HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/05/94TAPE #1238
UNAPPROVED DRAFT
COUNCIL
APPROVED
0 C T 2 6 1994
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
OCTOBER 5, 1994
#0016
#0038
The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Bremerton
was called to order in the City Council Chambers, 239 4th Street,
Bremerton, Washington, Wednesday, October 5, 1994, at 5:30 P.M.,
with Council President Sherril Huff-Menees presiding. Council
members present were Morrie Dawkins, John Law, David Farr, A1
Colvin, Carlos Montgomery, Bob Winters, and Richard Neville.
Councilman Lon Overson was absent. Also present were Assistant
City Attorney Jim McNamara and Deputy City Clerk Gil Johnson.
The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council
President Huff-Menees and Invocation given by Intern Pastor Robert
Austin of Abundant Life Foursquare Church.
CONSENT AGENDA
A. Minutes of Meeting - September 14, 1994
#AB94-210
B. Minutes of Meeting - September 21, 1994
#AB94-211
M/S/C/U(Neville/Farr) to approve the Consent Agenda as presented.
CLAIMS/CHECK REGISTERS
Vouchers audited and certified by the auditing officer as required
by RCW 42.24.080, and those expense reimbursement claims certified
as required by RCW 42.24.090, have been recorded on a listing that
had been made available to the Council.
M/S/C/U(Colvin/Dawkins) on October 5, 1994, the Council does
approve for payment those vouchers included and further described
as follows: 178874 through 178877, and 178884 through 179063 in the
total amount of $644,549.12.
President Huff-Menees announced Council will hold a Study Session
on October 19, immediately following the City Council meeting.
Topic to be discussed - "Solid Waste".
COUNCIL MEMBER REPORT8
Mr. Winters thanked City staff members for their reports to the
City Council at the October 3 Study Session. He wished more of the
public attended City Council Study Sessions because of the
information that is given out. With school children back in school,
he cautioned drivers to please drive cautiously. On Thursday,
October 20, 6:30 P.M., the Kitsap Lake Neighborhood Association
will hold a meeting at the Cascade Natural Gas facility. This
group will hold election of officers as part of their agenda.
TAPE #1238
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
October 5, 1994
Page 2 of 12
Their future meeting schedule is as follows: Wednesday, November
16, 6:30 P.M. and Thursday, December 15, 6:30 P.M., at the Cascade
Natural Gas building.
Mr. Colvin announced the next District #1 Neighborhood Coalition
meeting will be held November 10, 7:00 P.M., at the Sheridan Parks
Recreation Center. He hopes to have those who prevailed in the
Primary Election to come back and reiterate what they promised for
that election. He emphasized City Council Study Sessions are open
to the public and he would like to see more public attending those
meetings.
Mr. Dawkins cautioned everyone that the State is starting some
repair work on the Warren Avenue Bridge that will cause some
traffic congestion.
Mr. Montgomery announced he will hold a District #8 Neighborhood
meeting at his residence - 605 N. Cambrian on October 6, 7:00 P.M.
Residents of District #8 will have an opportunity to discuss their
concerns and he has not scheduled any City staff members to be
present at that meeting.
Mr. Law announced the next District #3 Neighborhood meeting is
scheduled for October 18, 7:00 P.M., at the Senior Center. The
theme of that meeting will be "Community Development" and the
quality of life in the Manette area as well as Housing Quality
Rules for new construction and existing buildings.
Mr. Farr reminded everyone that he is holding a District #6
Neighborhood meeting on October 18, 7:00 P.M., at Bremerton High
School Room 206. The program for that meeting will include Richard
Haze, Director of Kitsap Transit to discuss possibilities of
reduced bus fare rates for low income people; a representative from
the Parks and Recreation Department to talk about potential park
opportunities in the West Bremerton area; and Mayor Horton.
Mr. Neville announced on October 8, 4:30 P.M., at the Warren Avenue
Playfield an informal dedication ceremony will be held to name the
field CARPENTER FIELD in memory of Murrel Carpenter. Also,
construction of the Warren Avenue CSO project will begin the week
of October 10 along Park Avenue, which will compound the work being
done on the Warren Avenue Bridge.
Mrs. Huff-Menees thanked the Street Department for improvements on
Rogers Street. She announced on Thursday, October 6, 6:00 P.M.,
Kitsap Transit building (2nd floor), she will be hosting a
neighborhood meeting of the South Yantic, Hartford and Summit areas
(400-500 blocks specifically). Presentations at that meeting will
include: Block Watch Program/Detective Jon Johnson;
TAPE #1238
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
October 5, 1994
Page 3 of 12
Parking/Parking Supervisor Deborah Goodell; Animal Control/Officer
Goodell and Shannon Hall, a Pet Behavior Consultant. Also, she
will hold a District wide meeting on Thursday, October 20, 6:30 -
8:30 P.M., at the Bremerton School District Office on Montgomery
Avenue.
MAYOR'S REPORT
Mayor Lynn Hotton reported on a visit she made today to the
Juvenile Detention Center where she talked with 15 youth clients of
the Center. She found the youth to be very bright and articulate
and their main issue centered around lack of things to do for youth
in the community, especially late evening hours. They also had
concerns about lack of job opportunities for youth and young
adults, and they shared how they feel they are treated asyouth in
the community by the City's Police Department. She found the
discussion with the youth to be very interesting and one of the
things identified should have been the fact that most of those
individuals come from very minimal home life situations, if they
have homes at all and several of the youth are already parents
themselves. She felt her visit pointed up that Bremerton is not
immune from the evils of big city life and may be a symptom of
society in general, but are issues that the City needs to be aware
of and try to address in some fashion. By the time she concluded
her discussion with the youth, several adults made comment that was
one of the most lively discussion they'd seen those particular
young people engaged in, which she felt was a good sign.
The youth were somewhat surprised to meet a "lady" Mayor
considering the fact they thought she was a man when they invited
her and didn't realize she is a lady Mayor or who she was or what
she stood for. She tried to impress upon them that they need to
register to vote and to find out about the people they want tovote
for and see in elected offices, so they have some control over some
of the things they are going to have to live by.
Mayor Horton attended the Kitsap Regional Planning Council today
and that group has decided to remand. the voting structure issue to
the Attorney's General Office for an official opinion on whether or
not the Regional Planning Council is bound by the Dwyer decision
"one-man one-vote" ruling.
Mayor Horton and City staff members have developed the preliminary
draft of the City's internal Emergency Plan and over the coming
months they will become better acquainted with specific portions of
that plan as well as conducting emergency drills. She will also be
spending some dollars getting City staff prepared with emergency
kits. An element of the planning addressed the fact that if City
employees are expected to be called into service in the case of an
emergency that means they have to make sure their families are
prepared and cared fore before they take on the care of others
TAPE #1238
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
October 5, 1994
Page 4 of 12
within the City. She emphasized the City Council plays a key role
in this program, if she is not available to take on the emergency
situation.
Mayor Horton read the following Proclamation:
(1) October 1994 as Breast Cancer Awareness Month.
PUBLIC RECOGNITION
GordV Byrd stated he was asked by Maria Jones of Young Country 96.5
Radio Station if she could nominate his Byrds Nest Shelter for the
homeless as a "Charity-of- the- Month" as part of their radio
program. He recently received a letter from KCAP thanking him for
his financial donation of $500.00 towards the funeral of a child in
their Head Start Program, who was involved in a fatal automobile
accident. He expressed his thanks to KCAP for the gift of a
jacket.
John Phillips expressed his concern over having received a parking
ticket from a City Parking Regulator for parking his pickup truck
in a particular manner when he was unloading food supplies at the
Salvation Army building. He felt he was not only treated unfairly
but rudely and he believed his vehicle was not parked illegally.
He also related two other incidents where he felt he received
unjust treatment, one at a place of employment and the other by
actions taken by a Kitsap County Deputy Sheriff when he was
carrying out tasks that Salvation Army Captain Winters had
requested during his absence.
Don Atkinson, Bremerton Main Street Association, provided the
following update information:
(1) Graduation Program for the PACK Team on October 11, Noon.
(2) Prospectives '94 series will be telecast on the Access Channel
covering six races in the General Election: Kitsap County
Commissioner District #3, Kitsap County Treasurer, 23rd Legislative
District, Kitsap County Assessor and District Court Judge.
(3) Planning is underway for Santa's arrival and a unique Christmas
Craft Market, holiday banners, street lighting and window
decorating efforts.
Jim Litow stated because the Mayor read a Proclamation concerning
Breast Cancer Awareness, he wanted to share some information that
he heard on a news report that the FDA is now certifying
Mammography Clinics and a toll free telephone number is available
to find out if a particular clinic is certified and on the FDA's
list. He suggested anyone interested in obtaining the toll free
number to contact KING 5 NEWS.
7A - ORDINANCE (FIRST READING) ADOPTING RCW 10.14 AND AMENDING BMC
9A.32.080 (CIVIL ANTI-HARASSMENT PROTECTION ORDERS), #AB94-212
TAPE #1238
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
October 5, 1994
Page 5 of 12
The City of Bremerton currently, under BMC 9A.32.080, enforces
orders for protection issued under Domestic Violence laws (RCW
26.50, 10.99) and restraining orders issued under Dissolution of
Marriage laws, (RCW 26.09). RCW 10.14, which provides for
enforcement of Civil Anti-harassment Protection Orders, has not
been adopted and needs to be in order to provide protection to
victims and prevent all further unwanted contact between the victim
and the perpetrator.
Jim McNamara, Assistant City Attorney, stated in order to give the
Municipal Court the jurisdiction over enforcing violations of civil
anti-harassment orders, the City must adopt RCW 10.14, which
provides for the issuance of anti-harassment orders in civil
matters. This would be used in the event there is a dispute
between one neighbor against another. If there was a violation of
that order, adoption of RCW 10.14 would allow the Municipal Court
Judge jurisdiction to hear the criminal violation.
Jim Litow asked Mr. McNamara to summarize RCW 10.14. He explained
his family has been caught up in such a dispute and continuing
harassment from a neighbor. Mr. McNamara explained RCW 10.14
provides for an individual to petition the District Court for
issuance of an anti-harassment order on grounds that the District
Court Judge feels are sufficient. The order would be issued and
served by the Sheriff or other peace officer in the area or a
Police Officer. Following that, proof of serving has to be filed
with the court and any violation of the order, which would prevent
contract or harassment and violation of the order, would be a Gross
Misdemeanor, which is a criminal matter and punishable by jail and
fine. Mr. Litow stated he and his family have been in a "catch 22"
between the City and County as to where that criminal line is
drawn. The County apparently does not want to consider prosecution
because it is difficult and he understands that position as a
taxpayer, but as a victim he doesn't understand. The City finally,
over a period of time, recognized the fact that they were not able
to'prosecute and the subject amendment was then drafted along with
the previous amendment concerning threats. He is still
experiencing acts of harassment and the last record date of such
action was September 29, 1994. He urged Council to give this issue
serious consideration and approve the amendment.
Gordy Byrd asked if this proposal would protect both males and
females. Mr. McNamara stated it protects both. Mr. Byrd related
that he has known of a situation were the wife inflicts bodily
blows to her husband, who had already experienced bad chest
problems. Mr. McNamara stated the City already adopted legislation
that addresses domestic violence or abuse. The issue being
discussed at this time deals with a different sort of matter that
is outside the scope of domestic violence.
#1270
TAPE #1238
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
October 5, 1994
Page 6 of 12
M/S/C/U(Colvin/Winters) to approve ordinance, on first reading,
adopting RCW 10.14 and amending BMC 9A.32.080 (Civil Anti-
Harassment Protection Orders).
7B - ORDINANCE (FIRST READING) AMENDING BMC 9.08.060 TO CHANGE THE
DEFINITION OF JUNK VEHICLE, #AB94-213
BMC 9.08.060(c) which defines "junk vehicle" was modeled after
State law which defined a junk vehicle as one which met all 5
criteria. The State Legislature has recently amended the
definition of junk vehicle so that the vehicle must meet any 3 of
4 specified criteria. The proposed amendment of BMC 9.08,060 will
bring the ordinance into conformity with State law and make it
easier to designate and remove junk vehicles in the City of
Bremerton.
Jim McNamara, Assistant City Attorney, stated currently the City's
BMC contains a definition of "Junk Vehicles" that was modeled on
then current State law. There has been a recent change in State
Law definition of "Junk Vehicle" and it provides if the localities
wish to adopt ordinances dealing with junk vehicles they need to
adopt the State definition of "Junk Vehicles". Therefore, this
action would be an amendment to the City's current definition of
"Junk Vehicle" and would change the criteria. Under previous State
Law and the City's BMC, there were five criteria that defined a
junk vehicle, all five of which had to be met before the vehicle
could be determined as a "Junk Vehicle" and further action to abate
taken. Now, there are only four criteria, any three of which if
met would qualify a vehicle to be "Junk Vehicle, which could then
be abated. Mr. Neville asked that the four criteria be read into
the record. Mr. McNamara identified the four criteria as follows:
(1) Vehicle is three years old or older; (2) is extensively
damaged, such damage including but not limited to any of the
following: broken window or windshield or missing wheels, tires,
motor or transmission; (3) is inoperable; (4) has a fair market
value equal only to the value of the scrap metal.
Public comment - none.
Mr. Farr stated he firmly supports any effort to clean up the City,
but he is concerned about people who restore collector cars. He
believed at any state of the restoration process, three of the four
criteria listed would be met, unless there was something already
identified in the BMC that prevented them from being classified as
a "Junk Vehicle". Mr. McNama~a stated it should be noted that a
vehicle will not be simply hauled off. If a vehicle meets the
criteria, notice will be mailed to the record owner of the vehicle
and an opportunity is given for them to request a hearings before
the Hearing Examiner to determine whether it is a "Junk Vehicle"
and needs to be abated. At that time, the owner of the vehicle can
#1523
TAPE #1238
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
October 5, 1994
Page 7 of 12
present evidence why it does not meet that criteria. Furthermore,
the current ordinance also provides that if a vehicle or part
thereof, is completely enclosed within a building in a lawful
manner, or is not visible from the street or other public or
private property, or a vehicle parked thereof that is stored or
parked in a lawful manner on private property in connection with
business of a licensed dismantler shall not be subject to
abatement.
Mr. Dawkins questioned if a friend asked him to store a vehicle in
his side yard, would the owner of that property then be held liable
for that vehicle? Mr. McNamara stated yes, but within the City's
ordinance if it is determined at the hearing that the vehicle was
placed on the land without the consent of the landowner and is not
subsequently acquiescent in its presence, City shall not assess
cost of administration or removal against the property owner. Mr-
colvin asked if the property owner would be responsible if he gave
permission for the vehicle to be parked on his property? Mr.
McNamara stated if permission is given, then it would be the
property owner's responsibility to do something about the vehicle
or they would be held responsible.
M/S/C/U(Dawkins/Colvin) to approve ordinance, on first reading,
changing the definition of junk vehicle and amending Section
9.08.060 of the Bremerton Municipal Code.
7C - ORDINANCE (FIRST READING) AMENDING BMC 6.04.050 REGARDING THE
DISPOSAL OF REFUSE AND BMC 6.04.062 TO PROVIDE THAT VIOLATION
THEREOF IS A CIVIL INFRACTION, #AB94-214
BMC 6.04,062 provides that the Building Official shall issue orders
to remove accumulations of refuse within 72 hours of notice being
provided to the owner or occupant of the premises. However, the
ordinance presently fails to specify that failure to comply with
such an order is a violation of the law. The proposed ordinance
amends BMC 6.04,062 to provide that failure to comply with an order
to remove refuse is a civil infraction.
Jim McNamara, Assistant City Attorney, stated this action would
amend the Abatement Ordinance wherein the City's Building Official
or other officials can declare accumulation of refuse or garbage as
a nuisance. The City would then issue an order to remove the
refuse within 72 hours and if not removed, they are subject to a
penalty of a civil infraction. It was an apparent oversight to not
include the penalty when the Refuse Abatement Ordinance was first
written. This proposed amendment is to correct that oversight.
Public comment - none.
Mr. Neville questioned the severity of a civil infraction penalty?
#1820
TAPE #1238
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
October 5, 1994
Page 8 of 12
Mr. McNamara stated the penalty structure is as follows: first
conviction - $100,00 per day; second conviction - $200 per day; and
third conviction - $300.00 per day; additional convictions -
$500.00 per day. There is no jail time penalty assessed. Mr.
Neville noted this was different than the Abatement process where
the City cleans up the site and then tries to get a monetary amount
from the person who refused to clean up. He questioned the
official capacity and how many Building Officials are currently
within the City? Mr. MaNamara stated the City has one Building
Official and enforcement actions are taken by a Building Department
subordinate who devotes all of their time to building code
violations, garbage violations, and processing permits.
Mr. Dawkins questioned if the recommended changes to the ordinance
were coming from the State? Mr. McMamara stated no, cities have
the authority, under general police power, to abate nuisances and
this Cityhas chosen to make these nuisances civil infractions. If
the change is made to an apparent oversight drafting, which became
apparent when a case was being prosecuted, it can be accomplished
by amending the ordinance.
Mr. Farr asked for an explanation how these infractions come to the
attention of the Building Official? Mr. McNamara explained they
are mostly on a complaint basis...aneighbor might observe there is
an accumulation of refuse on a property within their neighborhood
and a call is made to the City's Building Department where that
information is them transferred to a Complain Form. The next step
is for the Building Technician to investigate the complaint and
notify the responsible party.
M/S/C/U(Colvin/Neville) to approve ordinance on first reading
amending the garbage and refuge enforcement provision and amending
Sections 6.04.050 and 6.04.062 of the Bremerton Municipal Code.
8A - PUBLIC HEARING ON CABLE RATE APPROVAL FOR TCI CABLEVISION OF
WASHINGTON, #AB94-208
The City became certified by the FCC to regulate basic service tier
cable rates and associated equipment and installation charges as of
February 1, 1994. TCI submitted FCC Form 393-Request for Cable
RateApproval that encompassed rate review from February 1, 1994 to
July 14, 1994. TCI also provided additional support documentation
.that verified financial and channel data and explained costing
methodologies used in preparing Form393. Upon review and analysis
by staff it was determined that TCI's Form 393 was prepared
accurately using assumptions and methodologies consistent with FCC
rules.
President Huff-Menees asked the "Appearance Of Fairness/Conflict of
Interest" question with all Council members being seated.
TAPE #1238
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
October 5, 1994
Page 9 of 12
Paula Johnston, Tax and License Inspector, stated the City became
certified in 1993 by the FCC to regulate Basic Service Tier Rates
of cable companies along with any installation charges or equipment
that go to help to support the Basic Tier. The FCC decided to
regulate Expanded Basic Service themselves, so the City is not
involved in that territory. This is a highly technical and formal
process not unlike telephone rate regulation that the FCC has been
in for many years. This is somewhat of a frontier in terms of rate
regulation and everyone has a steep learning curve including the
FCC. What has happened and what this public hearing is about is
the initial rate regulation is a two-pronged process and during
this hearing only the first prong will be addressed.
Initial rates for Basic Service Tier and equipment and installation
are rates that TCI has had in effect from February 1, 1994, the
date the City started regulating to July 14, 1994. As of July 14,
a new set of rules become effective and a new set of rate
regulations starts over again using the new FCC Rules and
Guidelines. That rate review and public hearing will happen at a
future date once the City has gone past the initial Form 393. The
FCC told franchise authorities that they had to approve both
processes and the City is doing one at a time.
Form 393, submitted by TCI, was verified in terms of accuracy and
reasonableness. The City's findings were actually the same as what
TCI found once they went through the rate regulation process. The
findings were that their Basic Rate they were charging from
February 1, 1994 to July 14, 1994, of $10.43 was reasonable and
below the benchmark rate of $10.51. In reviewing the calculations
for installation and equipment charges, the City concurs in TCI's
findings that their actual rates from February 1, 1994, to July 14,
1994, exceeded the maximum permitted and allowed by the FCC Rules
and Guidelines.
The following recommendations are:
(1) The City Council should approve TCI's Basic Tier Rate of
$10.43, because it was below the benchmark of $10.51.
(2) To Direct TCI to lower all of their installation and equipment
charges down to the maximum permitted level.
(3) Order TCI to calculate and refund the overcharges that did
result from the actuals being too high.
Ms. Johnston emphasized the City must be very formal and accurate
in how TCI is directed to come up with their refund liability.
They are entitled, as part of the FCC Rules, to go back and look at
their benchmark Basic Tier Rate, which they undercharged, when
calculating refund liability. She assured the City Council TCI has
TAPE #1238
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
October 5, 1994
Page 10 of 12
viewed the information provided in the Agenda Packet and it is her
understanding that they concur.
Public comment - none.
Mr. Neville questioned for clarification how the formula is broken
down for the Basic Tier Rate? And, he questioned if he understood
correctly that TCI may raise the rates up to the maximum of the
benchmark? Ms. Johnson stated only under a refund calculation is
TCI allowed to go back and look at all of the undercharges that
they gave subscribers during the window of refund liability. It
doesn't mean that Council is certifying a high rate and it is her
recommendation that Council certifies the rate that they did
charge. Under FCC Rules, the cable company has the option of
taking two different methods of calculating and identifying the
refund: (1) to identify each subscriber that they overcharged and
undercharged; (2) to come up with a bottom line refund and
prospectively give everyone a one-time credit.
Mr. Winters asked if TCI reviewed the window of time and categories
that need to be adjusted? Dan Clark, TCI Manager, stated these
rates are basically mute due to their having already moved onto the
next level that Ms. Johnston alluded to earlier. On July 14 they
actually lowered their rates again according to the FCC Form 1200,
so the rates being discussed at this time are no longer being
charged. Mr. Winters asked if notice was mailed out to TCI
subscribers? Mr. Clark stated yes, several notices have been sent
out to subscribers.
Mr. Law referenced "Exhibit C - Maximum Permitted Rates" and asked
for an explanation why the Kitsap County rate for Basic Service
Tier is $10.43 and Bremerton's is $10.517 Ms. Johnston explained
"Exhibit C" was put together from Form 393 covering the three
jurisdictions - Bremerton, Poulsbo and Kitsap County. These are
strictly the maximum permitted rates from those 393 applications.
That information is provided to let Council know that what TCI is
doing throughout the County is consistent. The Basic Service Tier
on "Exhibit C" is the benchmark for each of the three
jurisdictions. Mr. Law stated he was somewhat confused and felt it
resembled the City's garage contract. Ms. Johnston explained the
reason for their being different is due to the formula being based
on subscriber count as well as the TCI headend with numbers of
satellites, and number of broadcast channels. Because the
subscriber count is different in each of the jurisdictions, the
entire calculations came out a little different, but in conferring
with Kitsap County, who did rate regulation review 383 concurrently
with the City, it appears, to the best of her knowledge, that TCI
used the same methodology for all of the393's in Kitsap County.
In the second round of rate regulation, which starts July 14, 1994,
#2520
TAPE #1238
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
October 5, 1994
Page 11 of 12
and will be brought under the 1200 application. The methodology
was changed by the FCC on how Cable operators would go about coming
up with their benchmark rate. As a result of that process, as of
July 14 Bremerton has the lowest Basic Service Tier charge of any
jurisdiction in Kitsap County.
Ms. Johnston pointed out the City Attorney did make an amendment
that needs to be adopted along with the rate order. The amendments
are as follows:
Replace Conclusion #4: Where a cable operator's rates are not in
compliance with FCCrules, the operator's refund liability shall be
based on the difference between the sum of the old charges and the
sum of the new regulated charges. TCI shall calculate refunds to
Bremerton franchise customers based on the overcharges for
equipment and related installation under Finding #7 above and the
savings to subscribers from TCI's basic service rate set below the
maximum permitted rate under Finding #6.
Replace Paragraph 3 of the Order: TCI shall refund fees and charges
collected for equipment and installation from subscribers within
its Bremerton franchise area in excess of the maximum permitted
charges listed in Findings #6 and #7 above from September 1, 1993
to July 14, 1994. Refunds shall be made pursuant to the procedures
contained in the 47 CFR Subpart N. Sec. 76.942(d) and adhere to the
mathematical principles underlying the benchmark approach to rate
regulation. TCI shall report the total amount of overcharge to
subscribers to the City Council by November 20, 1994.
This amendment for conclusions of law comes directly from a FCC
Rule that states basically that the overcharges and undercharges
will both be looked at in the refund liability calculation and to
compliment that the City Attorney drafted the change to Order #3,
under Council's orders. It is also incorporating language to allow
TCI, formally, to offset their overcharges in equipment and
installation with the undercharge on the Basic Service Tier.
Mr. Colvin asked if there is an amount that can be subscribed to
for an estimate? Mr. Clark stated the exact amount has not yet
been determined and they have until November 20 t6 provide that
information to the City Council.
M/S/C/U(Neville/Colvin) to adopt the Findings and Order approving
TCI's Basic Service Tier Rate of $10.43, approving the Maximum
Permitted Rates for each category of equipment and installation as
itemized and the City Council shall order a refund of every
subscriber in the City's franchise area who was charged more than
a maximum permitted rate for equipment and installation. Refunds
should be calculated from September 1, 1993 through July 14, 1994,
TAPE #1238
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
October 5, 1994
Page 12 of 12
with the noted amendments provided by Ian Sievers, City Attorney.
With no further business meeting adjourned at 7:05 P.M.
(M~7..C..L~
KA c LUS~, City' Clerk
KLM/SH-M/me
cc: Normal Distribution
File/Vault