Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />• <br />• <br />Bradley& <br />Guzzetta,1.LC <br />1976 Wooddale Drive <br />Suite 3A <br />Woodbury, MN 55125 <br />P/ (651) 379 -0900 <br />F/ (651) 379 -0999 <br />Attorneys at Law <br />Michael R. Bradleyt^ <br />Stephen J. Guzzetta* <br />Telecommunications <br />Consultant <br />Laura E. Bergus <br />www.bradleyguzzetta.com <br />t- Also admined in Wisconsin <br />Also admitted in Massachusetts <br />and the District of Columbia <br />^Qualified Neutral under Rule 114 of the <br />Minnesota General Rules of Practice <br />TO: <br />FROM: <br />April 6, 2011 <br />North Metro Telecommunications Commission Member Cities <br />Stephen J. Guzzetta <br />Counsel to the North Metro Telecommunications Commission <br />SUBJECT: Final Connectivity Service Agreement from Anoka County <br />On Friday, April 1, 2011, Kurt Glaser, City Attorney for Lexington and <br />Centerville, Scott Baumgartner, City Attorney for Anoka and Andover, and I, on <br />behalf of the North Metro Telecommunications Commission ( "NMTC "), were <br />able to meet with various Anoka County ( "County ") officials, including County <br />Attorney Thomas Palumbo, Assistant County Attorney Kathryn Timm, County <br />Commissioners Rhonda Sivarajah and Robyn West, and County Project <br />Manager David Minkie, to talk about the implementation of the Connect Anoka <br />County project, the connectivity service agreement template prepared by the <br />NMTC and the County's relationship with municipalities going forward. After <br />discussing our concerns about the County's March 28, 2011, version of the <br />connectivity service agreement with the County representatives, they agreed that <br />negotiations were not closed (as had been previously stated by County <br />Commissioner Kordiak), at least with respect to matters not exclusively <br />governed by the August 17, 2010, Wholesale Master Service Agreement <br />( "MSA ") executed by the County and Zayo Bandwidth, LLC ( "Zayo "). At the <br />conclusion of our April 1 meeting, it was agreed that the County and municipal <br />representatives would meet again on April 4, 2011, to see if a consensus could <br />be reached on certain issues outside the scope of the MSA. On April 4, 2011, <br />this group assembled again, and now included Tom Sweeney, City Attorney for <br />Blaine, and the County's information technology consultant. <br />Because most of the important issues are locked into and dictated by the MSA <br />(e.g., service speeds, network reliability, network design, co- location site <br />specifications, limitations on liability, billing, etc.) and due to the time <br />restrictions imposed by the County, there were very narrow parameters for <br />discussions on April 4, particularly since the County remains unwilling to re- <br />open the MSA to rectify problems that it acknowledges exist. Moreover, the <br />County was unwilling to discuss certain matters regardless of whether they were <br />controlled by the MSA, such as warranties, reimbursement of costs that may be <br />incurred by municipalities as a result of providing access to co- location sites, <br />