Whenever the city disapproves a schedule of rates upon initial review or subsequent rate increases, it may employ any combination of the following remedies:
(A) A prospective reduction in rates may be ordered consistent with FCC rate standards or the results of a cost of service study;
(B) New rates may be prescribed by the city to bring rates found to be unreasonable into compliance with FCC rate standards or a cost of service study;
(C) The city may, consistent with division (D) in this section, order the franchisee to refund to subscribers an amount by which rates are found to be unreasonable under any of the following circumstances:
(1) As part of the initial review of rates;
(2) When the franchisee has failed to comply with a rate decision and has continued to charge unreasonable rates; or
(3) Where the city has tolled a prospective rate increase for 90 or 150 additional days (as applicable) and the rate increase later found to be unreasonable has gone into effect; or
(D) When refunds may become applicable, the city shall issue a brief order when the tolled rates go into effect directing the franchisee to keep accurate account of all amounts paid by individual subscribers relative to the rates in question (an accounting order). The period for which refunds may be ordered shall not exceed one year. Before ordering a refund, the city must give the franchisee prior notice and an opportunity to make a presentation, either orally in a hearing context or by paper filings. Refunds shall include interest computed at the rate used by the Internal Revenue Service for refunds and additional tax payments. Normally, refunds shall be made to individual subscribers that paid the unreasonable charges. However, where no accounting order has been issued or the franchisee can demonstrate that such specific refunds will entail undue burden compared with the amount of the refund, the city may authorize a one time credit to all subscribers of the class that paid the unreasonable rates.
(Ord. 96-9, passed 2-26-1996)