My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 05/09/1995
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
1995
>
Agenda - Council - 05/09/1995
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/1/2025 3:37:26 PM
Creation date
9/26/2003 11:02:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
05/09/1995
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
223
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
The Commission may possibly start consideration of the use outside <br />consultants, for such things as conducting various "focus groups" <br />which will be affected by future telecommunications needs. <br /> <br />It Was requested that the Attorney's Report be moved up. <br />ATTORNEY'S REPORT - 7 <br /> <br />7.1~ State Legislation <br /> <br />Creighton updated the Commission regarding the Bill before the state <br />legislators allowing cities to control right-of ways. He stated that the <br />legislature is up and down. Most of the bill's trouble is in the Senate <br />regarding the area of compensation for use of right-of-way. He also <br />staf:ed that there is still high interest but that they are holding the bill <br />for the time being. It may be possible that the bill will be merged with <br />another (Public Service Bill). They may possibly break it into <br />components and merge it. This has been a huge educational process by <br />the lobbyist. Most of the legislators do not understand all that the bill's <br />elements totally covers. If the bill is not passed this session, it will be <br />brought back at the next session. <br /> <br />At the present time, individual cities can pass rights-of-way ordinances <br />to this effect, Creighton said that the State will not be pre-emp{ied.. <br />The League has already written a sample ordinances. Everyone knew it <br />would be a difficult legislation to get passed, but they are not <br />disapPointed yet. The League has written letters to the cities requesting <br />financial support. The cities have turned it back to their Cable TV <br />Commission to use franchise fees on the member cities behalf. <br /> <br />M. Johnson stated that the state representatives are confused, they are <br />being told this would impede the progress of the superhighway. Also, <br />the phone company is bending over backwards to convince the <br />representatives that they are not a cable company. <br /> <br />Creighton stated that their are not a phone, company either offering <br />only phone service. Many of the charges are paid by the consumer, ie: <br />lobbyists. <br /> <br />O'Connell stated that the phone-companies are telling hackers on <br />Internet that if they support telephone deregulation bill, they will be <br />future charges for modem time and use. <br /> <br />NEw BUSINESS - 6 <br /> <br />Administrator's Report <br /> <br />I <br />I <br /> I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.