Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/24/1997 Telecommunications Advisory Committee City of Apple Valley July 24, 1997 7:00 P.M. City Hall Minutes 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairperson Bible. Members Present: Dale Rodell, Rollin Bible, Jerry Brown, Scott Hugstad-Vaa, John Magnusson Members Absent: David Westbrook Others Present: Charles Grawe, Denis LaComb, Patsy Hoyt, Darin Helgeson, Cheryl Bitner, Tony Taschner 2. Approval of Minutes of February 11, 1997 The minutes of February 11, 1997 were approved unanimous (motion by Mr. Rodell, second by Mr. Hugstad-Vaa). 3. Franchise Renewal Update Mr. Bible gave a brief update regarding the cable franchise renewal. He explained that it has been the Negotiating Task Force’s initial intent to keep the issues of franchise renewal and provision of other telecommunications services totally separate from one another. The Task Force has since met with Marcus and talked about the provision of other services through the fiber hybrid system which Marcus has proposed. Mr. Bible said he fears that there is a blurring of non-franchise and franchise related issues at this time. He said he does not want the franchise renewal to be delayed by the talks concerning provision of other services. Mr. Bible asked where the Marcus Attorney was in terms of progress on the franchise. Mr. Helgeson responded that the Marcus Attorney told Marcus that the City’s Attorney hasn’t responded to the previous draft franchise, nor has he sent the Marcus Attorney a copy of the Telecommunications Ordinance. Mr. Bible said that the franchise and the Telecommunications Ordinance are separate documents and that he would like to get to the fine points of the franchise and resolve those issues as quickly as possible. Mr. Bible directed Mr. Grawe to contact the City’s Cable Attorney and tell him that Marcus believes “the ball is in his court”. Mr. Rodell asked if Marcus plans to upgrade all of the cities at once. Mr. Helgeson responded that he understands the Cities of Apple Valley, Rosemount, and Farmington to be working together to create similar but separate franchise documents. He said that Marcus is ready to begin work once the franchise is signed and will begin in a city as soon as the city signs the franchise. However, he said it is Marcus’ intent to be upgrading all four cities at one time. Mr. Rodell asked if all the cities has the same ending date on the franchise and if Marcus could work over the winter. Mr. Helgeson said the cities all have different end dates and that Marcus can do much work over the winter. He explained that the system has one OTN in each city. Each OTN has 24 count fiber coming from the headend. He said once the OTN is established, Marcus can work over the winter to splice fiber from the OTN to fiber node locations. He said that nodes will be activated as they are ready. This will mean that the customers will receive a new channel lineup immediately after their node is activated. 4. Model Rights of Way Ordinance Update Mr. Grawe explained that the City’s Cable Attorney, Tom Creighton, has prepared a model rights of way ordinance. Mr. Grawe said that City staff in the Public Works and Community Development Departments were reviewing the document but were not yet ready to make a presentation to the Committee. Mr. Grawe explained that the rights of way issue is very important and that ultimately, the cable franchise will be a smaller subset of the larger rights of way ordinance. He asked that Committee members become familiar with the issue so that they are prepared for a staff presentation some time in the fall. 5. Equipment Upgrade Update Mr. Grawe briefly went through his memo outlining the proposed equipment upgrade and asked for Committee input. Mr. Bible commented that this upgrade may be linked to the franchise, subject to negotiation. Mr. Grawe said that EPA Audio Visual was willing to design the upgrade and prepare documents for bid for a cost of around $2,000. Mr. Bible recommended that the City proceed with the engineering and prepare a cost estimate. Mr. Bible also suggested that the existing camera system be examined. Mr. Hugstad-Vaa moved, seconded by Mr. Brown, that staff proceed with the engineering process and obtain a cost estimate for the proposed upgrade. Motion carried unanimous. 6. Introduction of ISD 196 Representative Mr. Tony Taschner introduced himself as the District 196 Communications Specialist. He provided a brief background on himself and explained that his job is provide communications to the residents of ISD 196. He said that current programming is provided from Apple Valley Senior High and includes athletic events, graduations, and considerable character generated material. He said that the District has upgraded its computer networks, data systems, and telephony services but has not done much with video in the past. He said he plans to make a strong effort to do more with video this year. Mr. Bible said that the City received a letter with the District’s concerns, but that the City has little power to mandate the District’s requests. He explained that the issue of interconnectivity extends beyond Apple Valley and that the District needs to talk to all cities involved. Mr. Taschner said that the Eastview High School will bring the issues to light because Eastview will incorporate students from Eagan and Apple Valley. He said that he would talk to the groups involved in the issue. Mr. Bible reiterated that the City can recommended wording for specific issues in the franchise but can not mandate action. 7. Review Marcus Rate Adjustment Ms. Hoyt asked if their were questions regarding the rate adjustment. Mr. Bible asked for clarification on the City’s correspondence. Mr. Grawe said that he understood Mr. Creighton’s letter to say that the City was not waiving its rights to comment, but was not challenging the increase either. Mr. Bible asked if Ms. Hoyt had a comparison of rates for other cable providers. She responded that such a comparison was not provided this year, but that a rate history was provided. She added that Marcus had received few complaints. Mr. Bible asked if Marcus still received considerable requests for new programming. Ms. Hoyt and Ms. Bitner both responded that Marcus has received many requests and compiles this information. Mr. Bible asked if Marcus is legally obligated to add some channels first. Mr. Helgeson responded that there are legal “must carry” requirements in the retransmission consent agreements. Mr. Bible asked if this is a corporate agreement. Mr. Helgeson said that it was a corporate agreement. Mr. Bible asked how many new channels could be added through the upgrade. Mr. Helgeson responded that 20 to 22 analog channels could then be added above the current channel capacity with existing technology. He added that more channels could possibly be added if digital compression were used, but that technology would require new home terminal technology. There were several brief questions about the existing home terminals. Mr. Bible requested additional information from Mr. Helgeson regarding the digital radio service. 8. Review 1997 Complaint Log Mr. Bible asked about the unsatisfactory call backs. Mr. Grawe clarified that in some cases, he did not call the customer back until several weeks after the service was completed. Mr. Helgeson explained that the program channels vary in volume levels. He explained that Marcus can not control levels of off air channels, but Marcus evaluates and resets the audio levels at least 3 times per week. However, he said that audio fluctuations still persist. Mr. Bible asked if there are guidelines regarding the audio levels. Mr. Helgeson said that Marcus is within the guidelines, but that there is room for the fluctuations within the guidelines. Mr. Helgeson noted that Smart Sound technology is a response to these fluctuations. He added that Marcus offered the customer in question a volume controller free of charge but she had declined to take it. Ms. Bitner briefly summarized the complaints registered by the owners of 5539 and 5557 138th St. One resident had poor cable reception which required Marcus to drop a new line and bore under a neighbor’s driveway. The customer had been misinformed that he would be charged for the boring. Mr. Helgeson explained that in that neighborhood, one pedestal services four houses. Once the drop went bad, it required Marcus to bore under a neighbor’s drive and the customer’s drive. Mr. Helgeson explained that the boring is paid for by Marcus if it is necessary to meet signal requirements, but it is charged to the customer if the boring is only the customer’s preference. 9. Approve 1996 Annual Report Mr. Bible requested that the Marcus Fact Sheet be added to the report. Mr. Brown asked how many customers left Marcus due to the home terminals. Mr. Helgeson said that it is difficult to measure since the terminals only affected premium channel customers. He said that typically, Marcus expects 5-10% of the customers to initially choose against the service, but that most take the service again in the future. Mr. Bible asked if Marcus conducts audits of the system. Mr. Helgeson responded that Marcus audits at least one pedestal per day. Mr. Rodell moved, second by Mr. Brown, to approve the 1996 Annual Report as amended. Motion passed unanimously. 10. MACTA Conference of October 30 & 31 Update Mr. Bible asked if any members were interested in attending the MACTA conference. Mr. Rodell said he would be interested in attending. 11. Adjourn Mr. Rodell moved, seconded by Mr. Hugstad-Vaa to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried unanimous. The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 P.M..