Laserfiche WebLink
B-2 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION AMOUNT <br />EVEN THOUGH THE EMPL(�tEE CONTRIBUTION AMOUNT WAS SET AT 8%,IN <br />MANY FUNDS THIS IS NOT EQUIVALENT TO 40% OF THE NORMA,, COST. THE <br />AMM URGES THAT THE CONTRIBUTION LEVEL BE SET AT 40% OF THE NOVMAL <br />COST OF FINANCING THE BENEFITS EVEN IF THIS AMOUNT EXCEEDS 8% <br />OF BASE SALARY. ANY INCREASE IN BENEFITS FOR CURRENT EMPLOYEES <br />INCLUDING ANY RESULTING DEFICIT, SHOULD BE FINANCED 5O% BY THE <br />EMPLOYING CITY AND 50% BY EMPOYEES ON A CURRENT BASIS. <br />II-C CABLE COMMUNICATIONS <br />Nearly all of the cities in the Metropolitan Area have formed <br />single or joint powers Cable Service Territories (CST) as have <br />many of the cities in Minnesota outside the Twin City Area. The <br />franchising process in progress in these areas range from totally <br />served to under con:-truction to preparing RFP's for bids. Based <br />on recent court decisions and pending Federal Legislation it <br />appears that much of the control cities had in cable <br />franchising, rates, and the cable product is being eliminated or <br />transferred to the FCC and market place. However, the basic <br />franchising process and issues related to system interconnects <br />and regional. channel still remain state and local issues. <br />C-1 CABLE FRANCHISE PROCESS <br />Minnesota statutes provide a reasonable and flexible set of <br />guidelines for municipalities to establish cable service <br />territories even in a changing, federal environment. <br />THE AMM BELIEVES THIS LAW HAS ALLOWED LOCAL COMMUNITIES TO <br />PROVIDE I►?UT INTO AN IMPORTANT COMMUNITY SERVICE AND THAT IT <br />SHOULD NOT BE MODIFIED TO DIMINISH LOCAL CONTROL. <br />C-2 METROPOLITAN<*EGIONAL CHANNEL NEEDS <br />The 1973 legislature mandated a uniform regional channel be set <br />aside, an entity to schedule programs and facilitate use of the <br />channel be designated, and the cable board should prescribe rules <br />for its operation and practi(:e which ;.hall insure that priority <br />be given to public use of the channel. To date, minimal 'needs <br />analysis' has been done to determine what type of programming <br />should be pr:)vided or even if there is a real need or desire on <br />the part of the general pudic an it relate:; to the cost ,f <br />providing a regional channel capability. It may be that after <br />definitive analysis there i., nct .sufficient ,u t.;fication, ever. <br />In light of some of the special interest activists claims, for a <br />regional charme 1 as mandated and that the Action mi i tit be <br />to attempt t!, repeal the mand.ite. <br />