Laserfiche WebLink
ROSS A. SUSSMAN <br />NEAL J. SHAPIRO <br />SAUL A. BERNICK• <br />THOMAS O. CREIOHTON <br />SCOTT A. LIPSON <br />OAVIO K. NIGHTINGALC' <br />PAUL J. OUAST' <br />THERESA M. KOWALSKI <br />RESCCCA J. MELTZER <br />BERNICK AND LIFSON <br />A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION <br />ATTORNEYS AT LAW <br />SUITE 1200 THE COLONNADE <br />5500 WAYZATA BOULEVARD <br />MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55416 <br />1612) 54-6 -1200 <br />FACSIMILE 1612) 5A6 -1003 <br />'ALSO AOMITTCD IN WISCONSIN <br />'ALSO CERTIPICD PU*LIC ACCOUNTANT <br />PARALEGALS <br />KATHRYN O.MASTCRMAN <br />JOAN M. SCMULK CRS <br />JO BROWN <br />WHITE PAPER <br />DISCUSSION OF TELECOMMUNICATION REGULATORY <br />POLICY ISSUES AND PROPOSED AREAS OF STATUTORY MODIFICATION <br />Submitted to the MACTA Board of Directors <br />June 7, 1994 <br />Thomas D. Creighton <br />Bernick and Lifson, P.A. <br />In light of the convergence of telecommunications technologies, and the expansion of the <br />services which could be offered by previously one dimensional providers, policy makers at the <br />local, state, and Federal level are faced with significant regulatory decisions. <br />The Minnesota Association of Cable Television Administrators (MACTA) has decided <br />to begin to develop a policy paper relating to the complex future regulatory issues and directions <br />for possible solutions from the perspective of Minnesota municipalities and cable franchising <br />authorities. <br />This paper is a first attempt to outline issues and frame approaches to recommendations <br />for comprehensive solutions to telecommunications regulation in the State of Minnesota. <br />This discussion is only a first step. It is hoped that it will stimulate an exchange of <br />viewpoints by those interested and experienced with telecommunications regulation in Minnesota. <br />No one person or any one group can adequately carry this project to a satisfactory outcome. <br />Therefore, any future drafts of this document should achieve wide - spread distribution and <br />comment. <br />While federal regulatory changes must be considered in formulating of state policy, <br />comments on the evolving federal regulatory scheme are beyond the scope of this document and <br />are considered only to the extent that they impact the development of state policy. The concern <br />of MACTA should be limited to the involvement of local government in the regulation of <br />telecommunications in Minnesota, and the impact of state regulatory policy on existing and <br />contemplated municipal authority. That focus encompasses the scope of this discussion. <br />Page 59 <br />