Agenda - Council - 11/27/1984 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I ! Quad Cities Cable Minutes Oct. 18, 1984 Page 2 would pass the final settlement. Hr. Reimann felt that it would. Hr. Creighton stated that if the settlement was going to pass the Ramsey City Council, he would be distributing the ordinance summary. Hr. Dulgar informed Hs. Thompson of construction that the City of Anoka had sche- duled in October on Hwy 47 and on Third and Fourth Avenues. Hr. Jacobsen asked that either Hs. Thompson or Terry O'Connell furnish the Com- mission with a monthly list of complaints and how they were resolved. Mr. O'Connell responded that it would be no problem to do that as he knows that Group W keeps a record of complaints and he does also. He did ask whether it would be possible for Group W to print on their bill that his office does exist for con- sumers to call and his phone number. Mr. O'Connell felt that many people were not aware that his office or position existed or what it was for. Terry Lovaas reported that Group W was currently very busy planning for Halloween, that he had attended the NFL£P Convention and felt it was very worthwhile, and that plans for advertising on the local channels was in the beginning stages. Ms. Thompson introduced Tom Sharrad, new Group W District Manager. Mr. Sharrad explained that Group W is currently trying to re-organize and decentralize their systems, and commented that their continuing first commitment is to provide quality services to the customer. Mr. Sharrad distributed to the Commission members a revised financial Pro Forma for the Quad Cities system. He asked that the Commission consider a two step process, the first step would be to have Terry O'Connell and Tom Creighton research the figures Group W has provided and determine whether they are correct and that Group W is being honest with the Commission. The second step would then be to look at the possible atlernatives put forth in the pro forma and come to some kind of decision. Mr. Beissel com- mented that he would be very concerned about any possible cut back on local access programming. Mr. Jacobson asked Group W to respond to three questions he had. 1. What is the amount of management fee that Group W charges, both the original amount requested and the actual amount received? Mr. O'Connell responded that he had gotten that information and that the amount was not as high as it could possibly have been. 2. What are Group W's intentions concerning 1st Amendment rights? Mr. Sharrad replied that Group W was sensitive to the price of the product but had no intentions of litigation regarding 1st Amendment concerns and that they still intended to follow the franchise. 3- Is Group W's final option to sell the system if it becomes unprofitable? Mr. $harrad answered that their intention is to make the system work. Mr. Jacobson stated that he dldnlt see the problem as Group W saw it. He felt that the solution is to get the houses passed with cable to hook up to it. Mr. Creighton felt that there should be a third step added to the process. If the projections proved to be inaccurate and Group W did achieve adequate penetration to provide the 16% return on their in- vestment, then how and when would the concessions be returned to the system. He also felt that Group W shouldn't be looking at this system as in individual pro- fit center, and that "somebody has to be the worst system in the country". Mr. Hartman commented that he felt everything hinges on penetration and questioned what percentage of penetration would be necessary for a break even point. He also concurred with Mr. Beissel that local access opportunities should not be cut.