My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-11-00 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2000
>
10-11-00 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/13/2009 2:26:26 PM
Creation date
8/6/2008 10:50:47 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />OCTOBER 11, 2000 <br />Wilson gave the Council an overview of Federal and State legislation <br />relative to telecommunications pointing out that the FCC set cable <br />franchising rules in the late 1960's and there is local control over public <br />rights-of--way. <br />Wilson pointed out that most Twin Cities' franchises were granted in the <br />early 1980's. Even though exclusive franchises are precluded under State <br />Law, only one franchise was granted in each of the various metro areas. <br />Wilson stated that the her best recollection is that one franchise was <br />granted because the reality of the situation at the time was that two cable <br />companies couldn't compete. However, given the fact that companies are <br />now providing cable, telephony, and Internet services, this has changed. <br />Wilson reported that competition will provide a huge benefit to customers <br />in terms of price control, improved customer service, and additional <br />technological services. The downside is the construction that will occur in <br />the rights-of--way as well as additional visual clutter on poles as well as <br />more additional green equipment boxes. Wilson also anticipated that if <br />additional franchises are awarded, the reality would be that it would be <br />two to five years before a system could be constructed and operational. <br />Wilson reported that the attorney for the Telecommunications <br />Commission is currently reviewing the legal, technical, and financial <br />qualifications of the applicants and she anticipated that a recommendation <br />would be made to the Commission in December with the member cities <br />asked to act on additional franchises after the first of the year. <br />Wilson pointed out that part of the franchise agreement with AT & T is <br />that they provide funding for PEG access as well as the institutional <br />network that is provided to member cities and school districts. Any <br />franchise agreement negotiated with another provider will have to include <br />equivalent requirements without duplication of the services already being <br />provided. <br />Wilson pointed out that while there are two companies requesting <br />franchises at this time, it is the general belief that the market will probably <br />only support two providers. However, it is also her philosophy that it is <br />the market that will make the decision as to which providers will succeed. <br />Fahey asked about the length of the AT & T franchise. Wilson reported <br />that the AT & T franchise is for 15 years and was renewed in 1998. <br />Morelan asked if telecommunicationscompanIes shared plant. Wilson <br />replied that they did not given that they may use different technologies as <br />well as would likely start construction of their infrastructure indifferent <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.