Southborough officials to seek roughly $21,000 from Charter, pause fight over HD channel

Town of Southborough committee members agreed June 23 to open negotiations with Charter Communications for a cable franchise that would ask for a capital payment comparable to the town’s Verizon agreement — roughly $21,000 — and to pursue a five‑year license while avoiding an extended fight over an HD channel or equipment funding.

The committee, who discussed strategy with outside counsel Bill Solomon, said the immediate goal is “to get it done as soon as possible, as painlessly as possible,” and to start negotiations at a level comparable to the Verizon deal so the town is not at a competitive disadvantage. “Again, let's go with that approach. Try for the 21 plus to see what they say,” Sam said during the meeting.

The committee’s discussion centered on two main questions: the capital payment the town will request from Charter and which contract terms to insist on. Solomon, who advised the committee through a shared screen, said Charter has been difficult to negotiate with in other towns and that the firm’s corporate changes may make it less eager to spend time on small systems — but recommended beginning negotiations by asking for parity with Verizon’s terms.

Solomon reviewed alternative calculations that committee members could use in negotiations: the town’s last Charter payment was about $19,000, a per‑subscriber recalculation using the town’s February 2020 per‑subscriber rate would yield about $12,006.77, and a CPI‑adjusted figure would be about $15,006.80. Solomon said starting at parity with Verizon (roughly $21,000) was a reasonable opening position and that the committee could adjust if Charter responded with a lower offer.

On operational points, the committee decided not to press for a separate paid HD channel or to require Charter to buy encoders, citing cost and the likely difficulty of winning that fight. “You're not gonna pay for an HD channel. It'll eat up your—it's $600 a month they want. … So we're not gonna pursue that,” Solomon said.

The group also discussed a commonly contested legal clause known as a “level playing field” provision, which can allow one franchisee to claim a town changed terms in a way that would reduce another carrier’s obligations. Solomon described approaches that reduce the town’s legal exposure (shorter license terms and targeted contractual language) and advised the committee on practical remedies if Charter sought to trigger comparative‑terms claims.

To preserve negotiation flexibility and avoid unintended administrative deadlines under federal franchise procedures, Solomon recommended sending Charter an ascertainment and a formal request for proposal (RFP) and then mutually “staying” (pausing) the formal process while negotiating. The committee agreed that approach would reduce legal risk if Charter submits a formal proposal before the town has clearly stated its needs.

Members settled on next steps: Solomon will contact Charter representatives (the committee discussed reaching out to Nancy Clark or another Charter point person), draft the town’s ascertainment and RFP, and attempt to arrange an in‑person negotiation meeting in the week of July 14; the committee also agreed to hold a preparatory Zoom meeting beforehand. The committee noted a public hearing is optional and unlikely to draw a large crowd, so they do not plan to require one unless it will demonstrably aid negotiations.

No formal vote was taken on the Charter license terms during the meeting; members agreed on a negotiating approach and scheduling. The committee’s remaining routine business — reorganization of officers, approval of minutes and adjournment — was conducted by roll call prior to and after the Charter discussion.

The committee’s next substantive milestone will be the pre‑meeting with counsel and, pending Charter’s availability, the in‑person negotiation in the week of July 14.