03-29-83 Public Works Committee - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Qlnmmtiin Road t?!o the Mammon Qlounril of tilt Ong of OoutA Nrnb PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE The March 29, 1983 meeting of the Public Works Committee was called to order at 4 :00 in the Council informal meeting room by its chairman Raymond Zielinski. Persons in attendance included: Councilmen Voorde, Harris, Serge, Zielinski, Citizen Member Joe Simeri, Citizen Member Mark Golden, Rich Hill, Carolyn Pfotenhauer, Don Yates of Gensis Electronics, Bob Yates of Gensis Electronics, Attorney Tom Brunner of Indiana Cablevision, Bill Moss of Indiana Cablevision, Larry Abbott, President of MARA, Tom Atwood, Technical Assistant of MARA, Tony Neitzel, Technical Chairman of MARA, Bruce Best, of Ivy Tech and Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand. Councilman Zielinski noted that the purpose of the meeting was to review Bill No. 17-83 regarding the cable television franchise bill. Mr. Brunner of Cable Television stated that his client has spent over 300 man hours in the last three months trying to correct the interference problem on Channel E. There had been a problem with the receiver on Edison Road and problems of radiation, however the radiation is now within acceptable FCC limits. Indiana Cablevision wants to be responsive to complaints but . ham operators are now using very sophisticated equipment. Mr. Tony. Neitzel .of the Michiana Amateur Repeaters Association stated that one of their biggest areas of concern is the disruption of service. He then quoted the FCC regulations and his letter of March 14th. He noted that precident can be found in. Santa Rosa,California where in March of 1982 they passed legislation preventing cable television from using the ham radio frequences. He cited River Falls, Wisconsin as another community using this language. Mr. Bill Moss, General Manager of Indiana Cablevision then explained the CED' s, CATV Frequency Allocation Table. He noted that his company has now spent over 450 man hours checking for .interference problems and correcting such problems. Mrs. Pfotenhauer then reviewed her memo, a copy of which is attached. Mr. Abbott stated that he did not want the City to do the 'work of the FCC. Several frequencies are leaking beyond FCC standards, thus the City should oversee the franchises so they do not loose their franchise. Mr. Hill stated that the City could not enforce such technical standards since it was beyond the capabilities of personnel and equipment. Mr. Yates had two areas of concern namely that the ordinance does not address implied restrictions of individual rights and the'.i proof of performance and the body overseeing compliance. He noted that many persons have more than one input device and that such things as remote control tuning .systems, signal enhancer systems, and video recording systems should be allowed to be used by the citizens. He then questioned Section 7-6 subscriber rights and Section 7-5 operation, service and maintenance. He questioned what the- qualifications of the persons reviewing on an annual basis would be. He wanted. to be sure that the ordinance addressed quality. rose /AC.• •deth. PUU I/NIMO CO.