********************************************************    
                         NOTICE
********************************************************

This document was converted from
WordPerfect or Word to ASCII Text format.

Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.

All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.

Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.

If you need the complete document, download the
WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version, if available.

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

In the Matter of                        )         
                              )    CUID No.  CA0623  (City of Dixon)
Sonic Cable Television                  )
of Northern California                  )         
                              )
Complaint Regarding Cable Programming   )
Services Tier Rate Increase             )           
                                
                              ORDER

     Adopted:  November 18, 1999        Released:  November 22, 1999  

By the Acting Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division, Cable Services Bureau:

     1.   In this Order we consider a complaint against the rate the above-referenced operator ("Operator")
was charging for its cable programming services tier ("CPST") in the community referenced above. A single
complaint was filed with the Commission on May 25, 1995 against Operator's June 15, 1995 CPST rate increase. 
In response to the complaint, Operator filed a Motion to Dismiss on May 19, 1998. 

          2.   Under the Communications Act, the Federal Communications Commission
          ("Commission") is authorized to review the CPST rates of cable systems not subject to effective
          competition to ensure that rates charged are not unreasonable.  The local franchising authority
          ("LFA") for the franchise area referenced above filed a complaint with the Commission on May
          25, 1995, against Operator's June 15, 1995 CPST rate increase in the franchise area referenced
          above.  Section 623(c)(3) of the Communications Act requires that complaints be filed within "a
          reasonable period of time" following a change in rates.  We determined that a "reasonable period
          of time" is forty-five days.  An LFA must file a complaint within 45 days from the date the rate
          increase becomes effective.  

     3.   In its Motion to Dismiss, Operator argues that the complaint against the June 15, 1995 CPST rate
increase should be dismissed because the complaint concerned a proposed increase not yet in effect.  Based on our
review of the record, we find that the complaint filed on May 25, 1995 was not timely filed within 45 days of a rate
change because no rate change had occurred at the time the complaint was filed with the Commission.  Therefore,
we will grant Operator's Motion to Dismiss the complaint against its June 15, 1995 CPST rate increase and
dismiss the complaint because it was not timely filed.

     4.   Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.
0.321, that Operator's Motion to Dismiss IS GRANTED and the above-referenced complaint IS DISMISSED.


                         FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 



                         Patrick A. Boateng
                         Acting Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division
                         Cable Services Bureau