|
WHEREAS, by letters dated October 11, 2010, and November 23, 2010, from Comcast
<br />to each of the Member Cities, including the City, Comcast invoked the formal renewal
<br />procedures set forth in Section 626 of the Cable Act, 47 U.S.C. § 546; and
<br />WHEREAS, the City and the other Member Cities informed the Commission, by
<br />resolution, that they want the Commission and/or its designee(s) to commence, manage and
<br />conduct the formal renewal process specified in Section 626(a)-(g) of the Cable Act, 47 U.S.C. §
<br />546(a)-(g), on their behalf; and
<br />WHEREAS, the City has affirmed, by resolution, the Commission's preexisting
<br />authority under the Joint Powers Agreement to take any and all steps required or desired to
<br />comply with the Franchise renewal and related requirements of the Cable Act, Minnesota law
<br />and the Franchises; and
<br />WHEREAS, the Joint Powers Agreement empowers the Commission and/or its
<br />designee(s) to conduct the Section 626 formal franchise renewal process on behalf of the City
<br />and to take such other steps and actions as are needed or required to carry out the formal
<br />franchise renewal process; and
<br />WHEREAS, the Commission adopted Resolution No. 2011-02 commencing formal
<br />franchise renewal proceedings under Section 626(a) of the Cable Act, 47 U.S.C. § 546(a), and
<br />authorizing the Commission or its designee(s) to take certain actions to conduct those Section
<br />626(a) proceedings; and
<br />WHEREAS, the Commission performed a detailed needs assessment of the Member
<br />Cities' and their communities' present and future cable-related needs and interests and has
<br />evaluated and continues to evaluate Comcast's past performance under the Franchises and
<br />applicable laws and regulations, all as required by Section 626(a) of the Cable Act, 47 U.S.C. §
<br />546(a); and
<br />WHEREAS, the Commission's needs ascertainment and past performance review
<br />produced the following reports: The Buske Group's "Community Needs Ascertainment — North
<br />Suburban Communications Commission (Arden Hills, Falcon Heights, Lauderdale, Little
<br />Canada, Mounds View, New Brighton, North Oaks, Roseville, St. Anthony and Shoreview,
<br />Minnesota)" (July 15, 2013) (the "Needs Assessment Report'); Group W Communications,
<br />LLC's, telephone survey and report titled "North Suburban Communications Commission Cable
<br />Subscriber Survey (September 2011)" (the "Telephone Survey Report'); CBG Communications,
<br />Inc.'s, "Final Report - Evaluation of Comcast's Subscriber System, Evaluation of the Existing
<br />Institutional Network and Evaluation of PEG Access Signal Transport and Distribution for the
<br />North Suburban Communications Commission" (July 2013) (the "Technical Review Report');
<br />Front Range Consulting, Inc.'s, "Financial Analysis of Comcast Corporation 2012 SEC Form
<br />I OK" (May 2013) (the "Comcast Financial Report'); and Commission staff's "Report on Cable-
<br />Related Needs and Interests and the Past Performance of Comcast of Minnesota, Inc.," (July 22,
<br />2013) (the "Staff Report'); and
<br />WHEREAS, based on its needs ascertainment, past performance review, best industry
<br />practices, national trends in franchising and technology, and its own experience, Commission
<br />2
<br />
|