Laserfiche WebLink
jt�" _ 3 <br />MEMO rO: MAYOR AND Ci':Y COUNCIL <br />FROM: CLERK-ADMINisrRATOP. <br />DATE: FERRII'.RY 4. 1986 <br />suBi ECT: rRAN., CR uF OWNERSHIP OF GROUP W CARLI <br />Attached please find a memorandum from North Suburban Cable <br />Commission Chairperson Steve Schmidt outlining the issues <br />revolving around the transfer of ownership of the North <br />Suburban Cable system from Group W to the Daniels Group. In <br />his memorandum Chairman Schmidt suggests that the City take <br />two actions which do not require formal action by the City <br />Council. These actions would be: <br />1. Allow the cable Commission to undertake the required <br />public hearings and investigate the background of <br />the propo,Ld system purchaser in order to ensure <br />compliance with franchise requirements as well as to <br />evaluate the intert of the proposed purchaser as it <br />relates to maintaining the system we currently have. <br />Once theso hearings are completed by the commission, <br />each City will be conducting its own public hearing, <br />however, the detail to which this hearing will go <br />will be significantly less than that of the Cable <br />Commission. <br />7. Chairpers(n Schmidt SLggCetS that the member cities <br />refer all contact from either Group W, the <br />purchasing cable company, and all public 'Pquiries <br />ti the Cable Commission to ensure accuracy of <br />information and avoid being .iivided by an consertive <br />lobbying effort on the part of Group W or the <br />purchasing company. <br />Staff would strongly recommend concurrence with <br />these two recommendations by the City Council as the <br />purchase of the system is an extremely complex and <br />.ensitive issue requiring far more expertise than is <br />currently available at the City level. <br />DFP/mjs <br />Attachment: <br />