Laserfiche WebLink
LMCCC - August 1993 Meeting <br />Page 4 <br />Olds asked if the KCC would still monitor rates even if the LMCCC did not request <br />certification. Creighton replied that the FCC would most likely not, unless their were <br />numerous subscriber complaints. <br />Pattrin asked if the cable company would be able to raise it's rates, then ask for <br />approval. Creighton said the cable company must give 30 days notice prior to any increase <br />and must give justification for the increase. If the Commission feels that there is not <br />enough information given another 90 days can be given to collect more data and <br />the information. <br />Pattrin then asked if the term "Basic" had been officially defined, <br />stated that "Basic" is the lowest tier in which all broadcast, access and PEG <br />Educational ? Government Access) channels can be received. <br />Markle asked if action were necessary today. Creighton stated <br />certification is planned, he would recommend official action take place as <br />possible. Markle then asked if, due tc ^he time-line, a vote in favor of certification is <br />taken this evening, however, the Commission decides after more thought that they wish to <br />de-certify, is this possible? Creighton stated that Just because you are certified, that <br />doesn't mean you have to regulate. <br />Thies concurred with Creighton in stating that the Lake Minnetonka Cable <br />re-rev lew <br />Creighton <br />(Public. <br />that <br />soon <br />if <br />as <br />Communications Commission wa <br />Motion 8.17.93.5 <br />formed as a regulatory body. <br />Thies moved to direct staff to prepare application to the FCC <br />for the Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission's certification to be a regulatory <br />authority. Pattrin seconded. Salazar asked for questions and/or coniments, receiving <br />none, he then called the vote. Motion passed unanimously. <br />then asked for <br />c) Approval of Proposed 1994 Budget <br />Salazar gave a brief summary of the proposed 1994 budget and <br />questions. <br />Olds stated that in view of the previous motion, it should be known that although <br />there is not a line item in the proposed budget for rate regulation, the money is <br />available from monies put away over the years in legal funds. <br />Daniels stated that additional funds were included for the coverage of two new <br />cities' council meetings in 1994. <br />Motion 8.17.83.6_ Brancel moved to approve <br />presented. Anderson seconded. Motion passed unanimously. <br />Daniels then explained that this now goes to the <br />approval. He encouraged the Commissioners that do not sit on the council to attend their <br />city's meetings in support of the 1994 budget and the LMCCC. <br />the proposed 1994 budget as <br />individual city councils for <br />d) Quarterly Subscriber Complaint Report <br />Daniels stated that the complaints for the 2nd quarter have been handled <br />satisfactorily. He also stated that although the system outages have increased this <br />summer, it has not been at the fault of Triax. Several lightening strikes and <br />construction problems have occurred, however, the resulting outages were corrected <br />expeditiously. <br />VI. MAHERS FROM THE FLOOR <br />Salazar stated that during the Budget Committee and Executive Committee meetings <br />the idea of having an official logo for the LMCCC to improve it's image was discussed. He <br />explained that it was looked into and that for a professionally designed logo it would <br />cost approximately $250. <br />Motion 8.17.93.7_ _ _ Pattrin moved to approve the appropriation of an amount not <br />to exceed $300 for an official LMCCC logo. Stanga seconded. Motion passed 10/2. Murphy, <br />Wear voted nay.