Before the
                Federal Communications Commission
                      Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of                )
                                )
TCI of Arlington, Inc.          )  File No. CSB-A-0612
                                )  CUID TX0826
                                )
Petition for Stay of Local Rate Order)
of City of Arlington,Texas      )


                              ORDER

   Adopted:  March 11, 1999             Released:  March 15, 1999  

By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau:

     1.   On February 26, 1999, TCI of Arlington, Inc. ("Operator") requested a stay of the local rate
order passed by the City of Arlington, Texas ("the City") on February 23, 1999 pending action on its appeal
of that local rate order.  Operator filed an Errata on March 4, 1999.  The stay is requested with respect to the
City's ruling on Operator's equipment, installation, and maintenance rates on Form 1205 and its basic service
tier rate on FCC Form 1240.  The City filed an opposition on March 4, 1999.

     2.   Franchising authorities may regulate rates for basic cable service and associated equipment
and installation charges pursuant to section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended
("Communications Act") and the Commission's implementing regulations adopted pursuant to section 623(b)
of the Communications Act.  The City issued a local rate order reducing the maximum permitted rate
calculated in Operator's FCC Form 1240 for the basic service tier and rejecting Operator's proposed equipment,
installation, and maintenance rate increases.  Operator argues that, if a stay is not granted, it will be irreparably
harmed by what it alleges is an erroneous rate order, because economic and legal considerations may limit
recovery of lost tier revenue through a surcharge, and there is no automatic true up mechanism for lost
equipment, installation, and maintenance revenue.  Operator argues that, if a stay is granted, its subscribers
will be fully protected by its pledge to track its revenue and make appropriate refunds if ordered to do so under
the final disposition of the case.  The City opposes Operator's request, arguing that the rate reductions and
refunds it ordered were justified and consistent with Commission precedent.

     3.   The Commission evaluates petitions for stay under well settled principles.  To support a stay,
a petitioner must demonstrate:  (1) that it is likely to prevail on the merits; (2) that it will suffer irreparable
harm if a stay is not granted; (3) that other interested parties will not be harmed if the stay is granted; and (4)
that the public interest favors granting a stay.  The likelihood of success on the merits is an important element
in a petitioner's showing.  However, the degree to which a probability of success on the merits must be found
will vary according to the Commission's assessment of the other factors.   When confronted with a case in
which other elements strongly favor interim relief, the Commission may exercise its discretion to grant a stay.

     4.   The substantive issues addressed by the City concern Operator's development of company-wide
equipment and installation rates after the Telecommunications Act of 1996 amended the Communications Act
to allow aggregated equipment rates on a franchise, system, regional, or company level.  The appropriateness
of Operator's methodology and the adequacy of supportive information provided to franchising authorities has
been questioned in local rate orders adopted by several franchising authorities and is being further reviewed
pursuant to a petition for reconsideration of the Bureau's Memorandum Opinion and Order in TCI of
Richardson, Inc.  The City also revised Operator's computation of the "gap" period in its true up of its tier
rate.  The proper treatment of the "gap" period is also under further review pursuant to the petition for
reconsideration in TCI of Richardson.  We find that a stay of the local rate order pending this review and a
determination of the Operator's appeal is in the public interest so that Operator's nationally aggregated rate and
"gap" true up can be treated consistently in these jurisdictions.  

     5.   In order to protect the interests of subscribers and ensure that refunds will be paid if Operator
does not prevail on the merits, we will grant operator's request that the local rate order be stayed pending a
resolution of this case on the merits on condition that Operator create an escrow account.  During the period
of this stay, Operator must deposit in an interest-bearing escrow account the total refund amount due under
the City Ordinance as of the date the account is opened and on an ongoing basis must accumulate in the escrow
account the difference between the rates ordered by the City and the rates charged customers during the
pendency of the underlying petition for review of the City's local rate order.  Alternatively, Operator may elect
to post a bond for the benefit of the City.  The amount of the bond shall be the total refund amount due as of
the date the bond is posted plus an estimate of the additional amount that will accumulate on the basis of the
difference between the rates ordered by the City and the rates charged customers until Operator's next annual
rate adjustment is scheduled to take effect, plus interest. The amount of the bond for estimated additional
amounts shall be based on Operator's subscriber count at the time the bond is posted.  The bond shall provide
that, if operator is unable to fulfill its refund obligation for any reason, then the surety will fulfill that obligation
to the City on behalf of Operator's subscribers.  

     6.   Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Request for Emergency Stay of Local Rate Orders
filed by TCI of Arlington, Inc. IS GRANTED pending the resolution of Operator's appeal on the merits.

     7.   IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Operator SHALL PLACE in an interest bearing escrow
account the refund amount due under the City Ordinance at the time the account is opened and SHALL
ACCUMULATE in this account on an ongoing basis the difference between the rates ordered by the City and
the rates charged customers during the pendency of the underlying appeal.  Alternatively, Operator SHALL
SECURE this amount by posting a bond for the benefit of the City for the total refund amount ordered by the
City that is due at the time the bond is posted plus an estimate of the additional amount that will accumulate
on the basis of the difference between the rates ordered by the City and the rates charged customers until
Operator's next annual rate adjustment is scheduled to take effect, plus interest for the period covered by this
bond at the prevailing U.S. Internal Revenue Service Rate for tax refunds and additional tax payments.  Proof
of Operator's compliance with this Order SHALL BE FILED with the Commission within thirty (30) days of
the release of this Order.

     8.   This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by section 0.321 of the Commission's
rules.  47 C.F.R.  0.321.

                              FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION



                              William H. Johnson
                              Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau