:36bus stop on Grafton Street

7:40between

7:42where Waverly Street the the U I don't

7:45know the exact address of it but it's

7:48between where the light at Waverly

7:50Street the the traffic light and going

7:52down to 290.

7:54>> Okay. on that if you're traveling toward

7:57290 it's on that right side and we have

8:01one at Cumberland Farms in front of

8:04Cumberland Farms and I asked that one to

8:06be taken out because we had closed Coral

8:08Street so no one is ever walking down to

8:10that one and I was hoping that the bus

8:13could get into the lefthand lane and go

8:16down under 290

8:19to the hub and not stay in that right

8:22hand lane because

8:24That's where traffic

8:27starts to uh you know jam up and and and

8:31it goes all the way back up until

8:33Hamilton Street. So I was hoping if

8:34there was no bus stop there which there

8:37isn't that it was voted on to be removed

8:40and it's still there. The sign is still

8:41there.

8:42>> Okay. So if you could look at it.

8:46>> Yeah. Sorry.

8:47>> Through No. through the chair. I just um

8:49we had had prior conversations on this.

8:51So, I I thought it was actually um

8:54addressed, but that's something that we

8:56can check up on with WRTA.

8:59>> Yeah, absolutely.

9:00>> About a month ago, I saw it there, but

9:02if it if it's been it could be could be

9:06removed, but I just wanted to bring it

9:07to your attention. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

9:09I'm sorry about that.

9:10>> No problem. Councelor O'Hara, did you

9:12have any questions?

9:14>> Um, not right now. Thank you.

9:15>> No, no problem. No, I really appreciate

9:17uh the WRTA and and uh DTM for this

9:20being part of the mobility action plan.

9:22Um it's a great area having the

9:24ecotarium in North High there and but

9:26again it's not as residential or you

9:28know in that specific section of

9:30Parington way. So um it it'd be great to

9:32have some type of bus service up there

9:34and and have it be an opportunity to to

9:36roll out microransit in the city. So I I

9:39really appreciate that. And um I had one

9:41question about the public outreach

9:43moving forward. Would it make sense to

9:46try to put an order or or some type of

9:48chairman's order for us to start

9:49organizing those or or maybe the

9:52commissioner did we want to hold off to

9:54wait on those to start organizing those

9:56public meetings about this particular

9:59initiative?

10:01>> If I could start starting the one. So

10:03public outreach is incredibly important

10:05to toward success of this program. Um

10:07we're going to attack this in a few

10:08different ways like we've done dur

10:10during my time at WRTA. Um, we're going

10:12to be holding in-person sessions at at

10:14the hub to make sure we're getting

10:15people during their commutes. That's

10:17very important to me. Many of these

10:18individuals don't have time to to come

10:20to a formalized meeting. So, getting

10:22them during their commutes is going to

10:23be very important. We're going to be

10:24doing some robust um um outreach as well

10:27to make sure there's actual like

10:29planning documents you can access

10:30online, surveys, kind of manage your own

10:32ways. There's some really good examples

10:34from other transit authorities across

10:35the country where they've kind of made

10:36like design your own transit game or or

10:38how to prioritize. So, we're going to be

10:40using Nelson Nygard to help develop a

10:42lot of those engagement tools. In

10:44addition to all of that, we're going to

10:45be using a tool called Remix. And Remix

10:47is a visual tool that shows where our

10:50routing and mapping and all that. You

10:51can zoom in and out and see where you

10:53are versus where the proposed routes

10:54are. So, we're going to try a bunch of

10:56different um mediums to really reach out

10:59to the public, engage the public, always

11:01make sure we have Spanish translation

11:02and other available uh resources as

11:04well. Um, but certainly as we go into

11:07that process, we'll be in close

11:08coordination with with the city and

11:10we'll be happy to to come back and and

11:11talk talk to the group at any time about

11:13those uh opportunities.

11:14>> Okay. No, that's great. I think it's

11:16this committee too, we can work on

11:17having, you know, a couple public

11:18hearings or getting the word out as

11:20well. So, h happy to do that. Uh, I

11:22really appreciate and we obviously

11:24appreciate the update on this. Um, it's

11:26good to hear that it's something that

11:28might be I know it's hard to nail down

11:30an exact time now. what what what do you

11:32all envision as a potential tidal line?

11:34Maybe I'm sure it's maybe a year or two

11:36away at this point.

11:38>> Yeah. So, right now, the way that we're

11:39envisioning this uh this study is kind

11:42of a six-month study. So, we're trying

11:43to wrap this up with our next fiscal

11:45year 28 uh budget approval process. So,

11:48typically we will go into fiscal year 28

11:51in March. Administration provides a uh a

11:54kind of a a presentation to the large

11:56board. The board then sends it to audit

11:58and finance committee for review. and

12:00then in April you vote in a finalized

12:01budget. So, it's really an opportunity

12:03for us to vision towards FY28, what the

12:05possibilities are there. Um, but in

12:07terms of that uh next steps for the

12:095-year vision, that's going to be a

12:10six-month process. If there is a

12:12decision at that time to think about

12:14adding in this type of service, we will

12:16have to have some formalized public

12:18meetings to to vote that in per per the

12:20chapter 161B and uh the WRT advisory

12:23board bylaws. Um, but we are preparing

12:26ourselves for all those possibilities.

12:28>> Okay. Well, that's great to hear. Uh

12:30well yeah, thank you. Thank you,

12:31Administrator Rickman. We really

12:32appreciate it and um excited to hear the

12:35new development at the hub we were just

12:36talking about. So looking forward to

12:37that ribbon cutting in October. Uh but

12:40yeah, thank you for for your time,

12:41Commissioner. I really appreciate it.

12:42Thank you.

12:44>> And I don't know, Commissioner Ry, did

12:45you have anything to add or did you want

12:46to chime in or

12:48>> Uh thank you, Mr. Chair. No, I I don't

12:50really. It's uh this has been a a good

12:52collaborative effort and it really did

12:54start um back with the mobility action

12:56plan where we recognized there were

12:57these areas of the city that didn't have

13:00service currently didn't really meet

13:02some of the density thresholds um to

13:05justify service or traditional service I

13:07should say or didn't have the kind of

13:09writership that you would hope to see

13:11previously. So, um, you know, in working

13:14with WRTA and our consultants at the

13:17time coming up with this idea that, hey,

13:18this is a a potential application that

13:20could help us introduce service into

13:22these areas. So, really excited that um

13:25that we're uh continuing to look at this

13:27and that, you know, there's a

13:28possibility of moving forward with it.

13:31>> Great. Thank you, Commissioner. Well,

13:33thank you everyone. Um, I think with

13:34that clear, I'll make a motion to file

13:36item 3A.

13:38>> Councelor Folo,

13:39>> yes. Councelor O'Hara.

13:43>> Yes.

13:45>> And chairperson councelor Bada.

13:47>> Yes.

13:49>> Great. Thank you. Uh so we'll move on to

13:51item 3B. Order of councelor Gary Rosen

13:54request city manager provide city

13:56council with an update concerning the

13:58current state of negotiations for a new

14:01cable contract with Spectrum. The

14:03previous agreement, which expired on in

14:05October 2023, was marred by Spectrum's

14:07contract violations, poor customer

14:09service, poor cable reliability, and

14:11failure to provide contractual senior

14:14discounts, amongst others. Um, want to

14:18thank everyone for joining us tonight on

14:19this. We're joined by uh Judy Warren,

14:21director of cable services for the city

14:23of Worcester, and our friends from WCCA

14:25TV. We appreciate you all being here. I

14:27thought we could have um Director Warren

14:30if you'd want to come to talk about some

14:31of the what's going on with the spectrum

14:34negotiations. Um and then maybe we could

14:37have WCCA TV talk a little bit about

14:39what's on on your plate.

14:44>> The um

14:48the contract is still in negotiations.

14:50Mhm.

14:51>> Um I don't want to say we're in the home

14:53stretch, but um we are getting near the

14:58um wrapping this up. There will be my

15:01understanding is there's um a

15:04requirement by the state. Don't quote me

15:06on who, but um there will be a public

15:09hearing probably through this committee

15:12um for when the contract is finally

15:16finally finally drafted. Okay. Um, so

15:18that the um and then I believe that the

15:21attorney and or the

15:25[sighs]

15:26special consultant that was hired to

15:28help um negotiate this contract would be

15:32um present at that meeting. They'd most

15:34likely be virtual, but um they would be

15:37here to answer any additional questions.

15:40The um

15:43negotiations have been going on for a

15:45long time now and um there were certain

15:49pauses based on things that were

15:51happening in the industry and um so now

15:55that that somewhat settled a little bit

15:58um we're just pretty much wrapping up um

16:02you know minute details.

16:04>> Okay. uh because it is under

16:06negotiations, I can't really say too

16:08much about, you know, what's in there,

16:10but um

16:13mostly the law, legal things that are um

16:16trying to be finalized and stuff. I

16:19don't know what more I can say publicly.

16:22So,

16:23>> um I can try to answer any other

16:25questions that you might have.

16:28>> Sure.

16:30>> Uh through you, Mr. Chairman. Judy. Uh

16:33I'm sorry. I was talking with the

16:35>> Oh, that's okay.

16:35>> Commissioner,

16:36>> are you in negotiations? Is that what

16:39you're saying?

16:39>> Yes, I'm on the um negotiating team.

16:42>> Okay.

16:43>> The um

16:45more so to bring the institutional

16:48knowledge

16:50um because one part of my role as

16:52director of cable services is to handle

16:54or process any customer complaints in

16:57issues that they're having. um been

17:00doing that for almost 28 years. But um

17:05and they're similar the same issues tend

17:07to be you know my bill is wrong or

17:10they're charging me this that and the

17:11other thing and um generally I reach out

17:13to the government liaison at charter and

17:17generally get things squared away. Used

17:20to be almost always in the customer's

17:22favor. It's not necessarily that way

17:24anymore, but um

17:27the the laws federally and state

17:32um kind of restrict us with what we can

17:35and can't do um for the consumer. they

17:39have consumer rights and protections but

17:42um

17:44unless there's egregious issues with say

17:48billing or something but a lot of like

17:50say technical issues a line is down in

17:52someone's yard or they did damage or

17:55something it's usually um fixed between

17:59the customer and charter by the time it

18:02gets to me then you know it it's

18:04escalated so to speak

18:06>> okay Um, I don't know if you can address

18:10it. You said during negotiations, I

18:12don't know if you but one of there's a

18:14couple things I want to address. First,

18:16the senior discount.

18:18>> It's a big item with [clears throat] the

18:20council.

18:20>> Are you are you able to touch on that or

18:23is that something that is coming up in

18:25your discussions?

18:26>> It um has been part of the discussions

18:29and this is um my third or fourth

18:32renewal.

18:34um

18:37any kind of discount has always been

18:40perceived even at the state level as

18:44rate regulation.

18:46the

18:49I don't want to say caveat but

18:53it's been a

18:55sorry I'm trying to be careful here the

19:01which we try to um get in every single

19:04contract is to maintain that senior

19:06discount the

19:10because of the rate regulation rule

19:13basically so I'm going to back up a

19:15little bit sorry the the main things

19:18that customers have issues with and

19:21they've always had them is programming

19:23and rates.

19:25Unfortunately, the federal government um

19:28deregulated cable in 1996. So, we lost a

19:31lot of um what little control we had

19:34over rates because it was only on basic

19:36rates anyway. um and somewhat of the

19:41programming the um it's been very

19:44challenging to even address

19:47rates at the state level because there'd

19:50be hearings. The rates would already go

19:52up much like utilities. You might have

19:53some experience from your own state um

19:56service that the bills go up and then

19:59you have the hearing and then you know

20:01it takes time to get it retro changed

20:05whatever. Um

20:08gosh n 2019 I think don't quote me on

20:11the year charter also petitioned the FCC

20:16I believe it's definitely on the federal

20:18level to that there's competitive there

20:22effective competition in Worcester in

20:25the surrounding towns actually but um so

20:28they won now there's no say in the rates

20:33programming anything so It's basically a

20:36corporate decision on how they handle

20:39things, what they do for customers. Um,

20:42we do have some say over the quality of

20:46the signal and the service. Um, whether

20:49the public educational government

20:50channels go off the air, we can, you

20:53know, call them and say, you know, well,

20:55Marorrow um was out of service for what,

20:58a week, um, if not more because of a

21:02modulator problem. Anyway, um so there's

21:07I alluded to the chairman earlier that

21:10it's negotiating kind of with one hand

21:12tied behind your back. Um because of the

21:15laws in the regulations, there's

21:18my representation on that was for

21:21experience with customer service over

21:24the last 10 years of the contract, if

21:27not longer. but because it was the

21:2910-year contract, so it's the last 13

21:31years since we're under the old one. And

21:35public educational government access

21:37input.

21:40So then there's the lawyer and the

21:43consultant that are for the law and the

21:46rules and whatever regulations are on

21:49the books. So

21:50>> okay,

21:51>> I know there was a lot of

21:52>> You don't have to elaborate. Quick quick

21:54answers. Uh when you say we who are you

21:58alone on the uh

22:00>> Oh no team or do you have somebody else

22:02with you from the city?

22:04>> Yeah. Um the city solicitor is with us.

22:06>> Who is

22:07>> uh city solicitor? Alex uh Kalpunis.

22:10>> Just you and her,

22:12>> right? Michael Trainer was there until

22:14he um retired. But

22:16>> okay. And u All right. So you you know

22:19going in that that's that's a uh big

22:22issue, right? that the council most if

22:25not all the council is in favor of a

22:27senior discount. Okay, I'll speak for

22:30myself. Government channels and uh

22:35public assets channel

22:38>> 194 is very important to me that it gets

22:42funded

22:43in a more appropriate manner that it is.

22:46If you could negotiate, if you could

22:48bring that up, I'd appreciate it. Mhm.

22:51>> Uh because

22:53uh they have people working there that

22:54haven't had a raise in years and uh they

22:58can't hire people. It's not

23:01it's not what I like uh to hear because

23:04people deserve a living wage. They they

23:06deserve a increase and they do well. I

23:10know, you know, just I'm a fan of that

23:13channel. I watch it and I want to see uh

23:17these people that put on a good

23:18performance for our city to be uh you

23:23know

23:25respected and and rewarded for their

23:27work.

23:28>> So I' I'd ask you to consider uh trying

23:32to make sure that their voice is heard

23:35at that negotiating table.

23:37>> Absolutely.

23:37>> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

23:40>> Thank you, councelor. I just had one

23:42followup. Um, Judy, would it be possible

23:45just to give a brief overview of the PEG

23:48funding

23:50>> in regards from charter or

23:52>> how it breaks down for like the city?

23:54Just for the folks at home, I think it

23:56comes up a lot. I think a lot of

23:57>> folks aren't, you know, very familiar

23:59with it.

24:00>> Okay, no problem. The um

24:04we receive an annual

24:07in addition to capital funding that we

24:09may negotiate um and get from charter

24:14might be cyclical, you know, the first

24:17when we sign the contract and then

24:19halfway through you get the additional

24:21funding. Um that's separate from the

24:24annual franchise fees.

24:25>> Okay. And the annual franchise fees is

24:28um

24:30comes from the subscribers and it's got

24:33several categories of which they get the

24:35revenues. We get 5% of charter revenues

24:39>> minus just for Worcester, not not

24:42nationally. Um which would be very nice,

24:44but um

24:48where is I going with that? The revenues

24:51are based on the subscribers

24:55use of what they what they order, the

24:58the uh home shopping, those types of

25:02things. Um, the cable operator is

25:06allowed to deduct from that um any

25:09pay-per-view event. Oh, no, I'm sorry.

25:13Pay-per-view is included. They're

25:15allowed to um deduct bad debt. So if um

25:18say 400 people owed charter money for

25:22whatever calendar year like last year,

25:25>> they can deduct that as bad debt. Um

25:29>> and it can vary from year to year. There

25:31were some years that were really bad,

25:33but um

25:34>> but the PEG funding comes from the the

25:36the actual cable subscriptions. Correct.

25:40>> Correct. And then and then then it

25:41breaks down to the city for for public

25:44or for for your department and then for

25:47al also the school department, right,

25:49for education and then correct

25:51>> third. Um so

25:53>> public to clarify that it does come from

25:54the cable company. That's how we're all

25:56funded. Y

25:58>> um the tax dollars are not used for

26:01either PEG educational government.

26:04Within that breakdown however is um

26:10there's public education government what

26:13is called the inet which is an old term

26:16but the funding is used to offset costs

26:20for the city's network.

26:22>> Okay.

26:22>> Years ago the inet was also carried peg

26:27but it also carried um you know the

26:29city's financial systems data systems

26:31whatever. Um

26:34so that has been maintained within the

26:37breakdown of the uh funding by the

26:39issuing authority which is the city

26:40manager.

26:41>> Okay.

26:42>> Um

26:44missing one. Oh um administrative

26:47>> that's part of the breakdown as well.

26:48Okay.

26:49>> Yeah. And that is based on a percentage

26:53not 100%. It's a percentage of salaries

26:56for certain people that were involved

26:59with cable. Okay. um a portion of my

27:01salary say um the city solicitors

27:05uh I think in budget they might with

27:08small percentages it's five or 10%. The

27:12um

27:14and then part of that is also used for

27:16the renewal costs

27:18>> okay

27:19>> that have been set aside over the years.

27:22um because we renew

27:25even though the contract is 10 years,

27:27you start negotiations or renewal

27:29process three years before it expires.

27:31So, we've actually been in this renewal

27:33process for a while now, unfortunately.

27:36But, um

27:38the breakdown specifically for public

27:40educational government is decided by the

27:44manager

27:45>> as the um

27:48issuing authority.

27:50public is 55% of that funding that is

27:54left after the um

27:59Inet and the cable administration part

28:02is taken out not cable just the

28:04administration

28:06>> then education is 20% and government is

28:1025%.

28:12the um I'm sure in WCCA is a separate

28:18entity, a separate contract negotiated,

28:21so their terms are different. Um

28:25usually coincides with the license

28:26agreement with the cable operator

28:28anyway, but um just to clarify that

28:32funding is through the um issuing

28:35authority. The city manager decides how

28:37much and who gets what, when and where.

28:40Um it was changed back under uh city

28:42manager O'Brien

28:44because of the um at the time

28:49boosting the cable

28:52um I'm sorry the government access up

28:54because they wanted more meetings

28:55covered um in order to get more meetings

28:57covered. I needed another staff person

28:59and okay more equipment and rooms

29:02outfitted and so on. So um basically

29:06comes down to we get the money from

29:08charter and the city manager allocates

29:12according to the needs and operation

29:14requirements of the city.

29:17>> Great. No thank I really appreciate that

29:18Jud. I think

29:19>> one final thing though I just want to

29:20say that the funds are used by state law

29:24um for cable related purposes only. So,

29:28um that's where it gets a little bit

29:31gray with the administration part of it

29:33because it's um those the percentage as

29:38I said is nominal

29:40but they're doing cable television

29:44>> work.

29:45>> Okay. um the staff of various

29:47departments. There's like four people I

29:50think. But no,

29:52>> I we appreciate that and again

29:54appreciate all the work that you and the

29:56city solicitor and the manager have been

29:57doing to try and get this resolved. I

29:58know it's very hard for the city of

30:00Worcester compared um in other

30:02communities compared to going up against

30:04this massive conglomerate that Spectrum

30:06is um and frankly monopoly. So uh

30:09appreciate that. We're hoping to get

30:12those senior discounts back for a lot of

30:14our seniors that were defrauded from

30:15that. So hopefully we'll have some good

30:16news with that and appreciate your your

30:18help um and the information because I

30:20think again helpful for folks to

30:22understand how this funding from

30:23Spectrum is broken down for the city. So

30:26thank you Judy.

30:27>> Appreciate it.

30:28>> Thank you.

30:28>> Uh Mr. Chairman.

30:29>> Oh yes. Go ahead council.

30:32>> Uh to the chairman. Uh yeah, I I do have

30:35some concerns regarding, you know, the

30:37the senior discount uh the back and

30:40forth that we we've been having or

30:42you've been having with them. Um

30:45and I know you can't really get into too

30:47much detail, but can you just talk about

30:50if you can help me understand the actual

30:53um

30:55the contract itself? So it was a a

30:58contract, it was an obligation with

31:01them. It was like an agreement. Was it

31:02like an a franchise agreement? Is that

31:04correct?

31:05>> Yes. It's um by law the um to provide

31:09cable television service cable operators

31:12have to apply um for a license agreement

31:15with any municipality.

31:17>> So within that agreement they were that

31:20senior discount was part of the were

31:22part of the the agreement. Correct.

31:24>> Correct.

31:26>> Okay. Do we know how much in total is

31:29was owed or is owed?

31:33It's not a matter of what is owed and

31:36not owed. The negotiations from

31:41the previous the license that we're

31:44under now, the

31:47discount was on basic cable television

31:50service if you only had basic

31:54television.

31:56The majority of people have expanded

32:00cable, you know, additional tiers,

32:02whether they have a sports package, HBO,

32:05Showtime, so and the like. Very few

32:08people have just basic cable. The um and

32:14the discount is only on that basic rate,

32:17which historically for a very long time

32:20was very low. So you're looking at a

32:22dollar a$150

32:24till about three years ago and don't

32:27quote me on the years everything's a

32:28blur at the moment. Um you know basic

32:31did go up as a matter of fact I do stand

32:34corrected when charter was able to

32:37succeed in their comp effective

32:39competition in 2019.

32:43Basic rates had been pretty much stable

32:46under $20. you had the fees and the

32:48taxes and the broadcast fees, but um the

32:52basic rate was very nominal in

32:54comparison to what you're paying. So the

32:57rate discounts would be between say

32:59maybe a $150 to $1.75.

33:03Once they were successful with the

33:06effective competition, they raised the

33:08basic rate to over $20. So you're still

33:11looking at approximately 22 250 a month.

33:16Um

33:18but because most people don't have just

33:21basic cable um the discount is not

33:26um they're not eligible for that

33:28discount.

33:30>> Okay. But this

33:32>> somewhat somewhat. So did this take

33:34place over over about 10 years now?

33:38>> Yes. Um it's actually been on the um

33:41each license before that as well. it had

33:43been um you know the 10% off the basic

33:46rate the basic

33:48>> so we could that it's a substantial

33:50amount of money um

33:54over time and is there a way to figure

33:56out that that that that amount can we

33:58>> I've been trying to figure that out for

34:00a very long time as to how many um

34:04seniors possibly could be have just the

34:08basic cable um I've

34:11>> talked with the uh senior the elder

34:14affairs people to see if they could

34:16gauge or whatever. And um

34:21there's no way to come up with an exact

34:24number of impacted

34:27subscribers that had just basic cable

34:30because so few have it and so few had

34:34it. Even back then, um, in 2013

34:39when I first started, yeah, uh, there

34:41were way more people that had just basic

34:43because expanded was, um, that was a

34:46treat. That was a, you know, that was

34:48the Maserati of cable. But, um,

34:52>> over the years they almost force you to

34:54have to get the expanded because that's

34:56where your channels are that you want,

34:58your hallmarks, your the Nessens. So the

35:00senior discount was only for the the the

35:03very lowest tier basic tier.

35:05>> Absolutely. The lowest tier.

35:07>> I see. Okay.

35:08>> But would you say I mean you said you've

35:11been looking at this for a while now.

35:12Ballpark. Could you give a ballpark of

35:16>> So you're saying it's been over 10 years

35:18now.

35:18>> Yeah.

35:18>> Uh

35:19>> could you give a ballpark of that? Are

35:21we looking at hundreds of thousands? Are

35:24we looking at millions?

35:26>> Yeah. the I mean again these are not

35:29like formulas or just based on

35:32experience of customers calling in

35:35>> um that maybe there would be a handful

35:38of people per year [snorts] that um

35:42might have had just the basic service.

35:44So and I was using maybe 25 people as a

35:48number. Um,

35:50so then it' be $25 a month, maybe $50 a

35:54month time 12 time 10. Um, so,

35:59>> okay,

35:59>> I don't have the math in my head right

36:00now, but um, I was think, you know,

36:03somewhere between, you know, 15 and

36:05$20,000

36:08>> per per year.

36:10>> No, no. Um,

36:13probably total for the last well 10

36:15years. When I was running the numbers,

36:17it was um probably like two, three years

36:20ago, but those numbers

36:25are mine, you know, just from

36:27experience. They're not science. They're

36:29not Charter does not divulge any of

36:32their subscriber demographics, their um

36:36makeup. They can't ask people's age. So,

36:40um it would only be a guess.

36:43>> Okay.

36:45>> Okay. Um

36:47I don't know chairman is if there's a

36:49way to figure out how we can uh support

36:51them and figure out what these numbers

36:53are because I don't know to me it seems

36:56like that number might be higher and um

36:59it is concerning. You know I did a

37:00little bit of research and I saw that

37:02you know um you know Spectrum built a $8

37:05million techhub initiative um in in

37:08Connecticut and it wasn't like something

37:10that was needed. So, I mean, if they're

37:12able to build something out there in

37:14Connecticut and know that we're dealing

37:15with this issue of um what they owe us

37:20or or our or our uh citizens or the the

37:23the our senior citizens,

37:27I just hope during these negotiations

37:29that we're pushing hard and

37:30understanding that, you know, us

37:32counselors are seeing that, you know,

37:33for Zola brought up a really good a lot

37:34of good points and issues that we're

37:36having Gary Rosen as well and all the

37:37other counselors. I just I just hope

37:39we're not in a situation where, you

37:41know, they don't they just don't live up

37:42to their bargain again and we go another

37:4410 years on something that's different

37:45than we find out down the road. Um so

37:49again, I hope these negotiations we are

37:50we are pushing hard and and

37:52understanding that, you know, we're

37:53we're here for our residents and that,

37:55you know, we're not just going to be an

37:56easy pushover. Um just think that, you

37:59know, these things can happen, have

38:00these negotiations, and then just back

38:02away from the obligation that they that

38:04they agreed on. Um and then obviously

38:06with our own city channels as well

38:08supporting them. Um so that's just I

38:11don't know through the chairman um if

38:13there's a way to figure out how we can

38:15support figuring out I would really like

38:17to know what what that total amount is

38:18or give me as close figure as possible.

38:22would um I don't know if the if the

38:24committee's amendable to it. Maybe we

38:26could do uh chairman's order

38:31asking for any I don't know what has

38:35have there been Judy any is there

38:38anything in writing that we could have

38:39that would really you know kind of

38:42pinpoint or or provide more of a general

38:44number or is I again it's it's pretty

38:46hard to to

38:48>> to to find Yeah.

38:50>> Again it's hard to put in numbers. Yeah,

38:52sorry. Um

38:54the again it was more of

38:58you know you have 20,000 subscribers you

39:01know what percentage of them are

39:03probably seniors because a lot of um you

39:07know certain demographics are more

39:09streaming than you know having hard

39:12hardwired cable.

39:14ballpark kind of whatever and then um

39:18trying to push forward with

39:21again going blind because I can't get

39:24the demographics from charter.

39:26>> Okay.

39:27>> Um and just guessing based on you know

39:30the experience at uh elder affairs with

39:33their people. Um, we've gone up there.

39:36We've had a senior's discount day, you

39:40know, with charter and stuff and, um,

39:43people did sign up,

39:46>> but because they had more than basic

39:49television, they were not eligible for

39:51the discounts.

39:53>> Okay.

39:53>> And it was approximately 175 people um

39:56on that list.

39:58>> Okay. I think what we'll do is maybe

40:01we'll hold this item and then we can

40:03kind of circle back and maybe have uh

40:07see in the in in the interim what might

40:10be able to be put together for it

40:12because I think we're all trying to

40:14figure out like if there's just some

40:15numbers and things that we could provide

40:17to the public. But again, it seems like

40:18it is pretty a nebulous number to try

40:21and grasp. Um I don't know if the rest

40:23of the committee is okay with that

40:24withholding. Um I I'll just make a

40:26motion to to hold

40:28But uh um I before we do that, I I

40:31appreciate your time. Thank you for

40:32answering those questions. I just

40:34thought we'd we we could bring Morrow

40:35from WCCA TV just to talk about what's

40:37going on, you know, their experiences

40:39lately or how what you know, how what

40:41their work relates to to this item.

40:44>> Um

40:45>> yeah, they're um to the chair just for

40:50public. The um WCCA is larger. They have

40:54more people. they have to serve more

40:58people.

40:58>> Um so their budget is larger and I just

41:02want um to go on record that we all um

41:06each entity has

41:08>> been cut as well. Um we had a staff

41:12person that um moved on to a different

41:14career in May and we can't hire. So um

41:19smaller but I just want you to each

41:22entity is um feeling it one way or the

41:24other and um you know as you will hear

41:27that um there you know the hit is hard.

41:30>> Yeah.

41:30>> Um and subscriptions subscriber counts

41:34are diminishing. So there's things we

41:37can hope for at the state level that um

41:40revenues can come in from um streaming

41:43services that's been in committee

41:45forever. Um so I would encourage people

41:49to contact Senator Moore, I believe. But

41:52um to push that forward and hopefully we

41:55can get somewhere um and pull in some

41:58revenues from the streaming because and

42:01this is just my opinion. I'm not

42:03speaking for the city manager in no way,

42:05shape, or form, but [snorts]

42:07the streaming services provided from

42:10charter are using the very same lines.

42:13So, if it looks like a duck, acts like a

42:15duck, it is a duck. So, um but they um

42:22it's just it's it's very convoluted and

42:25complex industry across the board. So

42:29>> they're using the same conduits

42:30basically, but but because it's under

42:32they call it quote or it is streaming

42:34not that's how they get around paying

42:36>> right because driver

42:37>> fee because the internet is not um a

42:40cable in the FCC's mind is not a cable.

42:45>> Okay.

42:46>> Even though they're using cables. I

42:47don't you

42:48>> it's literally a cable. Yeah.

42:50>> Yeah. I I I have and Marorrow probably

42:53has some more insight on that as well.

42:55But um it's just it's

42:58>> I think

42:58>> it's good for the council to know too

43:00what what you know we could pass

43:01resolutions or what we could do to reach

43:03out to our state delegation to support

43:06uh the the legislation that's out there.

43:08>> Exactly.

43:09>> Thank you J. Appreciate your time.

43:11>> Sorry.

43:13I apolog Yeah. Thank you. Um so you said

43:16the numbers have dropped the

43:18subscribers. Um, can you give give me an

43:21idea of where we're at with subscribers

43:23and or tell me like when you say drop,

43:25what's the is there a certain like in

43:27the hundreds again, thousands, where we

43:29at?

43:30>> The um I believe it's just under 18,000

43:35subscribers.

43:37>> Okay. And then what would you say 5 to

43:4010 years ago? Would you know that number

43:42where we were at?

43:43>> I just want to know what's like the the

43:44the difference in drop. Oh yeah, the um

43:47numbers have dropped significantly over

43:49the last um 10 years. The

43:53beginning of the other contract um when

43:56we were neg 2013

43:59I think we were closer to 42 or 30

44:03between 35 and 42. I can get you exact

44:05numbers. Um

44:08I have how many? What?

44:10>> 47,000.

44:11>> 47,000.

44:14So, um they they they are dropping

44:17rather quickly and it's um from Peg's

44:22perspective, it's scary because there's

44:24not enough revenue coming from

44:26subscribers to support the operations.

44:29So, and [snorts] that's with cuts. So,

44:32>> thank you.

44:34>> Thank you, J. Appreciate your time.

44:36Thank you. Oh, yeah. I thought we'd uh

44:38Mororrow, if you'd like to come just if

44:39you'd wanted to fill us in about any um

44:42updates or or if you maybe might be able

44:44to talk about that piece of legislation.

44:48>> I'm sorry I can't. My hearing is is

44:50terrible these days.

44:51>> Oh, no. It's okay, Mark. Um no, I just

44:53wanted to ask if you might want to talk

44:54about u how you know your W what WCA TV

44:58does ties into this item and also if you

45:01wouldn't mind touching on that piece of

45:04legislation.

45:05>> Yeah.

45:05>> That we might be able to assist. First

45:07of all, let me say that that I we

45:09appreciate the council members and and

45:12for voicing support to save WCCA and our

45:15PEG channels. WCCA we feel is a

45:18cornerstone civic asset as the station

45:21faces critical need to make up for

45:23revenue losses due to changes in

45:25congressional telecommunications law.

45:28And I'm have to say I'm sorry I haven't

45:30heard anything about uh the the attorney

45:32the specialist that the city hired for

45:34this Jerry Letterer. Uh he's one of the

45:37top in his field. Uh so I'd like to know

45:41what his what the status is of that

45:43later on. But I'm grateful to the city

45:46through a vote asked the city manager to

45:48work with WCCA to secure funding to save

45:51the channel and to see if public access

45:53and to save public access community

45:55programming to including to look into

45:57the budget to see what can be done. It

46:00seems that there's no movement forward

46:02nor not even any action to urge our

46:05state delegation to pass new legislation

46:08mandates to modernize PEG funding. There

46:11have been a couple of different bills

46:12that are out there and they get

46:14squandered in the process in on Beacon

46:17Hill and what happens is they end up

46:20fighting over how much money is involved

46:22and who's going to get that money and

46:24all the rest of it. You know, initially

46:26the uh telecommunications act was a

46:29congressional act of congress that

46:31established in exchange of rights of way

46:34that the the the cable providers would

46:36would would u contribute 5% of its gross

46:40revenue. That means everything. It's ad

46:42money, anything. Yeah. 5% of that gross

46:45to support peg channels. It wasn't

46:48intended to support city services. It's

46:51it's not a tax money. It's not

46:53technically the city money. It's money

46:55that comes from the cable provider in

46:58exchange of rights way. Their gross

46:59revenues that can amount to a lot of

47:02money um over especially over a 10-year

47:05period. Uh we we heard about the

47:08$477,000

47:10that that was that's you have taken

47:12every year to to pay for Inet. That's

47:15kind of a nebulous thing these days

47:17because I don't know what Inet does for

47:18the stations or the peg channels, but

47:20that 477 is a static fee. So if the

47:24cable subscriptions go down, that 477

47:27goes to the city consistently. Uh so

47:30while we're going from 800,000 down to

47:33400,000 a year, the city still gets that

47:37477,000

47:39uh every year. That amounts to about 5

47:40million over a 10-year contract.

47:42>> Okay. Um, so, so when the when the city

47:46manager does have the public hearings, I

47:48hope the city council is look at it

47:50before he signs it and have have a

47:51chance to comment on that. Under the old

47:54law currently supported that's currently

47:56supporting the extended situation that

47:58we have, uh, we're waiting uh, for a new

48:01franchise. The older law stipulates

48:04funding for PEG is derived for a

48:06percentage in our case 5% of the cable

48:10service providers gross revenues in

48:13exchange of rights away for support of

48:14PEG. Now even though the ser of course

48:18service standards and cable services

48:20diminish people cut the cord as you

48:22heard and instead they opt for digital

48:24fiber internet and or Wi-Fi delivery

48:27plat uh services to watch their TV

48:30shows. A simple elegant solution is to

48:33amend the current law. Take that state,

48:36you could do it from a state level, if

48:37not a federal level, ultimately

48:40congressional law. But to amend it,

48:42simply insert and stipulate funding for

48:44PEG is derived from a percentage 5% of

48:47the cable, fiber, internet, and Wi-Fi

48:50service providers. Gross revenues in

48:52exchange of rights of way. That's all

48:55that really needs to be done. Or change

48:57cable services to some broader term,

49:00okay? broadband services including A B C

49:03and D whatever it is it doesn't have to

49:06be rocket science in some in some cities

49:09like I know Ashland for example the

49:11cable franchise money went directly to

49:13the public access the public access was

49:15a peg channel it it took care it managed

49:18public it managed education it managed

49:20um government but it received all the

49:23money from from itself to determine what

49:25it could do so the municipalities have a

49:28say in it and They still have a say to

49:31some degree, but I know it's challenging

49:33as Judy pointed out. At any rate,

49:37running a full-fledged TV station is not

49:39cheap. If it was affordable and

49:41sustainable, there would be a channel

49:43four and five and here in the city

49:45operating. But the fact is those kind of

49:48revenues just aren't there. And you have

49:49Charter on top of it charging fees for

49:52its channel one. And they do a good job

49:54with that. It's a news program. It's

49:55local. But they're, you know, they're

49:57getting the whatever commercial money is

49:59out there, they're getting it and they

50:00can get it over us very easy because

50:02they're they're sending out their

50:04channel regionally or nationally because

50:06I know they cut in where we're limited

50:09to Worcester. And it's funny how that

50:11works because whenever there's a

50:12franchise fee, whether it was the old

50:14radio days back in the 30s and TV,

50:17broadcast TV, the spectrum was given,

50:20but the people got the little part. They

50:23got the little piece of it. you know the

50:24college radio channels and the co you

50:26know public access TV we get such a

50:29small part of it compared to every the

50:31to be these major corporations that run

50:34the world practically so it's not cheap

50:37and on top of running a TV station we're

50:39also a school in a way you know we're

50:42we're educating people we're giving

50:43people experiential learning

50:45opportunities to learn how to edit and

50:48produce and and even do the background

50:50stuff you know administrate for a TV

50:52show to learning how be directors,

50:54executive directors. We got some people

50:56that are doing it all on their own.

50:59>> So, a lot of great programming,

51:01>> right? I mean, and that's that's I don't

51:03want to say a burden, but it's part of

51:04it's part of our mission. It's a happy

51:06burden, I guess. It's what we do and we

51:08love it. And it's not it's not just

51:11about and I appreciate, John, what you

51:14said. It meant a lot to us. Uh it's it's

51:17not about Yeah, we had a staff. We lost

51:20three people. We couldn't replace them.

51:22I I'm holding on, you know, but we have

51:25people there. There's no turnaround.

51:27They either age out, die out, or or, you

51:30know, retire out. Uh but I can't u

51:34replace them with this budget that we

51:35have. I'll be lucky if we last another,

51:37you know, year and a half.

51:40So, we're at a place where we have to

51:42find a principal partner, a principal

51:43sponsor of that nature. Writing program

51:47grants. I'm doing doing that trying to

51:50see if we can hit something. Uh that's

51:52like fishing, you know, you pull it up,

51:53you might get a perch, you might get a

51:55k, you might get a bass, you don't know.

51:57But uh you know, we're trying. But

51:59that's not going to help keep the lights

52:01on. We lost a a modulator is a piece of

52:04equipment that gets our channel on the

52:06actually gets it out there. It was over

52:09$5,000 for us when all was said and

52:10done. The technicians from Charter were

52:12very responsive. They helped. They

52:13worked with us, but uh it was expensive.

52:17Two days later, the fire alarm panel

52:19blew out. So, you know, there's another

52:22$5,000. So, you got stuff like this. We

52:25have a TV station and I'm worried I got

52:27to keep keep our staff going so they can

52:30do what they do and they're doing way

52:32more than what they're getting to do.

52:34You know, we're doing more with less.

52:37Um Lauren, do you happen to know just

52:39real quick um what any of the names of

52:44some of the pieces of legislation that

52:45are in the state house right now? What

52:47the different pieces of legislation are

52:49at the state level that we could?

52:50>> There there's one modernizing public

52:52access that's out there. Jason Senator

52:54Jason Lewis wrote it. He I'm not sure

52:56he's going to come back after this

52:58election is done.

52:59>> I think he's okay.

53:01>> Um might be retiring. I'm trying.

53:03>> He's not running for re-election.

53:04>> Yeah, he's not running for for

53:05reelection. So, excuse me, Mr. Chairman.

53:08Three. Excuse me, ma'am. So, you need

53:10someone to pick that ball up and run

53:12with it.

53:12>> Yeah.

53:13>> If he's not there.

53:14>> Yeah.

53:15>> Not you, you say, but you know, someone

53:18>> I know I spoke to uh you know, some of

53:21our our state legislation and and the

53:24legislators

53:26and they'll ask, you know, you're

53:27working with this group and this group.

53:28Yeah, there's a there's alliance.

53:30There's over a hundred over a hundred uh

53:33public access channels in in the state.

53:36Now you figure some of those have

53:37between one and and 10 15 people working

53:40for them.

53:41>> So there's a lot of jobs in in not not

53:44not not to mention the services that are

53:47at stake.

53:47>> Okay.

53:48>> Thank you, Mario. Um councelor O'Ja, do

53:50you have any questions?

53:56>> No, I do not.

53:57>> Okay. Thank you. I I'd like to make a

54:00motion to do a chairman's order um

54:03if if the committee sees fit to request

54:06the city manager work with um the

54:10Worester Chamber of Commerce to explore

54:13principal uh sponsorships for WCCA TV.

54:17I'd like to make that as a motion.

54:22>> Follow Council Pello.

54:24>> Councelor O'Hada.

54:26>> Yes. and chairperson councelor Bada.

54:29>> Yes. Um yeah, I think there's there's

54:32more that we can do to you know what I

54:33mean to continue to advocate for WCCA TV

54:35more. Yeah. And we appreciate everything

54:37that you that you all do and it is like

54:39counselor Fzola said, it's a vital

54:40service to the community. Um you know, I

54:43follow on Instagram and social media and

54:46every day there's different people there

54:48that are doing different programming and

54:50and you know, really talking about

54:51what's going on in our community. So,

54:53it's an important

54:54>> important asset.

54:56Um, we appreciate mora and I think I'll

54:58make a motion to hold item 3A, excuse

55:01me, 3B.

55:02>> Prior to doing so, um, just to clarify,

55:04I do want to note that the item 3B is

55:07um, in order to request the city manager

55:10um, provide council with a report, but

55:12it's not necessarily um, an update or a

55:15formal report. Um, just for my own

55:17clarification, do you still intend to

55:19hold it or would you like to um

55:22recommend approval and direct the city

55:24manager to provide an update or hold it

55:26for discussion and

55:27>> Okay. Thank you, Claire. No, I think

55:28we'll we'll move forward with with

55:30submitting it or yeah, moving it forward

55:32finally so so the manager can um proceed

55:36>> through the chair. I will take a roll

55:38call on that then. Uh, councelor Folo.

55:42>> Voting for the manager. This go to the

55:44manager, right? Yes. Yes.

55:47>> Councelor O'Hada.

55:48>> Yes.

55:49>> Interperson Councelor Blada.

55:51>> Yes. Um well, appreciate everyone's time

55:54and thank you all for coming out. Uh

55:56with that, I'll make a motion to

55:57adjourn.

55:59>> Oh, yes, Fred.

56:01>> I would like to speak for a moment.

56:02>> All right. Absolutely. We'll open the

56:04floor for Fred Nathan.

56:07>> If it's green, you should be all set if

56:08it's green.

56:10>> Hello. Okay,

56:10>> there you go.

56:11>> Uh thank you, uh Fred Nathan Worster.

56:15So back in the 70s uh when cable came

56:18into existence now let's face it cable

56:22was a novelty and there something that

56:25worester bought into this novelty they

56:27bought in livestock and barrel and were

56:30promised a whole lot of things but

56:32really in essence they really got

56:35nothing

56:36I mean they they allowed people to have

56:39cable but this is something that

56:41somebody else probably would have um uh

56:44brought caught in. But so uh fast

56:47forward to 1996,

56:51the federal government deregulated the

56:53telecommunications

56:55uh act which had the cable under it. And

57:00basically after that happened,

57:03uh the bigger cable brought up all the

57:05little small mom and pop type cable

57:08operators. So that's why they have the

57:10monopolies that they do. And I think

57:14it's uh disgusting, you know, the way

57:16that the cable industry, not just, you

57:18know, this one, how they treat the

57:20elderly

57:22and the fact that they would only give a

57:25small like a dollar off on a uh cable

57:30subscriber

57:31only if they had basic cable.

57:35I mean, that's a disgrace.

57:37you know, are the people who built this

57:41country, who built all the cities.

57:45I always get mixed up. Are we the second

57:47largest city or the third largest city

57:49in all of New England?

57:50>> Second.

57:52>> I think the fact

57:55that you have operators like Verizon

57:59Files putting a dent into this cable

58:03system is good for business.

58:07But unfortunately

58:09the business that they lost because of

58:11their because of their actions that will

58:15never come back and it affects my good

58:18friend Marorrow over here because it

58:20means less money.

58:23I would say if they did a a forensic

58:26audit on this cable company and on the

58:29cable companies that have been here uh

58:32prior, uh you will find out that the

58:34city of Worcester

58:36and WCCA TV is owed a lot of money and

58:42the people in general are owed better

58:44services.

58:47Thank you, Frederick Nathan. Would not

58:49be a Worester City Council meeting for

58:51Nathan Charming. With that, we will mo

58:54make a motion to adjurnn.

58:56>> Councelor Folo,

58:58>> yes.

58:58>> Councelor O'Hada,

59:00>> yes.

59:00>> And chairperson councelor Bada.

59:03>> Yes. Thank you.