WHITBY FREE PRESS, WEDNESDAY, SEPTEM BER 20, 1978, PAGE 15 Oshawa-Whitby UnitedWy sets its, The goal of the 1978 (Osh«iwa-Whitby Uniitéd Way Campaign has been set at $1,104,000., it was announced by G. Boyd Chesney, Genpral Campaign Chair- man for this year's fund- raiising drive. The carnpaign Will hêgin. on Monday, (ctLober 2. Mr. Chesney said that the ne* target compare., -;th hie $1,051,612. which was raised in 1977, It represents Two Toronto men are charged wiîth extortion Two toronto men were (llalged last week by l)urhamn Regional Police wi th extortion, after a Whitby man wias allegedl y threatened during a dispute about money.. Police sai d Harry Dickinson, 46, of 238 Meadow Jioad received threats to himself and his family When- two men visited his- home Sept. 12. According to police, 1 lie dispute concerned mnoney uwving for a sub-contracting job) in which Dickinson was involved. Police'said Dickinson was ,realened with a hammer, liî was ,flot injured, and no iioney changed hands. Charged with extortion are Luigi Schifano, 20 of 608 ;vllverton 'Blvd., and Tony Gerlando' Mule, 21, of 604 Milverton Blvd'., Toronto. an increase of five percent over last year's achieve- ment. The United Way Board of Directors has approved tentative a!locatîons to agencies that are 7.5% over final.funding for, the current year. Information Oshawa has been granted agency status, bringing the total number of member agencies to twenty- nine. Two new organizations, Commfunity Care (Oshawa) and Community Care (Whitby), are to be provided with special grants in 1979. These agencies are assisting elderly citîzens to remain in their own homes. The Region of Durham withdrew grants to agencies during the current year. In order to compensate agencies no longer receiving Region'grants and to meet .ampaign goali ottîpr needs, special. grants lotifllirig $74,485. were made by tlhe United Way Boardof Directors in 1978, statedMr Chesney. It is of paramount importance to Oshawa and Whitby that> the people working and living in our communities should- strive together' to help the less fortunate in our area, said Mr. Chesney. Through f inancial support ' and volunteer effort, the member agencies, are enabled to provide the needed health, social services and recrea- tional activities that make our- communities better places to, live for ail citizens. The United Way keeps costs to a minimum.- In Oshawa and Whitby, fund raising and operating costs >represent only. about six percent of the to ,tal'fuiïds at $1, 1O4,OOQ.for 1978 raised, the Iowest for all the larger United WVay carnpaigns lin, Canada. Mr. Chesniey said that it is the work of thousands of volunteers that makes the linitc'd Way possible. Their tledication makes the United \Vay t he Ieaà st expensî ve way !'(r t11we people of Oshawa and ,Yl'îih,, I help each other. VELVEIT1 Older furniture& IT PAYS TOHAVE YOtJR 413 Di Bus. 668-5481, l le added that the ciizens, of our two communities have demonstrated in previous years their desire to share through the United Way on a, local and voluntary basis. This factor xvas highlighted in 1977 when 'pledges and contributions topped the one million dollar figure for the f irstt. AN p Uiquehltr antiques bought & old FURNITURE RE-UPHOLSTERED" undas St. E. HITBY Res. 668-652f DECISION', Ottawa, September 7, 1978 Decision CRTC 78-611 PRE-HEARING CONFERENCE APPLICATIONS RELATIVE TO THE TRANSFER 0F 'EFFECTIVE CONTROL 0F THE LICENSEES OWNED OR CONTROLLED BY CANADIAN CABLESYSTEMS LIMITED TO ROGERS TELECOMMUNICA- TIONS LIMITED. [CRTC PubliC Noticés,.1978-99 aii'c 110 - JuIy 24, 1978 and August 2, 19781J By Notice of Public Hearlng dafed July 24, 1978, the Commission announced that if woulcl hold a public hearing September 12, 1978 in Hull, Quebec relative fa appliîcations for the transfer fa Rogers Telecom mu nications Limited ("RTL') of-the effective control of the broad-castlng receiving undertakings confrolleci by Canadian Cablesystems Limited -("CCS"). By Notice of Public Hearing dafed August 2, 1978, the Commission announced that if would hold a pre-hearing, conference relative ta the said applications. The conference was duly held August 31, 1978. The follawing parties were represenfed and participated in the canference: -Canadian Lablesysfemns Limnited, -Rogers Telecom muni!cations LimifecO, -Edper lnvestments Limited, .Ministry of Transportation and Communications of the Province of Ontario, the divisional management group of CCS, and -Edwin R. Jarmain. lnaddifion, although nof presentor represented at the conference, Thomas 1. Hull and the Canaclian Broadcasting League participated by submifting motions in writing. The purpose of the pre.hearing conference, as describec in the Notice of Public Hearing, was: ..f0t hear and consider ail preliminary motions and objections which any party to the hearing may wislh to raise relative f0 these applications or f0 the conduct of the public hearing thereof .I AT the conference, a number of motions and issues were raised anddiscussed. In each case, the Commission reserved its decision in order le allow for consideration by the Executive Committee. The Commission hereby announces ifs decisions on ail 0f the motions and issues discussed at the pre-hearing conference: A. Rolle of Canadian Cablesysfemns Limited During fhe course of the argument and questioning on a motion by RTL (whîch if subsequently withdrew) for the removal 0f certain material f rom the public f ile, attention f ocussed on the precise role of CCS, aM representeci by its boarcd of directors, at the public hearing. RTL was concerned that much of the material filIed by CCS amounted in substance fa a compefing application by the existing boarcd andl management of CCS. CCS argueci tht its capacity as current custoclian of licences obliges iltof indicafe f0 the Commission how the public interest might best be servedl, having regard to the RTL proposais contained in the applications. The prinlary issue before the Commission at the pending hearing is. as stated in the July 24, 1978 Notice of Public Hearing, a proposai that the effective control of broadcastîng unclertakîngs controligd by CCS be fransferred to RTL. ln thaf Notice, the Commission sfated that if will: The Commission wishes, therefore, ta ensure an exploration of the issues by ail parties in an unrestricted mannier. Such issues, however, must be relevant ta the primary issue no ted above. n the Commission's view, the issue befare if is whefher if is in the public interest thaf RTL should have effective control of the broadcasfing undertakings confrolled by CCS, and nof whether ttie group which presenfly exercises effective contrai should refain that contrai. Denial of the present applications may or may mot resuit in the present contrai' group retaining that position, since there may be furfher applications relafing, inter a lia, ta certain cantractual rights passessed by Edper lnvestmenfs Limited ("Edper") and by RTL concerning the shares of CCS purchased by Edper and by RTL. At the same fime, the level of service enjoyed by the communities served by the CCS undertakings', and the benef ifs experienced by the Canadian broadcasfing sysfemn generaily f ram the CCS undertakings, are clearly relevant as standards againsf which the RTL proposais are fa be measured. B. Time limits HaVîng regard ta the magnitude and complexify of the issues raîsed by the applications, and their-signif icant implications -for the Canadian broadcasfing sysfem, the Commission is reluctant ta impose strict fimne limits on the oral presentations at the hearing by the parties, Ail parties are advised, however, that the Chairmý,n proposes fa exercise his discrefion in such a maniner as to ensure that presentations are bath relevant and not repetitiaus. If is noted that each af CCS and RTL lias esfimated that ifs presentafian will not exceed two and one-quarter hours. C. Order af appearance The order of appearance at the hearing wili be as follows: 1) Pro forma introduction t« the licensees of the applications, not f0 exceed 5 minutes. No quesfioning at this stage by the Commission is anficipated. 2) RTL - for presentatian and questianing. 3) Edper - appea ring at the request 0f the Commission fa respond fa questions in ifs capacify as a vendor possessed of subsequent rights of purchase. If may make a presentation f irst. 4) CCS- for presentation and response ta (2) and (3). 5) Interveners -.for presentafion and questioning, in the following arder (the fallowing being ail of the interveners who have infarmed the Commission of a desire f0 appear): *E.R. Jarmain Cableshare Ltd. the divisianal management groups of CCS Gursfon Rosenfeld Charles K. Eieveid Thomas 1. Hull Essex Cable TV Ltd. CHYR -7 CKJD Radio 1110 McLeod, Young, Weir and Co. Ltd. *Douglas Baerý Canadian Broadcasting Corporation Canadian Broadcasfing League 6) CCS in reply ta (5). 7) RTL in reply fa (3), (4) and (5). Ail parties are remninded that "reply" is soîely for the purpose 0f responding f0 new miatters and is mot an opportunity fa re-stafe or summarîze. D. The Issue of Ownership CC!ý moved thaf the issues fa be considered af the hearing inc lude tho Musin0 whefpýher the onerhip0f=nit sh:âarsMof CCS b controlled by CCS by fransferred ta RTL. The question of the desirability 0f the ownership 0f shares 0f a licensee by a part icular party is, under existing -Commission procedures, an issue mare properly tabe considered upon the application by that licensee for the renewal of ifs licence. E. Status af Thomas 1. FHull Mr. Thomas I. Hull moved that, -as vendor ta RTL oC8,000 shares of CCS, he. be entified ta appear and ta, make a submission as a vendor with. the same rights and position as Edper, As noted above, Edper is appearing at the invitation of the, Commission in ifs capacity as a vendor possessed of subsequent rights of purchase. This clearly distinguishes Edper's position tram that 0f Mr. Hull, who wishes ta make a submission in support of RTL. The Commission accordingly authorizes Mr. Hull's appearance at the haring as an infervenar. F. Further disclosures 0f inforimation Bath CCS and The Canadian Broadcasting League ("CBL") moved thaf RTL be required ta disclose additional information ta that which is aiready on the public file., The Commission is of the view that the Information presently on the public file is adequate for the purpases of the Commission and ail parties., The motions are accardingly denied. G. Transcript 0f the January hearing CCS moved that the franscripf of the hearing held In Toronto January 17-18-19, 1978 relative fa the control of CCS farm part of the public record of the pending hearing. While there is an abviaus connection between the two hearings, the, issues in each are different, and s0 the Commission is nof persuaded that there is ansi menit f0 including in the record of the pending hearing the.transcript of the January hearing. Ift is noted thaf the transcript of the January hearing is a matter of publ ic record, ava ilable for incorporation in the record by sepcif ic reference by any party. H. Crass-examin4tian In a motion annexedI as Appendix "A" ta its Intervention Statement in this matter dated August 23, 1978, CBL made f ive speciîc requesfs ta be allow9d fa cross-examine at the hearing. Two of the requests concern matters of cansiderbie historical interest but af littie apparent relevance fa the primary issue presntly bef are the Commission. These are the requests concerning the "1circumsfances leading f0 the triggering of the 'shotgun"' and the "proposed Ieveraged buyouf"l. The other three requesfs are f0 cross-examine the authars of two of the studies filed by RTL and ta cross-examine off icers 0f RTL as ta certain financiai matters relative fa a proposed merger referred ta in the applications. Having regard f0thie adequacy of disciosure noted earlier, the number of parties participating, the diversity of their views, the material filied by them and thé time f0 be allocated f0 this hearing, the Commission is of the view that the scope 0f the public hearing as normally conducted and without cross -examination will be such as ta ensure complete exploration of the issues. The Commission is nof persuaded thaf ailowing cross-examination by CBL in accordance with ifs f ive requests or any of themn wili materially assist the exploration of the relevant issues. The motion in its f ive parts is accordingiy denied. J.G. Patenaude Acting Secretary General