CC PACKET 05241988 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1 The North Suburban Cable Communication Commission had passed a 2 resolution based on #3 at their April meeting, which said "the - North 3 Suburban Cable Communication Commission. wishes to express its obje 4 tions to adult unrated programming on Channel 34 and specifical 5 requests that the company remove the adult programming from Channel 6 34 . " Mr. Murphy said the resolution had been sent to the cable 7 company in May with a letter requesting a reply before the Commiss- 8 ion's June meeting. 9 Research Related to Stronger Request Advocated by Makowske 10 The Cable Commission representative told the Councilmembers the Cable 11 Commission resolution certainly didn't pre-empt the City from taking 12 stronger action, but it was his own perception that if St. Anthony 13 adopted option #4 which "ordered" the cable company to remove Channel 14 #34 from its system, they might as well go to #5 which threatened 15 legal action if the company didn't comply since the consequences of 16 either decision would be litigation. He also agreed with Councilmem- 17 ber Ranallo that the City's resolution should say adult programming 18 should be removed from the entire system since Channel #34 ads 19 referred to similar programming on Channel #58. 20 At Least One Commission City Advocates Stronger Action 21 Councilmember Makowske asked Mr. Murphy if he thought the action taken 22 by the Cable Commission might have been somewhat constrained by the 23 fact that they weren't really certain just what the various cities 24 .they represented wanted them to do. He replied that certainly wou� ' 25 have been true in ,his own case where he would never have voted for 26 measure stronger in tone without first consulting the City Council. 27 The Commission representative added that the Little Canada representa- 28 tive had indicated he expected his own city to go a lot farther than 29 the Commission, and had asked for a report from each Commission 30 representative on how their city viewed the issue to be given at the 31 next Commission meeting. 32 Makowske Wants Council to Hear What Other Attorneys Say 33 The Councilmember indicated she would hate to see the Council pass 34 such a weak resolution without first hearing from some people with 35 fairly good legal backgrounds who are fighting this kind of thing on a 36 daily basis, who don't believe Miller vs California case had really 37 been tested yet. Councilmember Makowske said she recognized there 38 were economic limits on how far the City could go but she thought it 39 would be helpful to find out how far some legal minds thought the City 40 could go. 41 Mayor Sundland indicated he perceived it would then be necessary for 42 the Council to hear from some of those who had already fought and lost 43 that battle. 11