A. 
This section is applicable to any lawfully operating, but unfranchised, MCS provider that does not remit a franchise fee payment to the City. It is also applicable to any MCS provider whose franchise has been ruled unconstitutional, unenforceable, or otherwise invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction. Further, this section also is applicable to a franchised MCS provider who has had its franchise fees ruled unconstitutional, unenforceable, or invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction.
B. 
Where not specifically prohibited by federal or state law, and as an alternative to and in lieu of the imposition of a franchise fee as set forth in this chapter, the City may impose and require remittance by an affected MCS provider to help in recouping the cost of administering, monitoring and enforcing compliance with a franchise agreement, other agreement, license or permit, and applicable law and regulation, and for the cost of the maintenance of the public property and rights-of-way occupied by the multichannel system.
C. 
The alternative user charge shall be based on the estimated cost of the time of City staff required to administer, monitor and enforce compliance by the MCS provider, and the cost of maintaining the public property and rights-of-way occupied by the multichannel system. However, in no event, shall the alternative user charge exceed the maximum amount that would have been permitted to be imposed as a franchise fee for the payment and reporting period.
D. 
An alternative user charge is adopted in order to recover the cost incurred by the City in administering, monitoring and enforcing the MCS provider's compliance with the franchise or other agreement or permit, and applicable law, rule, regulation and code, and the cost of maintaining the public property and rights-of-way occupied by the multichannel system. However, an affected MCS provider and the City may agree to an alternative charge that is based on either a flat percentage of gross revenue, or a given dollar amount, so long as that charge does not exceed the maximum amount that would have been permitted to be imposed as a franchise fee for the payment and reporting period at the time of the exercise of this option.
E. 
It is expressly understood that a franchise fee and an alternative user charge will not be imposed on the same MCS provider at the same time, for the same period, unless otherwise mutually agreed to.
F. 
Should the alternative user charge ever exceed the maximum amount that would have been permitted to be imposed as a franchise fee, then the alternative user charge shall be reduced to an amount not greater than the maximum amount that would have been permitted to be imposed as a franchise fee and any overpayment shall promptly be returned to the MCS provider upon request.
G. 
The alternative user charge assessed shall be payable to the City quarterly on a calendar year basis.
H. 
In the event that the alternative user charge is based on a percentage of revenue, to assist the City in determining the accuracy and completeness of the alternative user charge payments, the MCS provider shall file with the City a complete, detailed, accurate statement, of all realized revenues attributable to and occasioned by the operation of the system and the grant of the franchise, or other agreement, license or permit within the City, for the period for which the payment is required, whether received by the franchisee or other MCS provider directly, or any parent, affiliate or subsidiary. The statement shall be certified by a certified public accountant or a qualified officer of the MCS provider or its parent with respect to the statement's accuracy and completeness.
I. 
The alternative user charge payment shall be made to the City not later than 60 days after the end of each calendar year quarter.
J. 
The MCS provider shall also provide annually, within 90 days after the end of the MCS provider's fiscal year, a report certified by a certified public accountant or an officer of the MCS provider or its parent, verifying all earned gross revenues.
A. 
No person, or MCS provider, shall be permitted to construct, operate or maintain a multichannel system which requires the laying of positioning or use of cable (whether coaxial, fiber or a functional equivalent) in, along or across the streets or rights-of-way of the City, without having first obtained an MCS franchise, other agreement, license or permit, unless such person or MCS provider is exempted under state law (including any applicable rule or regulation of the PSC, or not required to do so under the Cable Act.
B. 
Consistent with the Cable Act, no franchise, other agreement, license or permit shall be required for either the City, or any local or municipal authority affiliated with the City, to own a multichannel system or operate as an MCS provider in the City.
A. 
Consistent with Section 621A(1) of the Cable Act (codified at 47 U.S.C. § 541), the City Council may award one or more nonexclusive multichannel service franchises or other agreements, licenses or permits within its geographical limits.
B. 
No franchise or other agreement, license or permit granting authority to construct and operate a multichannel system shall be exclusive.
C. 
An MCS provider's application shall be evaluated and approved or disapproved as part of a public proceeding and hearing which affords due process to the City, the applicant, and the public, and which is in accordance with applicable federal or state laws, including any applicable rules of the PSC.
D. 
Within 90 days after the effective date of a franchise, or other agreement, license or permit, a franchisee or other MCS provider shall proceed with due diligence and its best efforts to obtain, at its own costs, all necessary permits, licenses, and authorizations which are required for the conduct of its business in the City, including, but not limited to, any private easement agreements, any business licenses, utility joint use or attachment agreements, microwave carrier licenses, and any other permits, licenses and authorizations needed to lawfully operate a multichannel system within the City.
E. 
A franchisee or other MCS provider shall have in its possession such permits, easements, agreements and licenses prior to the commencement of its multichannel system operations.
A. 
An MCS provider subject to the City's franchising, licensing or permitting authority may not lay or use any cable (whether coaxial, fiber, or a functional equivalent) until the franchise or other agreement, license or permit is fully executed and is in effect, including approval by the PSC as may be applicable.
B. 
A franchise, other agreement, license or permit shall be sufficiently detailed so to clearly delineate the rights, duties and obligations of the parties concerned.
C. 
As permitted, and as may be applicable to a particular class or type of MCS provider, a franchise, other agreement, license or permit shall, at a minimum, contain and address the following matters, as well as any requirements in accordance with Part 591 of the PSC's rules, or other rules of the PSC as may be applicable at any time:
(1) 
A detailed definition of "gross revenue" in order to determine what revenues are subject to any franchise, other agreement, license or permit fee or alternative user charge;
(2) 
The term or duration of the franchise, other agreement, license or permit;
(3) 
Indemnity and hold harmless;
(4) 
Insurance;
(5) 
Performance and completion bonds or security deposits;
(6) 
Service area;
(7) 
Construction, upgrade or rebuild schedule;
(8) 
Compensation, including franchise, other agreement, license or permit fees;
(9) 
Continuity of service;
(10) 
Assignment of an existing franchise, other agreement, license or permit;
(11) 
Repeal of prior inconsistent franchise, other agreement, license or permits;
(12) 
Severability;
(13) 
Force majeure;
(14) 
Reference to the law and rules that governs the franchise, other agreement, license or permit;
(15) 
Any exemptions or relief from this chapter as may be granted, or any ordinance clarifications noted with respect to the MCS provider's operation of a multichannel system; and
(16) 
An effective date.
D. 
The City reserves the right to require, without limitation, additional matters, issues and subjects to be contained in a franchise, other agreement, license or permit, as may be reasonably deemed necessary or in the interest of the City and its residents, subject to applicable state and federal law and rule.
A. 
Upon an award of a franchise, other agreement, license or permit, in accordance with the terms of such franchise, other agreement, license or permit, an MCS provider required to obtain a franchise, other agreement, license or permit may construct, erect, install, maintain, operate, maintain, repair, replace, remove, or restore a multichannel system within the geographical limits set forth in the franchise, other agreement, license or permit.
B. 
The multichannel system may be located in, upon, along, across, over, and under the streets, rights-of-way, easements, and public ways of the City.
C. 
Any MCS provider shall be responsible for obtaining any required easements for private property (including privately owned utility or street light poles).
D. 
An MCS provider, through a separate pole or utility easement agreement with an affected utility, may locate the multichannel system on, or within, the property of such utility company. This provision specifically includes, but is not limited to, MCS providers classified as cable operators.
A. 
The term of an initial MCS franchise, other agreement, license or permit shall be no more than 10 years from the date that a franchise, other agreement, license or permit is approved by the City Council, and is executed by an authorized individual of the City and the affected MCS provider and is approved by the PSC, absent the demonstration of the need for a longer term for financial reasons.
B. 
The term of a renewal franchise, other agreement, license or permit shall be for a period not less than 3 1/2 years, nor more than as permitted by the PSC, from the date that a franchise, other agreement, license or permit renewal agreement is both approved by the City Council, and executed by both the Manager and the affected MCS provider, and is approved by the PSC. In the event the PSC does not establish a maximum term for a renewal, such maximum term shall be no more than 10 years, absent the demonstration of the need for a longer term for financial reasons.
A. 
Any franchisee, or other MCS provider, shall make service available to all residences, dwellings, businesses or establishments on all public streets and roads throughout the City. There shall not at any time, after completion of the initial construction of the system, be any residence, dwelling, business or establishment situated on or adjacent to any public street or road that is not capable of receiving multichannel service without the need for a line extension, as the term "line extension" is defined in § 309-5 of this chapter. The primary test for exception to the requirements of this section shall be a test of commercial impracticability, as defined under the federal Uniform Commercial Code.
B. 
If the City increases the required service area by adding or incorporating additional land areas, through annexation or any other lawful means, the franchisee or other MCS provider shall extend multichannel service to the new locations within 180 days of a written request from City, at no cost to the City.
C. 
Notwithstanding Subsection A of this section, the cost for any line extensions, if permitted to be passed through to subscribers incrementally, shall not be apportioned only to those subscribers served by the instant line extension, but shall be apportioned among all subscribers in the City.
D. 
Any applicant for an initial franchise, other agreement, license or permit, or the renewal of such, shall submit to the City a plan to provide service to all domiciles and businesses in the City as a part of the application, request or proposal. Such plan shall be subject to the approval of the City.
E. 
Further, while such approval may not unreasonably be withheld, any plan for community-wide or universal service requiring more than one year from the start of construction, rebuild or upgrade, or the request for renewal of a franchise, other agreement, license or permit, must be accompanied by a detailed explanation of the reasons for the needed additional time, as well as a date specific by which service is proposed to be available throughout the community.
A. 
For MCS providers classified as cable operators, the City Council shall follow all applicable rules of the PSC with respect to the submission and processing of initial and renewal applications for a franchise, other agreement, license or permit.
B. 
For other MCS providers, the City Council may develop rules with respect to the submission and processing of initial and renewal applications for a franchise, other agreement, license or permit. Such rules and regulations shall primarily be aimed at determining the legal, financial, technical, and character qualifications of the applicant for a franchise, other agreement, license or permit, as well as other matters deemed of importance that are not prohibited by applicable federal law.
C. 
Unless prohibited by the state or the PSC, an applicant shall pay an initial application fee which shall be no greater than the administrative and consulting costs associated with processing an initial application for a franchise, other agreement, license or permit. The total application fee must be paid, unless waived by the City Council.
D. 
The applicant shall submit to the City, simultaneously with the application or request, a check in the amount of $15,000.
E. 
In the event that the total actual cost of processing the application, in accordance with Subsection C of this section, is less than $15,000, the City shall promptly return any unused portion to the applicant upon conclusion of the process.
A. 
Any MCS provider, specifically including but not necessarily limited to, any MCS provider classified as a cable operator, that is granted a franchise, other agreement, license or permit, or a franchise renewal, or renewal of an other agreement, license or permit, after the date this chapter becomes effective, shall, if permitted by federal law or rule, have the choice of paying to the City itself, or collecting from others and remitting to the City, a sum equal to 5% of the annual gross revenue of such MCS provider. Such amount is intended in part to recompense the City for the cost of administering and enforcing the franchise other agreement, license or permit, and for the cost of maintaining the public property and rights-of-way occupied by the multichannel system.
B. 
The City Council recognizes that, with respect to MCS providers classified as cable operators, those MCS providers may have to remit an annual fee to the PSC. Therefore, to the extent that the remittance of the PSC annual fee, when computed together with any franchise fee paid by the MCS provider, or collected from other and remitted by the MCS provider, or that is owed, is greater than 5% of the cable operator's annual gross revenues, the payment of the PSC annual fee shall be deducted from and credited as an offset against any franchise fee actually paid to the City by the MCS provider, provided that the MCS provider has not elected merely to collect the fee from others, including subscribers, and remit the amount collected to the PSC.
C. 
If the FCC, Congress or any other governmental entity with authority to establish the maximum allowable franchise fee, ever allows franchising authorities to increase the franchise fee beyond 5% of gross revenue, then the City shall have the authority to increase the franchise fee to the maximum percentage and/or amount allowable.
D. 
An MCS provider subject to the collection and remittance of a franchise fee, or its functional equivalent under an other agreement, a permit or a license, shall, automatically and without further notification, pass through to subscribers the amount of any decrease in the franchise fee that is attributable to or calculated on subscriber revenues, in the next monthly bill or periodic invoice, so that the bill or invoice reflects the decrease in the franchise fee on subscriber revenues.
E. 
An MCS provider that is subject to the remittance of a franchise fee, or its functional equivalent, shall file with the City, within 45 days after the expiration of each of the MCS provider's fiscal quarters, a detailed financial and revenue report and statement clearly showing the franchise fee or functional equivalent due for the preceding quarter, together with the basis of the calculations thereof. Such statement shall be certified by a certified public accountant or officer of the MCS provider attesting to the accuracy, completeness, and veracity of the revenue figures. Such report and statement shall be in the form and format determined necessary by the City Council, or its designee, to reasonably ascertain the accuracy and completeness of the total remittance, as well as the accuracy and completeness of all types, categories and sources of revenue, individually. Further, said report and statement shall show all revenue from whatever source, that is directly or indirectly derived from, or caused to be derived from, or that is attributable to the operation of the multichannel system or the provision of any service by or using the multichannel system. The revenue shall, at least, be reported by service category, type, and level, individually, showing appropriate computations and individual and incremental rates for all sources, levels, tiers, clusters, and types of services, and other revenue sources by kind and type.
F. 
Remittance of the quarterly portion of the franchise fee, or its functional equivalent, shall be rendered to the City at the time the financial and revenue statement is filed.
G. 
In the event that remittance is not made by the due date, then such franchised MCS provider may be declared in default of the franchise, other agreement, license or permit, and should the amount owed remain unremitted for an additional 60 days after the date of notification of nonremittance or late remittance, then the franchise, other agreement, license or permit may be revoked, terminated, or canceled as noted elsewhere in this chapter.
H. 
The City reserves the right to audit a franchised MCS provider's books, if the City Council deems it necessary. If such audit discovers an under-remittance of the franchise fee or its functional equivalent, of greater than 2% of the actual amount owed, then the MCS provider shall reimburse the City for the cost of such audit, unless such cost is waived by the City Council. It is specifically understood that the right of audit and recomputation of any, and all, amounts remitted under a franchise, other agreement, license or permit fee, shall always be accorded to the City Council.
I. 
If an audit, or other research, discovers that the franchise fee or its functional equivalent has been either under-remitted or not remitted for a period exceeding six months from the original due date notwithstanding Subsection G of this section, then the City Council may seek full recovery of the under-remitted or not-remitted fees, plus interest not to exceed 15% per year, or if greater than 15% the maximum allowable under state law.
J. 
All annual reports due and pertaining to the remittance of the franchise fee, or its functional equivalent, will be certified by an officer of the MCS provider or its parent, and will be provided in the form, format and detail applicable to quarterly reports under Subsection E of this section. Such MCS provider shall maintain records used in the preparation of said reports, to be produced in their totality upon request or demand by the City Council.
K. 
No acceptance of any remittance shall be construed as a release of, or an accord, or satisfaction of, any claim that the City might have for further or additional sums payable under the terms of this chapter or a franchise, other agreement, license or permit, or for any other performance or obligation of a franchised MCS provider hereunder.
L. 
Payments of compensation made by a franchised MCS provider to the City, or remittances of amounts collected, pursuant to the provisions of this chapter, shall be considered in addition to, and exclusive of, any and all authorized taxes, business license fees, other fees, other levies or assessments presently in effect, or subsequently adopted.
M. 
A franchise fee or its functional equivalent shall not include any items excluded by Section 622(g)(2)C of the Cable Act [codified at 47 U.S.C. § 542 (g)(2)C].
N. 
Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the authority of the City to require the payment, or the collection and remittance, of a fee or other assessment of any kind, on any person (other than a franchised MCS provider, or an MCS provider operating under another form of agreement, or a license or permit) with respect to multichannel service or other programming or communications service provided by such person over a multichannel system, for which charges are assessed to subscribers, but not received by a franchised MCS provider. For purposes of illustration only, this subsection shall include the situation(s) where a provider of a particular service directly bills a subscriber, or the MCS provider acts as collection agent for a provider of a particular service who directly bills a subscriber(s), or where a person leases a channel for commercial use and sells advertising or goods on that channel, and receives the money directly or through a third party.
O. 
For any twelve-month period, the fees paid by or remitted by any person who provides any such multichannel service pursuant to Subsection M of this section, shall not exceed 5% of such person's gross revenue derived in such period from the provision of such service over the multichannel system, or such higher percentage as may be authorized by the FCC, Congress, or other governmental entity with authority to increase the percentage or amount of such fees.
P. 
If, at any time, the highest court of the nation, or the highest court of the state, invalidates, voids, or rules as unconstitutional or unenforceable the concept of franchise fees, then the City Council may impose an alternative user charge on the franchised MCS provider, as provided in this chapter.
Q. 
In light of Subsection P of this section, in the event the applicable provision of the franchise, other agreement, license or permit were to be ruled unconstitutional or unenforceable, so that the City's source of recompense for the cost of administering this chapter and any franchise agreement, other agreement, license or permit, and the cost of maintaining the public property and rights-of-way, may be protected, the MCS operator providing service under a franchise, other agreement, license or permit may be required to collect and remit to the City a fee using a different method and manner for the computation and collection of the fee as provided for in this chapter.
R. 
Subject to federal law, and notwithstanding anything preceding in this section, nothing shall limit the authority of the City to assess and impose a franchise fee, or its functional equivalent, on any portion, category or type of revenue, or to exempt any portion, category or type of revenue from inclusion in the computational base used to calculate the franchise fee or its functional equivalent, so long as such is done in a nondiscriminatory and competitively neutral manner with respect to competitive MCS providers in the City.
S. 
Notwithstanding anything in this section, in the event an MCS provider does not pay the franchise fee itself, but instead, if permitted by federal law or rule, chooses to pass the franchise fee through to subscribers, incrementally and in addition to the amount owed for service, so that the effect is that the franchise fee is paid by the subscribers and not the MCS provider, and is merely collected and remitted by the MCS provider, then in such an instance the MCS provider shall not be permitted to deduct the franchise fee from what is owed for property taxes, or any other taxes or money, due the City.
A. 
There shall be no assignment of an MCS provider's franchise, other agreement, license or permit in whole, or in part, without the prior express written approval and consent of the City Council.
B. 
Any assignment without such prior written consent shall constitute a default of such franchise, other agreement, license or permit, which may, at the discretion and in the judgment of City Council, subject a franchised MCS provider's franchise, other agreement, license or permit to revocation.
C. 
An MCS provider, classified as a cable operator, shall have its franchise, other agreement, license or permit assigned, transferred or sold only in accordance with the Cable Act, FCC rules, state law, and PSC rules and regulations, as applicable.
D. 
For all MCS providers subject to this section, including those classified as cable operators, the franchise, other agreement, license or permit shall be assigned, transferred or sold only after the City Council determines that the proposed transferee can meet all obligations imposed by the existing franchise agreement, other agreement, license or permit, and that there are no outstanding uncured violations of the franchise, other agreement, license or permit, or of this chapter, and that all money that is owed the City has been paid in full.
A. 
With respect to franchised MCS providers classified as cable operators, or other MCS providers operating under another form of agreement, a license or a permit, the City Council shall follow the rules and procedures adopted by the state, including those of the PSC, concerning the default, termination, revocation, alteration, or suspension of a cable franchise, or other agreement, license or permit, in addition to the payment of liquidated damages and the imposition of penalties, if not impermissible under applicable law. In the absence of such rules and procedures by the state, including the PSC, MCS providers classified as cable operators, or other MCS providers operating under another form of agreement, a license or a permit, shall be subject to the rules and procedures noted in Subsections C through L of this section.
B. 
For other franchised MCS providers, to the extent permitted by state law, the City Council adopts the rules and procedures (noted in Subsections C through I of this section) concerning the default, revocation, termination or cancellation of an MCS franchise, other agreement, license or permit.
C. 
When any event, act or omission on the part of an MCS provider occurs which represents a violation of a provision of this chapter or its franchise, other agreement, license or permit, or compromises the corporate character, or legal, financial or technical ability, integrity and/or stability of the multichannel system or the MCS provider to such a degree that the interests of the customer or subscribers are substantively affected in a negative manner, then such violation, breach, event, act or omission shall be considered a material breach of this chapter, or any franchise, other agreement, license or permit as may be applicable. Under such circumstances, the City shall notify the affected MCS provider, in writing, of the specific breach or violation, and direct such MCS provider to remedy the breach or violation in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.
D. 
For illustrative purposes only, the violations, breaches, events, acts and omissions include, but are not limited to bankruptcy, insolvency, failure to pay taxes or pay or remit franchise fees or the functional equivalent (including an alternative user charge in lieu of the franchise fee or its functional equivalent, if applicable), failure to receive written City Council approval for an assignment or transfer of the franchise, other agreement, license or permit, or failure to abide by the terms and conditions of the franchise, other agreement, license or permit, or the provisions of this chapter, including those involving matters of customer service, consumer protection and safety and safety-related requirements.
E. 
Where an MCS provider satisfactorily corrects any of the enumerated conditions to the satisfaction of the City within 60 days, then the procedure intended under this section shall cease, and in no event shall the enumerated condition be weighed against such MCS provider in any subsequent performance review under the terms of the franchise, other agreement, license or permit. However, to protect the health and safety of the public, at the discretion of City Council, violations of safety-related requirements may be required to be corrected, eliminated or otherwise cured in less than 60 days.
F. 
A copy of the notice of material breach shall be mailed to the surety on the performance bond, unless otherwise directed by state law.
G. 
Within 75 days after such written notice is mailed to an MCS provider, the City Council shall conduct a public hearing on the matter, unless state law requires a different procedure, in which event the state procedure shall control.
H. 
The City Council shall provide written notice to the affected MCS provider, and to the surety, of the time and place of said public hearing in a manner consistent with either state law, or approved by the City Council.
I. 
At the time of the hearing, the affected MCS provider may present information on the current status of the alleged breach of the franchise, other agreement, license or permit. If the situation has been resolved, or steps are being taken to resolve the situation, then the franchised MCS provider shall present the information at the hearing.
J. 
If the affected MCS provider fails to attend the hearing, and has not requested a continuance of the hearing, then such MCS provider shall be deemed to have waived its right to a further continuation of the matter, and may be declared in default of the franchise, other agreement, license or permit.
K. 
After the public hearing, the City Council may determine the MCS provider to be in compliance and dismiss the matter, or may determine that the MCS provider has cured any noncompliance and thereby dismiss the matter. However, the City Council may determine that an ordinance violation exists and remains uncured, or that a violation of the franchise, other agreement, license or permit has been committed and remains uncured. Consequently, upon a finding that the MCS provider violated a material ordinance provision, or failed to cure an outstanding violation of this chapter or of the franchise, other agreement, license or permit, the City Council may direct the affected franchised MCS provider to take corrective action within a specified period of time, or may declare such franchised MCS provider in default of the franchise, other agreement, license or permit, and thereafter may revoke, terminate, or cancel the franchise, other agreement, license or permit, unless the franchised MCS provider presents sufficient mitigating circumstances.
L. 
If the City Council directs corrective action to take place within a specified period of time or declares such franchised MCS provider in default of the franchise, other agreement, license or permit, then that declaration shall be reduced to writing, and the notice of corrective action or default shall be mailed to such franchised MCS provider, and surety, within 21 days of the City Council's action.
M. 
If within 60 days, the affected franchised MCS provider, or surety, does not take significant action to rectify the breach, or submit a plan detailing how the affected MCS provider will eliminate the breach, including the proposed time frame for such cure, then the City Council may revoke such MCS provider's franchise, other agreement, license or permit, and shall notify the affected franchised MCS provider and surety forthwith, unless there are mitigating circumstances.
A. 
The City Council reserves the right to design a performance evaluation procedure which periodically monitors compliance of MCS providers with the terms and conditions of both this chapter and any applicable franchise, other agreement, license or permit. Moreover, the City Council may periodically review and determine whether an MCS provider's financial, technical, legal, and character qualifications, and its record of meeting community and subscriber needs, as particularly relate, but are not limited, to matters of customer service practices, continue to meet the needs of the community, and to determine if the operational, maintenance, and performance levels needed to ensure the uninterrupted and acceptable provision of multichannel services are adequate to meet the needs and reasonable desires of the community. Such performance evaluations may be conducted at least every three years during the term of any franchise, other agreement, license or permit, or more frequently if deemed necessary and appropriate due to complaints or repeated or multiple violations of this chapter or the franchise, other agreement, license or permit.
B. 
If, as a result of the evaluation, the City Council determines that the franchised MCS provider has not complied with a provision of this chapter, or its franchise, other agreement, license or permit, then the City Council shall give the franchised MCS provider an opportunity either to correct or remedy the area of noncompliance, or submit documentation or supporting data that resolves or explains the area of noncompliance to the satisfaction of the City.
C. 
If the franchised MCS provider fails to correct or resolve an area of noncompliance in a timely manner, or provide an acceptable explanation in a timely manner, then such failure may be treated as a material violation of this chapter or the franchise, other agreement, license or permit, as is appropriate.