Laserfiche WebLink
resolution clearly outlined wide-spread uncertainty about whether the merger would support the <br />maintenance of such services. He said he would support the motion, despite the non- <br />compliance of AT&T and TCl with the City's Telecommunications Ordinance. <br /> <br />Mr. Fart complimented staff on preparation of the resolution and said he believed it was fair to <br />both AT&T and the City. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson said she did not believe the council had the responsibility of approving the <br />merger of AT&T and TCl, but to determine if the merger could negatively affect cable television <br />service concerns already documented, or the ability to address service improvements in already <br />reached agreements. She said most cable service complaints received by councilors tended to <br />be about the amount of programing in relationship to price, changes in programing, and the kinds <br />of service available. She said she did not believe programing and price issues were fully <br />addressed in the resolution under consideration. <br /> <br />Franchise Manager Pam Berrian pointed out that cable television programing and rate structures <br />were governed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), rather than local entities. <br />She also said that the US Department of Justice, Federal Trade Commission, Oregon Public <br />Utility Commission, and 900 other cities were also studying the merger and would provide some <br />protection regarding the ability of AT&T to operate the TCl system. <br /> <br />Ms. Swanson Gribskov asked how the amended resolution distributed at the beginning of the <br />meeting differed from the resolution councilors had received with the agenda of the meeting. <br />City Attorney Jerry Lidz replied that the amended resolution incorporated requests for word <br />changes submitted by AT&T and eliminated Subsection 1.7, which had required responses to <br />questions submitted to AT&T that had just been received. <br /> <br />Ms. Swanson Gribskov asked if the Metropolitan Policy Committee (MPC) had considered the <br />responses and suggestions for changes to the proposed resolution by AT&T. Ms. Berrian replied <br />that the role of the MPC had been to initiate the inquiry and provide authorization for the <br />jurisdictions involved to act. <br /> <br />Mr. Lidz said that subsequent correspondence from attorneys representing AT&T had requested <br />additional changes in the resolution, as follows: <br /> <br /> · Sentence 2 of paragraph D of the Findings be changed, as follows: <br /> <br /> Consent to the proposed merger is in reliance on AT&T's responses to <br /> MPC's inquiry and is conditioned upon TCI and AT&T agreeing to promptly <br /> cure the non-compliance with Ordinance 20083 if the City ubtirna~tely prevails <br /> in the pending litigation. <br /> <br /> · Subsection 1.1 of the resolution be changed, as follows: <br /> <br /> That if the City of Eugene ubtirna~tely prevails in the legal challenges to <br /> Ordinance No. 20083 filed by TCI and AT&T which are now pending, TCI and <br /> AT&T, who are not in non-compliance with that Ordinance, will promptly cure <br /> such non-compliance, including, but not limited to, the filing of all required <br /> forms and payment of all sums due, including penalties and interest, ezc-e~ <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 9, 1998 Page 5 <br /> 11:30 a.m. Lunch Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />