Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFEBRUARY 15,1983_2 I I CITY COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS ARE TAPE RECORDED AND, ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 25: 0670 INVOCATION: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL MINUTE APPROVAL PROCEDURAL ORDINANCE WAIVED TOWA CORP. Santa Ani ta Plaza UPdate; ( / 1,/1- q 't-~ 1~ HEARING GROUP W CABLE TV HEARING 'CLOSED y~~~ M I NUT E S CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA and the ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REGULAR MEETI NG FEBRUARY 15, 1983 The City Council of the City of Arcadia and the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency met in a regular session Tuesday, February 15, 1983, 7:30 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers. Reverend Alfred Carter, Christian Center of Arcadia City Attorney, Michael H. Miller PRESENT: Councilmen/Members Dring, Haltom, Hannah, Lojeski, Pellegrino ABSENT: None The minutes of the adjourned and regular meetings of Febr~~!y 1, 1983 were APPROVED as corrected, on MOTION by Councilman lOJeski, seconded by Councilman Dring and carried 'unanimously. . In order to take the fo110Win9 item, it was MOVED by Councilman Lojeski, seconded by Councilman Haltom and carried on roll call vote as follows that the provisions of the Procedural Ordinance be waived. AYES : Councilmen Dring, Haltom, Hannah, Lojeski, Pellegrino NOES : None ABSENT: None Rod Gunn, Financial Consultant retained for the proposed Santa Anita ,Plaza to be located at 130 W. Huntington Dr., Arcadia (formerly Ramada Inn) presented the current status of this matter; stated in part that the City under Charter powers would issue the bonds. Proceeds would be deposited with the Wells Fargo Bank; the bank would, in turn, use the funds to make a loan to the Towa Corporation for the develop- ment of the proposed hotel. The bonds would carry a dO,uble "A" rating. He noted conditions which would have to be corrected before the bank would approve it as a real estate package. Towa Corporation has retained 0'Me1veny & Myers to work with the property owner on restruc- turing the ground lease. Mr. Gunn stated further in part that the new financial statement is more comprehensive. This statement will be furnished the Council; also information on Robert Blumin, who has recently entered the picture; and a projected schedule for the develop- ment which was originally being proposed for the Olympics in 1984. This is a continued public hearing on the Cable Television Franchise with Group W. Staff recommended that the hearing be closed at this meeting and reopened at such time as Council desires to proceed with the granting or denial of the franchise. Staff requested that they be authorized to pursue negotiations with the company in an effort to resolve any differences in the draft cable ordinance. Due to the" length of the consideration, A TRANSCRIPT HAS BEEN PREPARED AND IS INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE. -1- 2-15-83 j o ~\o v I \ : HEARING Appeal Modification 2321 S. Sixth APPROVED 25 :0671 Other than the Council Members and staff, speaking to the matter were: Rusty Faust, General Manager, Group W Cable, Inc. John Merritt, District Manager for Group W Cable, Inc. Laudel1 Ludwig, 1085 Singing Wood Drive, Arcadia Perry Cope, 1231 San Carlos Road, Arcadia The hearing was CLOSED on MOTION by Councilman Dring, seconded by Councilman Haltom and carried unanimously. It was then MOVED by Councilman Dring, seconded by Councilman Haltom that the Draft Cable TV Franchise be presented to Group W for its I review and comments; that Council also review it, and that Council move under the general guidelines so that an acceptable agreement may be reached as soon as possible in order for Group W to proceed in building South Arcadia in an expedient manner, per the City's require- ments. Councilman Hannah stated in part that he would like to see Group W comply with the terms of its contract and then he would talk about changing it. ... he would not do that until such time as they do what they said they were going to do ... that until such time, staff should not have to waste their time drawing up new agreements. Councilman Lojeski stated in part that when things are sent back for review, it seems to take months.... He could not understand why, if the pole rights have been negotiated, Group W cannot proceed. He did not want to consider changing the time.... He wants a better contract for the City and for cable television.... He felt it is about time for the City to put its foot down and tell Group W how they are going to operate. Roll call vote was then taken on the MOTION: AYES NOES ABSENT: Counc il men Councilman None Dring, Haltom, Pellegrino Hannah, Lojeski (Please refer to transcript) Appeal from the decision of the Planning Commission in its denial of a modification application relating to 2321 South Sixth Avenue. The Commission had determined the masonry wall may be retained at 6 ft. along the north and south sides of the property but the fence must be at a maximum of 5' 9" on the east (front) side of the property. Mayor Pellegrino declared the hearing open and the applicant, Ramiro Rodrigues, asked Council to permit him to keep the fence across the front of his property at a maximum of 6' 0" in order for the wrought, iron to be higher than the pillars - thus keeping the arch effect all around the property. No one else desiring to be heard, the hearing was I CLOSED on MOTION by Councilman Dring, seconded by Councilman Lojeski, and ca rri ed. During the ensuing discussion Councilman Haltom said in part he could not support the request ... the applicant had been advised on what he could and could not do and he went ahead with the construction .., that he was in violation of the Code ... knowingly. Councilman Haltom then MOVED for denial of the request. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Councilman Lojeski submitted that, based on what the applicant stated in his letter of appeal, he MOVED that the request be granted for the 6 ft. maximum fence on the east (front) side of the house with the pillars at 5 ft. 9" ... the fencing would then be 6 ft. all around. MOTION seconded by Councilman Dring. Councilman Hannah said in part that he agreed with Councilman Haltom that violators of the Code should -2- 2-15-83 CARS PA~KED ILLEGALLY Sixth Avenue V' I HEARING TEXT AMENDMENT 83-1 APPROVED (Ordinance Forthcoming) I' PROCEDURAL ORDINANCE WAIVED , .; OCCUPANCY 435 E. Li ve Oa k 18 months APPROVED ON FEB. 1, 1983 (Per Conditions) p: 1107) I HEARING CDBG PROGRAM (Report to be prepared) (' l/ t~ l?Jb 25 : 06 72 be made aware of that fact; however, he would vote in favor of the appeal inasmuch as in this case, it is only a matter of 3 inches difference. Roll call vote was then taken on the MOTION: AYES NOES ABSENT: Councilmen Dring, Hannah, Lojeski, Pellegrino Councilman Haltom None Just prior to the above item being considered, Councilman Haltom had advised staff that as he traverses Sixth Avenue on a dai1y basis he notices many vehicles parked illegally... on lawns and the like. Staff will check into this. ' 'Planning Commission Resolution No. 1218 recommending approval of Text Amendment 83-1 which would amend the Arcadia Municipal Code by adding Section 9600 setting forth provisions for City Council appeals to decisions and determinations of the Planning Commission. Mayor Pellegrino declared the hearing open and no one desiring to be heard, the hearing was CLOSED on MOTION by Councilman Dring, seconded by Councilman Lojeski and carried. It was further MOVED by Councilman Dring, seconded by Councilman Lojeski and carried on roll call vote as follows, that the Negative Declaration be approved and filed and find that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment and that the City Attorney be directed to prepare the appropriate ordinance to effect this amendment. AYES NOES ABSENT: Councilmen Dring, Haltom, Hannah, Lojeski, Pellegrino None None In order to take the following item out of agenda sequence, it was MOVED by Councilman Dring, seconded by Councilman Lojeski and carried on roll call vote as follows that the provisions of the Procedural Ordinance be WAIVED. AYES NOES ABSENT: Councilmen Dring, Haltom, Hannah, Lojeski, Pellegrino None None Discussion held on the request of J'?rry Furrey, 655 Berkshire Av',., La Canada, for permission to use a portion of his apartment complex at 435 E. Live Oak Ave. as an occup1ncy unit for a period of 18 months. It was noted that on February 1 thi5 request was approved and carried on d vote of 3 to 2 to permit such occupancy, providing Mr. Furrey complied completely with all conditions imposed lY the various City Departments.... This was for an 18-month period only, and its use would not be for relatives. Staff was to take steps to ensure this use. Mr. Furrey presented himself to Council and said he would comply with all conditions. It was noted that the parking had been resolved. Councilman Lojeski said in part he was still opposed to this and would adhere to his "no" vote. He felt it was in total violation of th'? Code. Counci1man Hannah had made a MOTION to reconsider this matter but withdrew the MOTION. I NO ACTION TAKEN ON THIS MATTER IN VIEW OF THE MOTION OF FEBRUARY 1. This hearing was scheduled to obtain views of citizens on the community development and housing needs. The City had received information from the Los Angeles County Department of Community Development which indicated that the City's estimated allocation 'for 1983-84 would be $258,066. By May 1983 Council will be required to determine the specific program for submission to the County with detailed descriptions and dollar amounts. -3- 2-15-83 HEARING WEED ABATEMENT (To proceed) /,' ',I . )-- Vi?.' ROLL CALL MINUTE APPROVAL v ADJOURNED TO FEB. 16 6:30 p.m. 1/ HEARINGS SCHEDULED MARCH 1 j 25:0673 Mayor Pellegrino declared the hearing open and no one desiring to'be heard, the hearing was CLOSED on MOTION by Councilman Lojeski, seconded by Councilman Dring and carried. Council reviewed staff's report including a recap of the City's participation in the program ,and a statement of community development objectives. Staff received Council's list and will prepare a subsequent report for Council. This was the time and place for hearing objections from any and all property-owners to the proposed removal of weeds, refuse and other flammable material. The County Agricultural Commissioner mailed the appropriate notice of this hearing to all property-owners as required. Mayor Pellegrino declared the hearing open and no one desiring to be' heard, the hearing was CLOSED on MOTION by Councilman Lojeski, seconded by Councilman Dring and carried. It was further MOVED by Councilman I Lojeski, seconded by Councilman Dring and carried on roll call vote as follows that the Los Angeles County Agricultural Commissioner be directed to abate the nuisance by having weeds, rubbish and refuse removed from the parcels listed in Resolution No. 5085. AYES NOES ABSENT: Councilmen Dring, Haltom, Hannah, Lojeski, Pellegrino None None Council recessed in order to act as the ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PRESENT: Members Dring, Haltom, Hannah, Lojeski, Pellegrino ABSENT: None On MOTION by Member Hannah, seconded by Member Haltom and carried, the minutes of the joint meeting of the City Council and Arcadia Redevelopment Agency of February 1, 1983 were APPROVED. The meeting ADJOURNED to 6:30 p.m. Wednesday, February 16, 1983 in the Conference Room. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION Arthur Moulton, 1223 Golden West Avenue, was advised to contact Police Captain Neal Johnson on the morrow concerning the impoundment of his automobil e. Gerrald Garrigan, 1384 Brixton Road, Pasadena, said in part that he was late in paying his business license fee but that he was penalized to the extent of $200 - that his license fee annually is only $25; that he felt the penalty fee excessive ... although he recognized that some penalty was in order. He was advised that this matter is to be con- sidered by Council later at this meeting. ' Pat Gayer, 905 South First Avenue, also referred to the $200 penalty fee for those who paid their business license fee late... the penalty fee is almost unheard of. I CONSENT ITEMS SCHEDULED public hearings for March 1 on the proposed Tentative Map of Tract No. 38964 for a 9-unit residential condominium and on Planning Commission Resolution No. 1219 concerning zone change for 1231 Golden West Avenue. -4- 2-15-83 ri/1 P P: p~ f- SUBSTANDARD APPROVED substandard lot width of 74.56 feet in lieu of 75.00 feet lOT WIDT~ required for 315 East Camino Real. This is in connection with the PARCEL MAP realignment of lot lines at 1521 South Fourth Avenue and 315 East 83-2 Camino Real. ANIMAL CONTROL AGREEMENT REVISED F;",;1~ I TELEPHONE SYSTEM I~r? f" : I DIAL-A-RIDE CONSULTANT AGREEMENT APPROVED F- ID"'-"- /1 iJ.l 1;;,1 F:I'-',;uw I- I CONTRACT/ WAIVER OF 'FORMAL REQUIREMENT (Bleacher cover) CONTRACT RATIFIED 25:0674 APPROVED and AUTHORIZED the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a revised Animal Control Service Agreement with los Angeles County in ,form approved by the City Attorney. The Agreement has been revised to include provisions which require the City to reimburse the County for services provided which exceed the amount of animal license revenue generated to the City. Reimbursements would be effective for the cur- rent fiscal year and the new Agreement has been extended to expire June 30, 1987. DIRECTED staff to prepare for Council's approval, requests for proposals from telecommunication consultants for assistance in procuring a tele~ phone system for all City facilities. Staff will discuss this with the School District. ALL OF THE ABOVE CONSENT ITEMS WERE APPROVED ON MOTION BY COUNCILMAN DRING, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN HALTOM AND CARRIED ON ROLL CALL VOTE AS FOLLOWS: AYES NOES : ABSENT: Councilmen Dring, Haltom, Hannah, Lojeski, Pellegrino None None Council recei~ed and reviewed a Proposal and Services Agreement from Daniel Benson, of Daniel Benson and Associates, for providing services for the 1983 calendar year. It is similar to the prior Agreement except that it reflects the completion of increased Los Angeles County Transportation Commission reporting requirements.... It also does not include, provisions for the special projects (Proposition "A" implementa- tion plan and a cost allocating plan) which were included in the prior Agreement. Discussion ensued and staff said in part that it has been satisfied with Mr. Benson's previous work. Mr. Benson will be addressing Proposition "A" expenditures for the upcoming years in a report ~o be submitted to Council shortly. It was MOVED by Councilman Haltom, seconded by Councilman Hannah and car- ried on roll call vote as follows that the Agreement with Daniel Benson and Associates be approved and that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the Agreement in form approved by the City Attorney. AYES NOES : ABSENT: Councilmen Dring, Haltom, Hannah, Lojeski, Pellegrino None None The City Council at its meeting of January 18', 1983, approved a contract for the purchase and installation of alu,ninum seat and ,floor covers for bleachers at various schools. However, it has subsequently come to light that part of the formal procedure was inadvertently omitted from the bid- ding process, and based on legal advice, it was MOVED by Councilman Dring, seconded by Councilman Haltom and carried on roll call vote as follows, that pursuant to Arcadia Municipal Code Section 2844.3. the Council waive noncompliance with the procedures set forth in staff report dated February 8, 1983, and that the award of contract to General Seating Company in the amount of $15,465.76, be RATIFIED. (SEE JANUARY 18, 1983 MINUTES FOR APPROPRIATIONS.) AYES NOES : ABSENT: Councilmen Dring, Haltom, Hannah, Lojeski, Pellegrino None None -5- 2-15-83 LEASE ACAPULCO RESTAURANT PARKING p: \ 3~3 f" ./f' t J ./ SAlAR Y PART-TIME' POS I TI ONS --r= e : ..-/" C ET A CONSORT lUM APPROVED 25:0675 Request of the Acapulco Restaurant for a reduction in its rent for additional parking space from the City at 219 North First Avenue. They ask that the current annual rent of $11,700 (paid quarterly) be reduced to $5,850 annually (paid quarterly), and for the granting of a 5-year lease agreement. It was submitted that a 5-year annual return on the property combined with the continued operation of the restaurant facility for at least a 5-year period, would be in the best interests of the City; however, it was submitted that an escalating clause be in the Agreement... 6% was felt to be reasonable... and that an oppor- tunity be afforded Acapulco to purchase the property at the current market price. It was MOVED by Councilman Dring, seconded by Councilman Hannah and carried on roll call vote as follows, that the requested reduction to $5,850 annually on a 5-year basis be APPROVED with a 6% rider attached, and that an opportunity to purchase the property at the current market value be presented to Acapulco. The City Attorney is to prepare a new lease to commence Apri 1 1, 1983. Staff .to report back to Counc i 1, and if they do not agree - and since they are in default already - that Council give consideration to some kind of action. I AYES NOES : ABSENT: Councilmen Dring, Haltom, Hannah, Lojeski, Pellegrino None None Council received and discussed the salary recommendations for part-time positions for 1983-84 commencing June 17, 1983. It was noted in the report dated February 9 that the Personnel Department had obtained input from the Parks and Recreation and Police Departments and the Library management; they had evaluated the internal relationships between various positions and had completed a labor market salary survey to determine pay recommendations for part-time classifications. ' It was MOVED by Councilman Hannah, seconded by Councilman Lojeski and carried on roll call vote as follows that the staff recommendation be implemented and that a resolution be prepared to make the salary increases effective June 17, 1983. AYES NOES Cou~cilmen Hannah, Lojeski, Pellegrino Councilmen Dring, Haltom (Councilman Dring felt the money could better be spent on full-time employees who are more important to the City on a long-term basis, and,noted the employee terminations which Council authorized in July of 1982) None ABSENT: Staff advised that it had received an inquiry from Pasadena as to whether or not the City would be interested in joining with five cities (Duarte, Monrovia, Pasadena, Sierra Madre, and South Pasadena) in a CETA consor- tium beginning October 1, 1983. It was noted that the Federal Government I has proposed that the CETA program continue to be funded on a reduced funding level with more emphasis on private sector job training. There are two options: (1) Allow the County to provide CETA services to the Arcadia residents which would permit the County to use the monies, that might be allocated to Arcadia residents, anywhere in the First Super- visorial District; (2) Arcadia could join with the other cities and deal directly with the State for funds that would be allocated for the residents of its area. In response to an inquiry from Councilman lojeski as to whether or not the City of Pasadena would act as administrator of the program, staff stated in part that with Pasadena the City would be in a good position bargaining-wise because Pasadena needs Arcadia's population as well as Monrovia's population to have sufficient numbers for the overall group to qualify.... If Arcadia does not go along, Monrovia could not as the cities must be contiguous to Pasadena. - 6- 2-15-83 I I SENIOR CITIZEN HOUS I NG RELOCATION ASSISTANCE APPROVED r:tL/o9 ORDINANCE NO. 1763 ADOP, ORDINANCE NO. 1764 ADOPTED I 25 :0676 It was MOVED by Councibnan Dring, seconded by Councilman Haltom and carried on roll call vote as follows, that the Mayor be authorized to send a letter of intent to Pasadena regarding the City's intent to join with the other contiguous cities to form a CETA Service Delivery Area Consortium. AYES NOES ABSENT: Councilmen Dring, Haltom, Lojeski, Pellegrino Councilman Hannah None The Senior Citizen housing project at 645-663 West Naomi Avenue is being funded with HUD Section 202 funds; therefore, the City must provide relocation benefits to existing tenants pursuant to the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Act of 1970. It was noted that the property owner has waived his rights to relocation assis- tance but the City must provide assistance to the tenants. The necessary steps were outlined in the staff report dated February 15. It was recom- mended that the services of a relocation consultant be obtained. The Community Development Block Grant funds have been reserved for relocation benefits as well as consultant fees. It was MOVED by Councilman Haltom, seconded by Councilman lojeski and carried on roll call vote as follows, that staff be AUTHORIZED to ~roteed with the preparation of a request for proposal for consultant services at a fee not to exceed $5,000. (Responses and staff recommendations will be subsequently presented to Council for selection of a consultant.) AYES Councilmen Dring, Haltom, Hannah, Lojeski, Pellegrino NOES : None ABSENT: None The City Attorney presented for the secund time, explained the content and read the title of Ordinance No. 1763, entitled: "AN ORDINANCE OF -fHECITYOFARCADIA AMENDING THE ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE BY -AD[)ING- VARIOUS SECTIONS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE, ARTICLE IX THEREOF AND ADDING TITLE 6 TO DIVISION 5, PART 7, CHAPTER 2 OF ARTICLE IX, DEFINING AND REGULATING GAME MACHINE ARCADES." It was MOVED by Councilman Dring, seconded by Councilman Haltom and carried on roll call vote as follows, that further reading of the full text of Ordinance No. 1763 be waived. AYES NOES : ABSENT: Councilmen Dring, Haltom, Hannah, Lojeski, Pellegrino None None It was further MOVED by Councilman Lojeski, seconded by Councilman Hannah and carried on roll call vote as follows that Ordinance No. 1763 be ADOPTED. AYES NOES ABSEN1: Councilmen Hannah, Lojeski, Pellegrino Councilmen Dring, Haltom None The City Attorney presented for the second time, explailled the content and read the title of Ordinance No. 1764, entitled: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA AMENDING THE ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE BY REPEALING A SECTION OF AND AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF AND ADDING VARIOUS SECTIONS TO CHAPTER 2 OF ARTICLE.VI THEREOF PERTAINING TO ENTERTAINMENT PERMITS FOR AND REGULATION OF GAME'MACHINES AND GAME MACHINE ARCADES." It was MOVED by Councilman Dring, seconded by Councilman Haltom and carried on roll call vote as follows, that further reading of the full text of Ordinance No. 1764 be waived. AYES NOES ABSENT: Councilmen Dring, Haltom, Hannah, Lojeski, Pellegrino None None -7- 2-15-83 \ I. ORDINANCE NO. 1765 INTRODUCED j ORDINANCE NO. '1767 INTRODUCED I RESOLUTION NO. 5086 ADOPTED v 25:0677 It was further MOVED by Councilman Lojeski, seconded by Councilman Hannah and carried on roll call vote as follows that Ordinance No. 1764 be ADOPTED. AYES : Councilmen Hannah, lojeski, Pellegrino NOES : Councilmen Dring, Haltom ABSENT: None The City Attorney presented, explained the content and read the title of Ordinance No. 1765 entitled: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA AMENDING THE ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE BY DELETING THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION ON TEXT AMENDMENTS AND ZONE CHANGES BE ADOPTED BY FORMAL RESOLUTION." ' I It was MOVED by Councilman Dring, seconded by Councilman Halto~_and:' carried on roll call vote as follows, that further reading-of the full text of Ordinance No. 1765 be waived and that same be INTRODUCED. AYES : Councilmen Dring, Haltom, Hannah, Lojeski, Pellegrino NOES : None ABSENT: None Considerable discussion held on proposed Ordinance No. 1767 concerning charges for late payment of business licenses and renewals. Staff submitted a report recommending amending the current ordinance to pro- vide a new penalty for late renewals and commencing businesses. This has been brought about through numerous complaints about the current penalty of $200 or 50% of the license fee, whichever is greater. Following the deliberations, Councilman Dring presented, read the title of Ordinance No. 1767, entitled: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA AMENDING THE ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE BY AMENDING SECTIONS 6214.3 AND 6214.3.1 AMENDING THE PENALTY FOR LATE PAYMENT OF LICENSE FEES AND COM- MENCING BUSINESS WITHOUT A LICENSE AND FINDING SAID FEE AND PENALTIES DO NOT EXCEED COSTS OF SERVICE AND REGULATORY ENFORCEMENT," and MOVED that the further reading of the full text be WAIVED and that said ordinance be INTRODUCED with the following amendments: Under Section 1. 6214.3 PENALTY - the schedule of penalty fees be 20% of the license fee per month, 50% of the license fee the second month, and 40% of the license fee the third month, and that under Section 2. 6214.3.1 the "$50 maximum" be deleted. MOTION seconded by Councilman Hannah and carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES : Councilmen Dring, Haltom, Hannah, Lojeski, Pellegrino NOES : None ABSENT: None It was further MOVED by Councilman Dring, seconded by Councilman Hannah and carried on roll call vote as follows, that staff be directed not to apply the current penalty fees pending adoption of this ordinance. AYES : Councilmen Dring, Haltom, Hannah, Lojeski, Pellegrino NOES, : None ABSENT: None I The City Attorney presented, explained the content and read the title of Resolution No. 5086, entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA,AUTHORIZING AND INSTRUCTING THE COUNTY OF lOS ANGELES AGRICULTURAL COMMISSIONER TO IMPLEMENT THE PRO- VISIONS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 2854 OF JUNE 30, 1982, PROVIDING FOR RECOVERY OF WEED AND BRUSH ABATEMENT ENFORCEMENT COSTS IN THE FORM OF A $13.00 ASSESSMENT ON ALL PARCELS CLEARED IN THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, BY THE AGRICULTURAL COMMISSIONER." -8- 2-15-83_ ~ I "-J TRAFFIC DIVERTER Orange Grove & San Carlos (REPORT BACK) V 25:0678 It was MOVED by Councilman Dring, seconded by, Councilman Haltom and carried on roll call vote as follows, that further reading of the full text of Resolution No. 5086 be waived and that same be ADOPTED. AYES NOES ABSENT: Councilmen Dring, Haltom, Hannah, Lojeski, Pellegrino None None Council deliberated on what should be done with the traffic diverter at Orange Grove and San Carlos Road. Reference was made to a communication from the Santa Anita Oaks Homeowners' Association indicating a preference to retain the barrier. The City Attorney had advised that it would be possible that the barrier could remain provided it was brought into con- formity. He will discuss this with the Court and will report back to Council... it may take a formal resolution. Staff will provide esH- mates for beautification of the barriers. () I 0- ,~. COUNC Il ENTERED A CLOSED SESS ION, RECONVENED AND TOOK ACTION AS FOLLOWS: "11!' r{;.~'," -' COMPENSATION ECONOMIC REDEVELOPMENT ADJOURNED TO FEBRUARY 16 6:30 p.m. ( ATTEST: City Clerk (I It was MOVED by Councilman Lojeski, seconded 'by Councilman Haltom and carried on roll call vote as follows that the salary range for Assistant City Manager/Economic Redevelopment be increased to $2,995 - $3,640 per month. AYES NOES : ABSENT: Councilmen Haltom, Hannah, Lojeski, Pellegrino Councilman Dring None The meeting ADJOURNED at 12 midnight to 6 :30 p.m. Wednesday, February 16 in the Conference Room to conduct the business of the Council and Agency and any Closed Session, if any, necessary to discuss personnel, litigation matters, and evaluation of properties. ~r. Mayor .,-- .. -9- 2-15-83 ...., ,t.\ MAYOR I PELLEGRINO STEVEN BOCIAN PELLEGRINO COUNCILMAN DRING I ,> T RAN S C RIP T j6*~ REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEB. 15, 1983 PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE (Insofar as decipherable) Item 1 on our agenda is a public hearing, a continued public hearing regarding cable television franchise which will be handled by Steve Bocian. Mr. Mayor and Members of the Council: you have my staff report on this subject. In the staff report it is recommended that this scheduled public hearing be continued until such time as the Council desires to proceed with the granting or denial of the cable TV franchise. We'd like to amend that request so that this scheduled hearing be closed after this evening, and we would reopen the hearing at such time that the Council wishes to discuss the granting or denial of the cable TV franchise. We continue to request that staff be authorized to pursue negotiations with Group W Cable in an effort to resolve any differences in the draft cable TV ordinance. I'd also like to inform the Council that members of Group the audience in case you have any questions you'd like to That concludes my report. Thank you, Mr. Bocian. Mr. Dring - Mr. Bocian, I approve of your recommendation to close the public hearing because it's never been brought to us to approve the franchise. We have a currently existing one. Secondly, I'm a little bit ,concerned about your negotiating with them, items,.in the draft, when the draft itself has never - you know - formally been reviewed by the Council in a session where we thought about the particulars of it and made any suggestions, so - I appreciate the fact that you are trying to cut down a time lapse, but I don't see a time gun here since their franchise runs to '88. Number one, and number two, Council has not gone through a formal process. In W Cable are in direct to them. , , .. TRANSCRIPT DRING (cont'd) BOCIAN GEORGE WATTS CITY MANAGER COUNCILMAN HANNAH BOCIAN HANNAH 2-15-83 Tl Pg. 2 Reg CC Mtg fact, I'm not in favor of reviewing the franchise currently. You know, that's my particular, position. So why would it be appropriate to allocate staff time for this particular item at this point? Well, because we would be able to get a handle as to some major short- comings of the franchise that Group W may find that we could pass on to the Council. We have prepared the draft based on staff recommendations and the recommendations of our consultants, and we feel comfortable - we would like to get some sort of idea from Group W at this time, whether there are some things that are in the draft that they simply cannot pro- vide or that they are not able to meet up with meet and then we can 1 inform Council of this. We do not intend to formalize any sort of an arrangement with them; we just trying to get some fe~dback from them to find out their feelings of the needed draft. Councilman Dring, I think the word "negotiation" was the wrong term to use there. Basically, what it really amounts to is meeting with Group W to see where their concerns are with the draft, and to report those back to the Council. We had not intended to truly negotiate apart from any dis- cussions with the Council; merely get their reaction to our draft, and then in turn pass that on to the City Council for further direction. I have'two questions, if I may. One, if I recall properly, we did send a letter to Group W of our intention to cancel unless they brought the - unless they complied with the terms of the present agreement. I'd like to know where we stand on that letter - what has happened there. That letter was sent to the local office here. Staff requested that Group W comply with 5 requests. They have been able to respond favorably to all of those and they have provided us with the information that we have requested. I was under the impression that we were going to send them a letter that stated that inasmuch as they had not complied with the terms of their contract, we were going to take necessary steps to terminate the agree- ment. If I recall in reading the previous agreement, it required Group W or Teleprompter, as the case may be, to provide cable TV to all the people in Arcadia within a given period of time. They haven't done that. They obviously,'theri, are in noncompliance with their present agreement. I .' . . TRANSCRIPT HANNAH (cont'd) I BOCIAN HANNAH BOC IAN HANNAH BOCIAN HANNAH BOCIAN HANNAH BOCIAN HANNAH BOCIAN HANNAH BOCIAN HANNAH BOCIAN HANNAH I 2-15-83 Tl Pg. 3 Reg CC Mtg Secondly, in your memo you state that staff understands that the consensus of the Council is to postpone any decision until Group W has demonstrated its ability to conform. That was not my thinking. My thinking was, and I gathered from our previous conversation with the other Council members, that not only did we want them to demonstrate their ability, but to also comply with the terms of their contract, and that - the terms of that contract required them to provide all the citizens of Arcadia with cable television. Now, in our letter to them did we not - did we just say, "all you have to do is rectify the problems north of Foothill and solve alL, their problems and forget about everybody else," or what did we say in our - No, we actually said that, first of all, unless they met our 5 requests, that the Council would begin revocation proceedings, and we also said that we expected an improvement in the service. A- May I interrupt you, Mr. Bocian, did we put, as one of our 5 requirements, that they provide service to all of the residents of Arcadia? No. Why wouldn't we do that? Because there is, as I recall, we don't have a time frame in our franchise for that. It was in the original contract. Right. Yes, but there's no time It was in our original contract That's right. They've assumed the obligations of the original contract. That's right. And they have not complied with that. That's right. Why would we not go ahead with the termination if they haven't complied with the contract? Well, because, as I understand it, they still have a number of years left on their contract for which they could comply to that section. They're in violation of their contract because - I don't know the exact time frame, but I think that they were to provide service to all of Arcadia within a given period of time - something less than two years. frame outside of - - I keep going back to that. ". ,. TRANSCRIPT HANNAH (cont'd) WATTS HANNAH WATTS HANNAH PELLEGRINO COUNCILMAN LOJESKI BOCIAN PELLEGRINO 2-15-83 Tl Pg. 4 Reg CC Mtg. I don't have the contract with me, otherwise I'd look it up. Councilman, the current franchise that we're operating under - franchise ordinance - does not have a time period for building the remainder 'of the City. I can't argue the point. I don't have a copy. Unfortunately, I didn't know we were going to get into this. I would have brought the I'm sorry, I don't have mY copy with me either, but we can get it before this meeting is over. Then I'd like to defer this until we can find out whether they're in I compliance with their agreement or not. And I would again like to stress the fact that my thinking was not necessarily to extend the contract based upon their demonstra~ing their ability - it was on the basis of their complying with the terms of the contract. Mr. Hannah, I have a copy here. Mr. Miller's copy. Maybe you'd like to thumb through it while we continue. In defense only, and this doesn't happen very often where I'm going to come to Group W's defense, but perhaps there may have been a 2-year time frame. Let's assume there was. Well, is it not really true that Teleprompter was the one, if there was a problem. You can't expect, let's say, the new buyer of the thing to come in and all of a sudden go back and comply. You know, I'm only bringing this out in defense. I personally would like to hear, and I think there are some individuals in the audience, Mr. Mayor, on this particular item, and then I do have some information on this entire fiasco that I'd like to add after public input. I would like to inform Council that the draft you received this evening, staff has amended the term of the franchise so that there is in effect no extension. We have made it that this franchise would run the life of the existing franchise, but we added a provision saying that the Council, at their pleasure, could extend that term. Thank you, Mr. Bocian.' That is staff's report. At this time the pUblic hearing is open. All those in favor of this item on the agenda, would you come up to the podium and state your name and address for a matter of record. I " TRANSCRIPT RUSTY FAUST I I 2-15-83 Tl Pg. 5 Reg. CC Mtg. Your honor, Mayor Pe 11 egri no, Ci ty Council members: My name is Rus ty Faust. I'm the General Manager of Group W Cable. Address is 641 West Duarte Road, in Arcadia. On December 4th I stood before you and I said that the system to rebuild in northern Arcadia will be completed by December 31st. That, in fact, was completed by December 31st, except for the power supplies being mounted which I had also stated if the City could get them up, the Edison power company, there would not be a holdup. Due to the storms, there was a 3-week delay in getting the power supplies up. They hung the power supplies on January 17th. On January 5th there was a meeting. I was out' of town, was not available. Mr. Tom Plaven and Mr. Steve Larson,represented the company. We received a letter from you outlining specific requests for information. With the submission of the as-built drawings on January the 1st it is our belief that we have fully complied with this request. On January the 13th my office submitted to the City a plan for activating and verifying service on the new cable system along with the plan for con- verting 1,200 customers to this new system. As I indicated in that letter, it was a massive effort to which Group W had committed considerable resources with the objective being improved and expanded service for the customers. We believe that we have made considerabl~ progress in that effort, as the following points demonstrate: the new system has been activated and verified and will be ready for an independent engineering assessment February the 21st, 1983. Approximately 850, or 70% of the customers have been converted from the old system to the new system. Two mailers to each customer plus half-page advertisements in the Arcadia Tribune have been utilized to keep the customers informed of our activities. Two additional customer service representatives were added and a separate customer service phone bank was installed for Arcadia customers. This was to enable them to have a number where they could call and was readily accessable to answer any questions or problems. Also, for those that were missed and we were not able to contact. A free month of basic service will be credited to each individual customer for any inconvenience experienced during the changeover. I know there ", ," TRANSCRIPT RUSTY FAUST (cont'd) 2-15-83 T1 Pg. 6 ,Reg CC Mtg. have been many of them, and th is is a sma 11 way of sayi ng, "thank you for putting up with this during that period of time." The billing system will be changed effective April 1, from a 2-month cycle to a l-month cycle. I think that was of concern to some people at one of the previous meetings. A follow-up survey of customers converted to the new system is now being conducted to ascertain customer satisfaction and explain new services available. All of this has been undertaken in the last month, and we intend on continuing this kind of effort. In an effort of this magnitude, ,problems will arise. Some of the problems have I been the estate nature arid~he multiple outlets and underground con- I struction that was required in many of the homes in the northern Arcadia area. A solution for' that was that instead of a normal l-man installa- , tion crew, 2 men were assigned to each house with an average of 25 to 30 installation cont~actors working each day. Also, because of the diffi- culty in some of the installations, a concurrent program of field inspection was conducted, resulting in one subcontractor being released after two days on the job. Scheduling customers to be converted from the old system to the new system, problems encountered were contacting some customers. We added 2 customer' representatives, as I said, on separate phone banks. They have worked extended hours, trying to reach everyone. Arranging for a property owner to be present during installa- tion. Since we did not schedule specific times due to the nature of the installations and the time involved, it was almost impossible to give a certain time when someone would be there; therefore, we have missed people because people have tired of waiting throughout the day. The weather has created a problem. We've had six days of rain which has also held us up - that's one full work-week for us. Simultaneously switching some customers from the old service to the new system to ensure continued service. While those customers were not yet converted to the new system, and were receiving - and we cut off the old system, it turned off every- one, so they were left without any type of service. And the only possible solution for that was that we did install converters and hooked them up to the new system without complete rewiring at the time. We did not / " realize - I didn-t - was not aware at the time that several of the homes I " ,. TRANSCRIPT FAUST (cont'd) I , 2-15-83 T1 Pg. 7 Reg CC Mtg. were going to be without that service, and we immediately, that same evening, did contact the people and get service to them. Problems with picture quality on the new system. The vast majority of the installations that have complained of picture quality have been because of lack of understanding of our fine tuner and the remote device which operates it. Eight out of ten of the people that have had problems we have been able to walk-through on the telephone, explaining them to them exactly how to use the fine tuner. Another problem was the disruption of the new system was being swept and balanced. some people were without service, and it pictures. service during the day when the This interrupted the service; did cause interruptions on the Requests from customers for expanded services. People who were already on the new system have called and wanted expanded services. One of the things that I insisted upon to begin with was that the people, unless they did insist to the point where we couldn't say no, was to let them have the service for at least 2 weeks prior to giving them expanded services so that we were sure and could follow up that they did have a good picture quality. Just recently it has come to our attention a problem of contractors not identifying themselves with Group W I.D. cards or City business,licenses. Assessing private property without permission of property owner. In an effort to solve these problems, effective tomorrow our installation installers will again be instructed to identify themselves with either a copy of the City business license or a Group W I.D. card, both of which they presently have. They are not to assess private property without the permission of the property owner. Failure of the contractor to meet these requirements will result in their dismissal. These were the major problems encountered in our efforts this past month. We have done everything possible to minimize them, and we are now seeing gradual reduction in the amount of complaints. We have received several letters from satisfied customers tell ing us what good recepti'on they have. ,. TRANSCRIPT FAUST (cont'd) PELLEGRINO LOJESKI WATTS LOJESKI WATTS LOJESKI WATTS LOJESKI FAUST lOJESKI FAUST lOJESKI 2-15-83 Tl Pg. 8 Reg CC Mtg. We are doing a fOllow-up of installations. We have an installations customer service specialist and she is doing calls to find out exactly what problems people are experiencing, and we are sending out - she is setting up service calls if there is definitely a problem and working with the people to make certain that they do have a quality picture that the should have. In the upcoming weeks we will continue to convert the remaining customers from the old to the new system. We hope to get this done as quickly as possible. I personally pledge to work with the City Council until we both have a cable system that we can be proud of. Thank you, Rusty. Any questions to Rusty? Mr. Lojeski - A couple of things, Miss Faust. Some of this you've heard before, some of this perhaps not. First of all, on January 5th you received a letter outlining specific requests. It is your belief that you have fully com- plied with this request. Is it true, Mr. Watts, that has been taken care of? , [lInrlpr;phprehlp] We sent a request on January 5th to Group W requesting specific informa- tion. Has that been totally carried out to our satisfaction? Are you referring to the request for information regarding the employees? No, I'm getting - that's coming. Okay, it's my understanding that the information that we had previously asked for has been provided to the City. Has the entire area north of Foothill been run - not from the poles to the house, but has every pole been strung with new cable? Yes, to my knowledge, yes. It has? Yes. I strongly suggest you find out, first of all, where Whispering Pines Estates are. As of today, as of 5 o'clock tonight, that area still has no cable. There also is a gentleman by the name of Mr. Tom Bower, whose next door neighbor has no cable because the - it was pointed out to him by one of the installers that the cable ends at his telephone pole and there happens to be another telephone pOle next to him which services his , " .' TRANSCRIPT LOJESKI (cont'd) FAUST LOJESKI I , 2-15-83 Tl Pg. 9 Reg CC Mtg. next door neighbor. I don't think that's totally correct and totally true, and I would suggest you perhaps look into that. Are you still on schedule? Now I'm referring to the letter of February 10th which you sent to us indicating all of the new system has been activated and verified and will be ready for an independent engineering assessment on the 21st of this month. Are you still on schedule with that? Yes sir. Okay. In the same letter you made a couple of statements. Page 4 - requests from customers for expanded services. And it states, I quote: "In order to control who ligitimately ordered these services and should have them, they are handled either by in-house installers or a',specia1 contractor." I personally asked the special installer - in-house installer, we'll call him a special subcontractor, how about giving me the news service - the expanded service? And he was told that he was, first of all, unfamiliar with it, and secondarily was not able to do this sort of thing. So, I don't think that statement's entirely correct. Also, the following statement sentence it reads, "Before installation a sales representative must contact the customer and explain the new services." I was never explained the news serv'ices until today. I was given a sheet of paper with my new magical control box and that's about as far as the information went. I have no idea what the fees were until I actually asked you and Mr. Flaven today. I was the one who did ask George - Mr. Watts - to ask Becky Pike what the licensing requirements - and I'm addressing this comment, I think, to my fellow Councilmen - there are a number right now, of subcontractors. I counted at least 4 different cable television trucks in my particular neighborhood last Friday. And I'm a little concerned about that. I'm concerned from the standpoint: ',(1) with that much activity in the community, who's to know as a homeowner, who is truly representing a cable television company or a ripoff firm, and I would strongly request that not only identification cards but also information could be disseminated to the homeowner as to who these people are. They're driving in trucks which do not even have local addresses on them. They're Huntington Beach, El Cajon, you know, this sort of thing. Also, we do have a couple of subcontractors who I .' TRANSCRIPT lOJESKI (cont'd) FAUST LOJESKI WATTS FAUST LOJESKI CITY ATTORNEY MI CHAEL MILLER 2-15-83 Tl Pg. 10 Reg CC Mtg. do not believe have licenses currently in the City of Arcadia to do business; one being Superior Cable, but I did get a memo or the information from George through Becky that they have taken out 'a license permit. The other one is Cable TV Auditing - CATV Construction, with a 714 area code. And I believe that's one that should be checked on and they should have the appropriate business license. They are working for a company called Westcom Contractors. They're being paid by them and I think that you'll find that Westcom Contractors does have a City 1 icense. Is that correct, Mr. Watts? 00 they not need a license if they're for someone else? woe ki" have a If they are the employees; if they are a subcontractor they should business license also. Then I'll see that they have one, but they are working for Westcom as Westcom employees. I then draw your attention to the request which I made at the previous Council meeting in regard to some simple background information as to the principles involved with Group W Cable in this particular area. I'm not asking for financial statements, I'm simply wanting to know whether we're dealing with people who are involved or have been involved in com- munication services in the past. Are we dealing witn plumbers? Are we dealing with dentists? Who are we dealing with? This is a contract , that the City of Arcadia is into.with a cable company, and I cannot believe the letter that was sent to us. Now my question goes to the City Attorney as far as - is the: interpretation of this Jetter correct? Is it actually Federal and State privacy laws - are they strictly governing the avail- ability and dissemination of this simple information without the permission of the employee? I have preliminarily reviewed that question and have placed a call to the Human Resources person for the Group W Company to get clarification. They have not yet responded to my request. However, I.would at least rule at this time preliminarily, that certain generalized background information perhaps with the deletion of the employee's name, would be permissible. , , '. TRANSCRIPT MILLER (CQnt'd) FAUST I lOJ ESKI , 2-15-83 Tl Pg. 11 Reg CC Mtg. I think when you get into certain specific personnel, confidential or personal information that may very well be subject to some of these laws, but if I understand your reques~; Councilman. ~eneral ized back- ground information would be appropriate, and I will be talking to their Human Resources person about the means to obtain this general information that you seek. Councilman Lojeski, I did not receive a request of any type, to my knowledge. Mr. Flaven may have regarding personnel. I do not see at this point, where the people who are involved, if they have extensive backgrounds in communications, you have peop1e'who are going to come to work'who are going to be trained in all areas of employment, and I do not see that the background of an individual working should be in communica- tions. I don't know if you're talking about management; I don't know if you're cta 1 k i hg about just ,our regul a r employees, but, I do not see tha t that is something that we should give out. It's up to our Human Resource person, but I didn't receive the request - okay? You were on a business trip, I believe, to Florida at that particular meeting. Let me draw a little story together for my fellow Councilmen and perhaps for the people in the audience; a personal experience. And I think you'll see why this particular type of information is a little bit important. A meeting was scheduled at my own home for 8:30 on Friday morning to finally install my new cable from the telephone pole to my home, to my television set. It wasn't until 9:20 that the individuals finally arrived. I should have left. This has been typical of Group W in the past. But finally someone did arrive. Two individuals from the El Cajon subcontracting group, who proceeded, after a 15-minute huddle together, decided that my job was not in their realm of availability to perform. It wasn't until later that afternoon that Mr. Larson came to my home, now with another individual who proceeded to tell me that they were going to progress the following day in a certain fashion. I was told exactly how it was going to be done and what could be expected. And I was told that those individuals would arrive some time approximately before 10 o'clock in the morning. I told them someone would be at home. I told them if there was a change in attack, in plan, I would appreciate knowing about this. They went ahead and did arrive at 10. I was not at home. My wife was in the home, was aware of their presence. They never came to the door. They proceeded to have 6 individuals. When I arrived at approximately 11 :15. These 6 individuals had 6 shovels, dug a trench approximately 20 to 25 feet long, extending a very tortuous pattern, approximately 5 feet deep. The amount of damage that was done to my yard is in the neighborhood of $225, of which I have a certified bid from my landscaping gardener, and this has been presented to Group W tonight. I was told by one of them, "Don't worry, I'm really a gardener," that's what one of ' the gentlemen said, yet he was passing himself off asl someone knowledgeable of cable. Again, the homeowner, in this instance, was led to believe that something was going to be done in a certain fashi was not told that there was a change in the plan and a change in attack, . that personal property was going to be damaged. So I think you can see and you can understand why I would like to have simply a little bit of simple background. Again, are we dealing with plumbers, are we dealing with doctors, are we dealing with dentists, are we dealing with people, that know something about cable television? I personally feel it's very very important. Councilman Lojeski, are you on the new service at the present time? I'm presently on the new service - that is correct. That's correct. Tha t 's a 11 I ha ve. Were you happy with the installation that we finally did? Well, you know, Mrs. Faust, it's easy for me to say "yes," because it's after the fact. I agree with Mr. Hannah: this is something that 4 in the franchise agreement which was written four years ago, and you took over, has been violated from day one. So I'm simply getting today what I really should have had four years ago - that's the way I'm looking at it. But I wasn't here four years ago. But that's something we have no control over. You inherited a lemon and I say you - Group W - you've got two strikes on you, and a third one's coming down the pipe, and unfortunately you have to show some credibility; you must go in and correct'the problems that have existed in the com- m," i ty, ood th, "m,l, i"" thot h,,, bee" thee' - YO' ."'" - th, t ',"",y , TRANSCRIPT 2-15-83 Tl Pg. 12 Reg CC Mtg. LOJESKI (cont'd) FAUST LOJESKI FAUST LOJESKI FAUST LOJESKI i. TRANSCRIPT lOJESKI (cont'd) FAUST f LOJESKI PELLEGRINO HANNAH , 2-15-83 Tl Pg. 13 Reg CC Mtg. very important - customer relations is important; expertise with the cable is important; picture quality is important; they're all important. And so to ask me if I'm happy now, I finally got television reception. But how many public hearings has it taken? How many re9uests has it been? Why did it take 13 people and 4 subcontractors and a cable Group W television crew on my property on my lunch hour on Monday to get that type of action. That's what I have trouble with. We wanted you to be happy. Gosh thanks. Any other questions, Mr. Hannah - Mrs. Faust, I share Councilman Lojeski 's opinion up to a point, and I do have to complement you on the fact that you are making a diligent effort to correct the situation north of Foothill Boulevard. And, you know, it's amazing when you get television reception how your attitude changes. I jokingly said to my associate after I got mine, "Why don't you come over at 11 o'clock and watch the news with me," but you know, we're not the only ones that have to be satisfied. I've gotten a number of calls from people south of Colorado Boulevard. The contract says the grantee shall extend cable television service to any resident ,if the resident requests the service extension and the service connection requires no more than a standard 150 foot dropline, and on the next page it says that you'll do it if the dropline is more than 150 feet provided they pay for it. I'm told by our City Attorney that sometime in the past there was a resolution that defined that particular provision and limited it to less than the entire city. r"m not aware 0f that, I'm just looking at this contract. My-concern now is I really think you've done a diligent effort to correct the situation north of Foothill, and my complements to you on that. I guess I'm never happy, I want it for everybody in Arcadia, and I want to know when the people south of Arcadia and the people who live on San Simion; on Old Ranch Road, on Sixth Avenue, wherever it may be, when they're going to get the service. They're not concerned about the fact that I got my service, they want their service too. And I think it's only fair that we let them know, to give them some time frame as to when they can expect cable TV. Now I don't particularly care about movies and I don't buy all ". TRANSCRIPT HANNAH (cont'd) PELLEGRINO DRING HANNAH DRING 2-15-83 Tl Pg. 14 Reg CC Mtg. your extra services, but there are an awful lot of people in City of Arcadia who'd like to, and they don't have access to it, and I get telephone ca 11 s and they say, "When am I goi ng to get it?" I go out to breakfast and they say, "Hey, what are you doing about it?" and the only thing I can do is to come back to you and point out their concern - they're not getting it, and I would like to have an answer as to when they're going to get it. And until they get it, I think that the administration here is spinning their wheels, because I don't think that the attitude of the Council, from what I can judge, is such that they want to do anything about the existing contract until we have complied with the wishes of our constituents. That's all of the people. Excuse me, Rusty, Mr. Dring - May I address something before Rusty responds to that, David? Sure. You've heard me vocalize my"opinions about Group W and the way they've handled things in the past, but I would like to say congratulations to Tom. I think there's been a' significant improvement of effort being made over the near term, and it's recognizable. The objective, at least in my opinion, of where I came from with regard to this new cable tele- vision franchise ordinance was: (1) not an extension of time, but rather to specifically address the question which you just raised, okay? Without extending' the franchise, what build-out time are we talking about with regard to the rest of the City? Now I believe that ptaff here has made an attempt to address that area. Now they don't have specific schedules in here yet, but the problem being that if we take today's franchise - which is very nebulous and doesn't pin it down - if we can create schedules for buildout and penalties for lack of meeting those schedules - alright - then I think we all understand we've got a problem, number one, and number two, how are we going to address it under what time frames wHh what resources. It's that that's what really the cable television franchise ordinance that's been handed to us is supposed to do is address how we're going to finish and when are we going to finish building out the rest of Arcadia. Now, I'm not at all in favor of grant- ing an extension of terms - of length of terms. On the other hand, if they were to turn the operation around, provide good service on a , , " '" TRANSCRIPT DRING (cont'd) HANNAH f DRING HANNAH PELLEGR INO FAUST DRING PELLEGRINO DRING FAUST DRING FAUST DRING FAUST , 2-15-83 Tl Pg. 15 Reg CC Mtg. continuing basis, commit to buildout under certain schedules and meet those commitments, then I would have no objection to extending the franchise length of term because they're providing the service that we're asking for. So that's what the purpose of this doctrine is in the first place. Does that make any sense? My only comment is until the people south of Foothill are provided ser- vices I'm not willing to talk about revising and extending the contract, and that's al1 I'm saying. I complement them on what they're doing, I think they're making a diligent effort to satisfy the people up north; I realize it hasn't been easy for them; they got a can of worms, so to speak; that's their own fault, they bought the contract; they should have looked at it before they bought it. But by the same token, that's not the concern of the people south of Foothill. The concern is, when do I get my cable. Do you want to make any effort to try to define that? I want her to answer when she anticipates the people south of Foothill are going to get cable. Excuse me, Gentlemen - Rusty - Yes, I think it goes back to exactly what Mr. Dring said - that without some guidelines and the resolution that we agreed upon, it's not a good practice for us to start building. Well, hold it now - may I? Mr Dring - Rusty, I outlined at least my intent of 'the original document; let us not be confused. The contract and the commitment to the City under which we have given you virtually a monopoly to the City, and an authorized it under a franchise agreement to proceed - Right. Are you standing here telling us that unless we redraw this franchise - No - no sir - And extend the terms you're not going to [undecipherable] No sir, I did not mean that - I did not mean it like that at all. I mean that if - and I'm not the one that should be answering this, but I would like to say that under the existing resolution, if that's the " TRANSCRIPT FAUST (cont'd) PEllEGRINO DRING FAUST JOHN MERR ITT PELLEGRINO MERRITT 2-15-83 Tl Pg. 16 Reg CC Mtg. way we're going to operate, that's something else. operate under the existing resolution; are we going resolution before we start building? Gentl emen - I have a question: who is the one to answer that question? Mr. Flaven or Mr. Merrit could answer it. Are,we going to to draw up a new My name is John Merritt,I'm the Foothill District Manager for Group W Cable based in Upland. Excuse me, Gentlemen. Will you repeat that? - John Merritt - M~e-r-r-i-t-t. I'm the District Manager for Group W , Cable based in Upland, for the Foothill District. At the December 4th meeting at which I last was at, it was my understanding, as well as our Regional Vice President, Frank Nellis, that we, Group W, were essentially given an ultimatim that the City and Group W would not discuss building the area south of Foothill until we proved to you that we were capable of providing effective service in the area we currently serve. I think, from what I'm hearing tonight, without it actually being said, we have met that commitment. We have fulfilled the five points in the letter dis- cussed, and we feel we've made a great deal of progress. Seventy percent of the customers north of Foothill have been converted and connected to th~i~ystem, and we are ready to begin building; however, our understand- ing is that the Council would not consider releasing us to build the rest of the city until we have fulfilled that commitment. And on that December 4th meeting, I believe we addressed the issue, as Councilman Dring sug- gested, that if we did prove to you our ability to effectively run a cable system, that the Council would then discuss extending the franchise. Clearly, we have inherited an ordinance that only has six, perhaps a few months less than six years to run now. As a matter of prudent business judgment, we must ask ourselves, is it going to be a wise decision to build? At the same time, we have to recognize our commitment to you, in buying the agreement from the Teleprompter company. I think that we're asking for clarification from the Council as to whether they want to dis- cuss a new resolution or ordinance or whether they're asking today that we proceed under the present ordinance. , " TRANSCRIPT PELLEGRINO COUNCILMAN HALTOM I MERRITT I PELLEGRINO MERRITT 2-15-83 Tl Pg. 17 Reg CC Mtg. Mr. Haltom - First, I would like to commend Miss Faust; I think she has done a tremendous, put forth a tremendous effort and made tremendous progress, because you started way way back, and you really have done a good job. I know it's a lot of problems, a lot of combinations of problems, and I really feel that you've made a very sincere effort, I really do. For myself, I would be not in favor of extending the franchise, and I can't see - you're talking about a financial commitment, you know, not a prudent business to make a financial commitment for new equipment and everything else. That, to me, is not very valid for one reason: once you have the permits to string the lines on the poles and every- thing, and once you have the lines in place - assuming it won't take six years - you have, in effect, a captive audience. From then on you, in effect, hold the franchise to the City, whether in legality or not. The only question is the terms under which you hold the franchise. You're just like Southern California Edison, the Gas Company, and anybody else. When you've got your equipment in place there is, in effect, nobody that's going to come in and compete with you. The only question is the terms under which you have it in place. You know - the cost and the service you provide - to me. I can't see why Group W should be hesitant and use that as an excuse for not doing southern Arcadia because I would think that the more they expanded their service the more of a captive audience they would have. And you know how long it takes to get permits to hang those on poles, and I can't imagine once you 'have your permits and have your equipment in place, I can't imagine anybody even competing with you. let me clarify, perhaps, Councilman Haltom, In no way do we suggest that the only consideration to building south Arcadia is the financial commit- ment - certainly not. We do have approval of 95% of the utility pole applications completed. They are ready and we are able to go today. What I'm asking again, to perhaps articulate a little more clearly is our understanding on December 4th was that you were telling us that you will reconsider extending the ordinance if we prove ourselves in north Arcadia. And that's the assumption we've been going on since December 4th. That's the reason we have not proceeded. Mr. Hannah - If you're asking today that we proceed under the existing ordinance, ", TRANSCRIPT MERRITT (cont'd) PELLEGRINO HANNAH MERRITT HANNAH MERR ITT PELLEGRINO HAL TOM MERR ITT 2-15-83 Tl Pg. 18 Reg CC Mtg. clearly it's another matter, and we'll have to consider that. Certainly we do want to reiterate our commitment to move ahead. But we'd just like to know under what set of circumstances that would be - Mr. Hannah - I don't have the minutes of the December 4th meeting in front of me, but I think that you're putting words in our mouth. We - I don't recall having said, nor do I recall having heard my associates say that assuming you got our television cables which were screwed up, fixed up in northern Arcadia, that we would extend your contract. I don't think that was ever said, and I'll be happy to have the City Clerk go through our minutes verbatim to find out if that was said. I'm sure that the gentlemen here I are all honorable, and if that's what we said we would do, I'm sure that' what we'd do, but I would like to check that out. I don't recall that we ever said that you get the cable program working north of Foothill and we would rewrite this contract. I think what we said was, "comply with the terms of the contract and then we'll talk about extnding them." Yes sir, that is my understanding, and I believe you have articulated it better than I. The terms of the contract require you to service the entire City of Arcadia. Yes, and the question of extending the ordinance was only one of the items that was discussed. You are correct. Mr. Haltom - It's really covered - you both agree and I was just going to confirm what Mr. Hannah said is true; and that is what we agreed on, you know. Is there any reason why we would have to - or - do we, and this I ask of the Council, too - do we want to renegotiate the franchise - not the term of time - but is it to both of our ,advantages - is there some reason why we should both want to renegotiate the terms, rather than the time. The time factor I don't want to renegotiate, as far as I'm concerned. If they can't do it in six years, they'll never do it. But is there some reason why we should both get together and renegotiate o~ define the terms under which we have a contract, existing franchise? 1'm not really prepared to address that, I would only suggest that we would like to proceed with Mr. Bocian's recommendation that we continue to meet with the administration and plan how to proceed. We want to I '" TRANSCRIPT MERRITT (cont'd) PELLEGRINO DRING I I 2-15-83 Tl Pg. 18A Reg CC Mtg. build that area for you; we are ready to go now; 95% of the pole applications are in and we agree with the administration that the most effective step would be to sit down with them and proceed now. We'd like your approval to do that. Mr. Dring - To the Members of the Council, I suggest the following: my recollection of my position in that December meeting was one of either anger to Frank Nellis when he suggested, you know, he wouldn't build without an extension, and I was angry at that aspect. There are some pragmatic problems facing us: one,is that Group W has a franchise which effectively gives them a monopoly; two, they have the pole permits which effectively and very specifically provide them a monopoly for the franchise in Arcadia. The third thing is that while we do have an existing agreement, it's not very specific, and so yes, we're all in agreement. let's get northern Arcadia cleaned up because it was ,a disaster, and in my opinion, being handled very unprofessionally by Group W. And I think they've made significant strides in that direction now. I'd suggest to Council that it is in our best interest, and Group W's best interest to look at the franchise agreement, utilize the consultants that we hired to provide us specifications to performance so that we don't get into this bad service again without some kind of'penalties. Provide specifications and de1iniation. When you say, David, you know" build up the rest of Arcadia, I agree with you, but they've got six years to do it and if at the end of six years they're not doing it, so what? The new franchise agreement, if you will, the consideration here is that they provide for time frames, penalties and the rest. I think that's important for all of us that we see this job get done in an expedient manner, and it's in our best interest to contract those terms now. I'm not for extending the terms of the franchise. On the other hand, I wouldn't be against a provision that says, "If you meet these schedules, and you put this service in and it's satisfactory and it works and you come up on time in a reasonable time frame, and you provide this service to us, we would extend it." I mean, we could ma~~ethat kind of contractural commit- ment. So I'm saying yes, we'll extend/ terms based on their performance. " TRANSCRIPT DRING (cont'd) MERRITT HANNAH PELLEGRINO MERRITT HANNAH PELLEGRINO MERRITT PELLEGRINO 2-15-83 Dict 2 Pg. 19 Reg CC Mtg. If they do what they say they're going to do and provide that service then I have no objection to extending the terms, but an extension of time notwithstanding, I think what's important is for the Council to direct our attention to how and when and wherefor ,they're going to build the rest of the City. If we leave it to them, then you have no complaints whatsoever if it takes them six years to build even one block more than what they've got now. If you just turn it over to them, then that's your responsibility. We would welcome that opportunity, Councilman Dring, to establish that schedule with you. I I still haven't got an answer to my question. There's been so much verbiage, but nobody has told me when, they are going to'commence adding cable to south Arcadia. ' Is there anyone from the firm that can give us a commitment date on the work from - on south Arcadia, when that will start? Again, I think - I don't want to make it sound like we keep throwing the ball back to you gentlemen, but we are ready to move now, and we're only asking whether you're telling us to go ahead at this point or whether you are asking us to negotiate some points as Councilman Dring discussed. I feel that in fairness to you and the residents of Arcadia, we do need to clarify it before we proceed. Councilman Hannah, I hope that answered your question. We are ready to go, we simply ask for, that clarification from you. You have a contract that calls for you to provide service to all of the City of Arcadia! understand that still has six years to go. The people are saying "When are we going to get the service?" and that's the answer I'm looking for tonight. For when they ask me that question. Tell m~ thnt you're going to start next month and that they can anticipate service within six months, or nine months, or a year, a year and a half. Give me some answers. You have a contract. I don't know why we have to even discuss it at this time. John, are you anticipating that we are taking your contract away from you? No sir, no, we're not. Then you have six years to perform the duties that you would hope to perform. As I hear it, and as I see, the last four years of cable TV we had nothing. The last four months we've had not only a promise but they've carried out their promises to the north side of our City. We I TRANSCRIPT PEllEGRINO (cont'd) MERRITT PELLEGRINO HALTOM I WATTS HALTOM WATTS PELL EGR I NO MERRITT I 2-15-83 Dict 2 Pg. 20 Reg CC Mtg. are Councilmen that represent the whole city. In effect, you have six years to complete your job and I'm sure the more people you put on your . cable or your trunk line or whatever you have, the more dues are paid to your company, and you are just as interested in getting to the south end and the north end and east and west as we wouid hope you would be. Yes, we are. Any other questions, Gentlemen? Mr. Haltom - To answer your question, I think it's "yes" on both. isn't that true? I think yes, we want you to proceed with southern 'Arcadia, and yes, we want to negotiate. I agree with Councilman Dring that based on performance, you know, I wouldn't mind extending it based on performance. So I think it's "yes" on both, so far as I'm concerned. I concur with the comments Councilman Dring just made. I think he really underscored staff's whole intended procedure. And I would highly recom- mend that the City Council do not ask Group W to proceed wi€~li~~n~est of the City until we can revise the franchise ordinance irrespective of the term of that ordinance. I concur with Councilman Dring. I don't think we ought to extend the term now; however, if we ask Group W to proceed now with building the rest of the City, we do not have good enough penalty provisions; we have no time schedules; we do not even have adequate output specifications in the current franchise ordinance that will give us much in the way of leverage to get the kind of system, quality of reception that the City Council and staff wants and expects for the citizens of Arcadia. I know what you're saying, George, but from the legal standpoint, we can't stop them. I think that Group W throughout, since they took over from Teleprompter, their position has been they would prefer that before th~proceed to build the rest of the City, that we have a new franchise ordinance in place. I think that was again stated this evening - if not explicitly, at least impl icitly. Is that you opinion, John? That is correct. That is exactly our position. .' 'TRANSCRIPT PELLEGRINO MERRITT DRING PELLEGRINO 2-15-83 Dict 2 Pg. 21 Reg. CC Mtg. I wou 1 d recommend tha t Group W get with staff and come back wi th a report of the recommendation that you're intending to give us. We would be pleased to do this. ~s~r$eStjlthigntggr~~~~~t gf~~~n~he-hearing is closed? [Undecipherable]. Thank you, gentlemen. Anyone else in the audience in favor of this item on the agenda? Please state your name and address. 'I'm Laudel Ludwig. I live at 1085 Singing Wood Drive. I'm a I director and a member of the San Gabriel Valley Amateur Radio Club; it's local here in Arcadia. We have met with you before to bring to you the fact that many cable installations throughout the country have been improperly installed resulting in considerable cable leakage, both affecting TV reception and to the amateurs as well as City and other public types of radio communication. So this has resulted in fines substantial for cable companies and have made Councilmen and City Managers' lives very miserable. In the earlier days they did not take this factor into consideration when they were making the contracts with the cable companies. So our group has met with'you before here in Council sessions, and it was recommended that we have a private or a small meeting between some of the City employees, Group W employees, and our group, which we've done. We worked out some wording wh~ch has been i nc 1 uded' in the proposed contract that you probab ly ha ve today. I picked up my copy about 4 o'clock today, and except for one sentence that was inadvertently left out, and I brought it to Mr. Bocian's attention and he said there is no problem at all with inserting it, and I wanted you folks to know that the radio amateurs feel that as far as we're concerned, you have the necessary precautions to keep such inter- ference from happening, or if it does happen, to take care of it. So we're happy with the agreement. Also, should, hopefully, it will never occur, should such interference occur, San Gabriel Valley Group is available for the City's or cable company's services to help work out any of these problems should they arise. Thank you. I ,. -'" ., TRANSCRIPT PELLEGRINO PERRY COPE I I 2-15-83 T2 Pg. 22 Reg CC Mtg. Thank you, Mr. Ludwig. Anyone else in the audience in favor of this item? Anyone in the audience opposed to this item on the agenda? My name is Perry Cope. I live at 1231 San Carlos Road, two blocks north of Foothill, in the area which I understand is supposed to be completely taken care of by now. I'd just like to read a little bit of the history of my own personal dealings with Group W. December 22nd I ordered the full program of services from Group W. I was promised service by December 29th. On that date a service man did come to check out my system. He removed the box that I had from Teleprompter which pro- vided me some show time from Sierra Madre affiliate. He did nothing else to my set. He promised me that he would have a box with the full Group W services by December 30th ,- the next day. He also informed me at the time that the cable reception for my area was defective and it would be impossible to pick up good reception without replacing the cable. No one showed up on the 30th, 31st or thereafter. I finally called them again on January 8th, scheduled service. Services scheduled. No one showed up. They were called again on January 10th. Service was promised for January 12th. A tech rep showed up without a box. I called again on the 13th. Box was promised again. They said they didn't have it, and that was the end of that conversation, so I finally called Mrs. Faust here, the General Manager, told her I had been several weeks without service and I was getting a run-around, would like to know what was going on. She was very' empathetic to my problem, and promised that I would receive service January 18th. On January 18th a man came with 3 converter sets for the 3 TV's that I have to hook up, again informed me that the cable was not operating, it was deficient, and the service really could not be per- formed. The day after that the Sales Manager called me - I don't recall his name - he also promised that they were going to take care of these things for me. January 24th two new people showed up in vans which were not designated as being Group W; I don't know where they were from. They had 3 more converters. They didn't fix the cable and they didn't hook up the converter boxes. January 27th service came again, climbed the poles in my back yard, said they were going to check out the cables '.'" I.' TRANSCRIPT COPE (cont'd) 2-15-83 T2 Pg. 23 Reg. CC Mtg. and run in new cable lines, and again recommended that the cable lines be replaced. Now, this was about the third or fourth time I'd heard that and I'm still waiting, for them to do the job that they've already identified as a problem. They brought 3 more converter boxes with them, which they couldn't hook up. About January 28th a quality control man shows up to check out how my system is operating. I wish I had been home to tell him how it was operating. He thought the job was complete. He wanted to check the boxes again, which obviously were not working, and recommended that we have cable wiring done. I think this was the I fourth time this was recommended now. He's telling me the problem. Since that date we have had silence from Group W Cable. We called them on February 2nd - no response. We called them on February' 11th - no response. We called them February 16th - today - and we're still waiting for somebody to come out and take,care of. this problem. Now this is the way they've taken care of north Arcadia. Now, before they move south, I think they ought to live up to their obligations for north. Today we called again and some lady who answered the phone recommended we talk to the Sales Department, and get the proper service, and I am sure in favor of that, because we haven't got_it yet. In summary, I guess my comments, first of all they haven't fulfilled the commitment n9rth of Foothill Boulevard. I heard these words tonight but I haven't seen any action. They obviously do not communicate with each other. There is no follow-up on problems. They do not keep records on what they are telling each of the customers. We have been constantly referred to the Sales Department which is empathetic but can't help us. After two months I don't even have the basic service that I started with in December when I asked them to change the service to the full service. I can't even get Show Time, which I used to get from Teleprompter. in Sierra Madre. We have no response, no information, no follow-through, and in general, outside of Mrs. Faust, empathetic attitude - a don't care attitude. I don't know where you go with this. My personal opinion, and maybe I'm an isolated case, they're unable to service the area. They're sure unable to service me. And I hope that I receive the service that Mr. Lojeski has gotten. I'd love to have good service but I haven't received it yet, and before they move I '.., '. TRANSCRIPT COPE (cont'd) PELLEGRINO HANNAH DRING: PELLEGRINO DRING I HANNAH DRING HANNAH I 2-15-83 T2 Pg. 24 Reg. CC Mtg. south I think they ought to take care of the problems north. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Cope. Anyone else in the audience who'd like to address this item on the agenda? Gentlemen- I MOVE the public hearing be CLOSED. Second. The public hearing is CLOSED. Any comments, Gentlemen? May I? Gentlemen, I would suggest it's in our best interest to proceed to negotiate the contract with them. The terms and conditions can be specified as to whether or not you want to extend. You know, hardly any of us are in favor of that - that's not the point. We need, in my opinion, to request to require a build-out schedule with penalties there- to, and if indeed they can perform under some time frame, then I don't have a problem with extending the franchise downstream. It's not only practical to them in terms of justifying their cost expenditures, but the truth is, as Dick points out, you don't have a choice. They've got the City locked. Now, to tell them to go ahead and build, "you have the current contract," why tha t 's true, you know, that provi des no benefits, it requires no time frame and no performance. We have an opportunity and they're willing to comply - it's a two-way street. We want to exact some performance, and clearly it's about time. On the other hand, they're saying, fine, if we do we extend our franchise terms. I find that a mutually beneficial package provided everyone holds up their enp. So I recommend we tell staff to provide the franchise agreement to Group W for review and bring back their comments, and we should indeed move with great haste, well some expediency, anyway, into putting that into some effect. I'm still back at the same stand: I want to see them comply with the terms of their contract now and then when they do I'll talk about changing it. I don't want to change it in any way until such time as they comply with the terms of their contract, and do what they said they were going to do. The fact that they took over Teleprompter's contract is of no consequence to me - Agreed. They have 1 arge were doing, and legal until staffs; I'm sure they knew exactly what they they comply with this agreement I don't think .' '.-:'. I . TRANSCRIPT HANNAH (cont'd) LOJESKI DRING LOJESKI DRING 2-15-83 T2 Pg. 25 Reg _ CC Mtg. we have to waste our staff's time drawing new agreements. A couple questions. One is, any time we send things back for review they seem to take months - weeks - years - whatever. I'd be curious to know what time frame we are looking at. And I also don't understand why, if 96% - I believe that's the number that was given to us - the pole rights have been negotiated, why they cannot continue to go. If they feel that they've been doing such a super job and they're showing the City exactly what great people they are and what great service they've been giving those people now north of Foothill Boulevard, why they cannot continue at least in a diligent fashion now extending that service to other areas of the City while we're negotiating this par- ticular entity. I also, and I don't think I've ever stated this, I'm against, obviously, changing the extension of times and that sort of thing. I don't even want to talk about that. But something that's going to be a better contract for the City and a better contract for cable television, yes. Why can't they be done in conjunction? I'm getting the feeling that all of a sudden we're kind of backed into a corner here with Group W saying it's either-or type of thing. I don't like Group W telling me what to do any more. I think it's about time that the City explains and puts their foot down and says, "Hey, Group W, you know, this is a two-way street, we're going to tell you how it's goi ng to operate." Well, Mr. Lojeski. If we, and I don't know anything about electronics, so I'm going to make up some terms. If we tell them we want a 60 widgit system and they're starting to install a 50 widgit system, they're installing something that is unacceptable to us. Shouldn't we reach that agreement before they start installing it. I mean, if we decide it's got to be a 60, based on our technical expert's advice, then we want them to agree it should bea 60 and for them to install a 60. Why would you just turn them loose and say, "Start building something - whatever it is, no matter how good it is, and we'll discuss the terms and conditions and technical requirements on an on~going basis"? Are you telling me that what they've installed north of Arcadia is potentially wrong? Yes, you could - certainly. addresses very specifically technical requirements, and I I The contract that we've been talking don't - about I . . ..",. ". TRANSCRIPT DRING (cont'd) PELLEGRINO I DRING I 2-15-83 T2 Pg. 26 Reg. CC Mtg. George, have theY"reviewed it? No. They haven't seen it, is that correct? They haven't seen it. It may well be that indeed their system doesn't meet the tactical standards that our consultants say they ought to put in and don't accept anything less. It's about time I think we showed it to them and got an agreement. I think we're being self-defeating. I'd like to add a comment and not whip a dead horse to death like we're doing, Gentlemen. I'd like to say that there's nobody more up-to-date on what's out there to offe,r the other cities than Group W. There's other cities throughout the Country that Dennis and'I have gone to seminars where that same system has 60 channels, 150 channels"I forget what the number of channels; the ,high sChoo,l, the, library, the Council meetings, also a security alarm that's hooked, to the same system that's put through the house on that system. I don't think we have to tell them their job. I think they should tailor their program to the City of Arcadia as well as any other city has been tailored to offer their things, and I would hope, by reading this, we received this tonight, Tom,and Rusty, and I really didn't have - we don't have time to consume all of this anyhow. But I would hope that you have put the necessary carrot in front of the horse in front of the Council to give the City as much as you possibly give us through cable TV. If there is any better cable TV we would hope that you offer that to the City of Arcadia as well as you're doing in other cities. And I don't think we should make a decision. I agree wich you, Jeff. ,They have six years. They could perform three years, and with the credibility they've achieved in four months, which is almost impossible, I don't see any reason why we would withhold any extension to some organization or any corporation that,'would have the total telephone wires hook--up already com-, menced. I just think they have a heck of a job to do. They've done a job in four months and they've got six years to prove to us they they're going to give us a number one c3ble TV and I'm sure they're going to do it. Mr. Dring - Mr. Mayor, I ~'OVE that we direct staff to present the draft of the cable TV franchis~ ordinance, which none of us have seen - we all should note that too - but, pr~,ent that draft to Group W for their comments and let , . ..... ~, . '. .. . TRANSCRIPT DRING (cont'd) DRING PELLEGRINO CITYi CLERK PELLEGRINO CITY CLERK PELLEGRINO ROLL CALL CITY CLERK PELLEGRINO DRING PELLEGRINO 2-15-83 T2 Pg. 27 Reg. CC Mtg. us review it and I think we should move with the general guideline that we would like to reach an acceptable agreement as expediently as possible. Is that a MOTION? Yes, that's a MOTION. Any discussion, Gentlemen? There's a MOTION on the floor. Is it the consensus of the Council? Roll call. a second. Yes, Mr. Haltom, second. I May I have a roll call. AYES Dring, Haltom NOES Hannah, lojeski And Pelllegrino? Would you repeat your motion, Jeff? Yes, essentially, the heart of what I'm trying to say is that we should: one, present this draft to the franchise to Group W for their comments but more particularly - two - we want to reach agreement with them based on the technical advice from our consu'ltants so that we can - so that they can proceed to build south Arcadia as quickly and as rapidly as possible, and meet our requirements. Yes. * * *.* * * * * * I