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

This document was converted from
WordPerfect 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       )
           )
   Cox Communications       )       
           )   CUID No.  CA0329 (Chula Vista)
            )
    Complaint Regarding      )
  Cable Programming Services Tier      )
     Rate Increase      )


                                  ORDER

        Adopted:  December 6, 1996Released:  December 11, 1996 

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

      1.  In this Order we consider a complaint concerning the May 1, 1996 rate increase by
Cox Communications ("Cox") for its cable programming services tier ("CPST") in Chula Vista,
California, CUID No. CA0329.  In response to this complaint, Cox submitted FCC Form 1235.  This
Order addresses only the reasonableness of Cox's CPST rate increase of $3.79 that became effective
May 1, 1996.  We have already issued an order addressing the reasonableness of the CPST rates
prior to the implementation of the rate increase.  We conclude that, notwithstanding an adjustment,
the rate increase Cox implemented on May 1, 1996 is not unreasonable.  

      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.  If the Commission finds the rate
unreasonable, it shall determine the correct rate and any refund liability.  The  Telecommunications
Act of 1996 ("the 1996 Act") and our rules implementing the new legislation, require that
complaints against the CPST rates be filed with the Commission by a franchising authority that has
received subscriber complaints.  A franchising authority may not file a CPST rate complaint unless,
within 90 days after such increase becomes effective, it receives subscriber complaints.                
                                                                              
      3.  On October 24, 1996, the City of Chula Vista ("the City"), the franchising authority,
filed a complaint against Cox's May 1, 1996 CPST rate increase.  In its complaint, the City certifies
that it has received subscriber complaints regarding the CPST rate increase within 90 days after the
date the increase first appeared on the subscribers' bills.  As required by our rules, the City's
complaint also included a copy of the rate justification that Cox submitted to the franchising
authority. 

      4.  We have reviewed the FCC Form 1235 submitted by Cox, and have made one
adjustment.  We have adjusted Column C of Line 3h to properly gross-up Cox's income taxes.  This
resulted in a correction of Cox's FCC Form 1235 maximum permitted rate for the projected period
to $18.07.  Notwithstanding, this adjustment, we find that Cox's rate increase is not unreasonable. 
Cox must reflect this adjustment in any subsequent rate justifications.  
                                                        
      5.  ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.32l of the Commission's
rules, 47 C.F.R. Section 0.321 that the monthly CPST rate increase of $3.79 charged by Cox
Communications in CUID No. CA0329, Chula Vista, California, beginning May 1, 1996 IS NOT
UNREASONABLE.

      6.  IT IS FURTHER  ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.32l of the Commission's rules,
47 C.F.R. Section 0.321 that the City of Chula Vista's complaint against the CPST rate, effective
May 1, 1996, charged by Cox Communications, in CUID No. CA0329, Chula Vista, California, IS
DENIED.

     FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 



     Elizabeth W. Beaty
     Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division
     Cable Services Bureau