HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-03-16 Municipal Operations Committee Minutes Municipal Operations Committee
Meeting Minutes
March 16, 1999
� Councilors Attending: ]ohn Rohman, Pat Blanchette, Michael Aube, Nichi Farnham,
Gerry Palmer
Staff Attending: Edward Barrett, Bob Farrar, Gail Campbell, Dave Pellegrino,
Erik Stumpfel, ]ohn Lord, Frank Comeau
1. Animal Control Duties (City Clerk)
Gail Campbell explained the state is recommending that the City register as an ADO to
handle small wildlife or refer citizens to a DOC (Animal Damage Control OfFcer), a
private individual that would charge to come and take away the animals. Currently
citizens are asked to get a trap and once they trap the animal, the City will go out and
take care of it. Gail commented that if this is going to be done, there needs to be
specific guidelines set. One complaint from Pat Pinkham, the City's Animal Control •
Officer, is that she had certain spots where she would take the animals, then residents
in that particular area would start complaining. Ed Barrett suggested using the City
forest because it is a rural area and very few people live in that area. Councilor
Blanchette feels it is a good service provided but agrees there should be guidelines set.
Committee recommends registering the Animal Control Officer as an ADO with the
• parameters listed.
2. Adelphi Communications/FrontierVision Acquisition
Erik explained that Adelphi has announced their acquisition of FrontierVision's 700,000
customers nationwide, which includes the Bangor Franchise. The City cannot block the
sale, but does have the chance to review whether Adelphi can perform the existing
franchise agreement before it is transferred to them. The document is an FCC form
394 along with a copy of the transfer agreement between Adelphi and FrontierVision
and an FCC 10K form on Aldephi. The document has not yet been received. Under
the FCC regulations, the City has 120 days to review the document. The transfer will
take place, but the review process will take place over the summer and probably will
not be finalized until the fall. Erik included materials, which describe the standards
under which the City Council will review the transfer application and the basis for
granting or denying that.
The Council cannot unreasonably withhold consent but there are some grounds under
which the transfer cannot be consented to. There are four basic grounds to not
approve the transfer:
1. Adelphi lacks the legal, technical or financial qualifications to operate the existing
� system. It is unlikely that Adelphi would lack those qualifications.
1
2. Whether FrontierVision is in compliance with the franchise agreement and, if they
are not, whether Adelphi is going to cure any non-compliance. FrontierVision so far is
in compliance with the Bangor franchise.
�
3. Whether the transfer will reduce competition. Currently there is no cable competition
and Adelphi is not proposing to acquire satellite providers in the area.
4. Whether the transfer will adversely affect the interest of cable subscribers or the
City or would increase the cost of any future cable related fees in the interest of Bangor
residents. Erik suggests the Council should look at this in conjunction with the regional
consortium.
Ed Barrett commented that while in Washington at the NLC, he attended a session that
discussed AT&T's acquisition of TCI and the potential impact of such consolidation on
Internet Service provision. They consider it a bundled part of the cable service. It is
not a separate stand-alone service, so in effect it becomes a part of the cable system
but is really marketed as a high-speed access point into the Internet. One of the big
issues that has come up as people have looked at franchise transfers is the issue of
whether the municipality has the authority to require the cable provider, if they consider ,
such a service to be a part of their cable business, to provide open access through their
system to other Internet service providers. AT&T has taken the position they would
not. These companies are looking at using their cable providers for local phone service.
Adelphi has a similar service with an Internet service provider through cable access,
which is becoming more common. It is not clear legally how all of this will work its way
� through. Erik commented that that was the intent of the 1996 Act, and the legal issue
is whether they become a common carrier. Right now, cable providers are not common
carriers. There are a number of local Internet providers who could be affected by this.
Erik explained that Adelphi has paid $2.1 billion to acquire FrontierVision, $3,000 per
subscriber. They paid $25 million to acquire the chunk of FrontierVision that exists in
Bangor with 8,400 subscribers. Erik feels that at some point, the City, with the regional
consortium or with the larger group, should consider retaining outside financial analysts
to look at how the price of this acquisition is going to affect Aldelphi's future revenue
requirements and how that might impact cable rates. The primary interest is that the
current franchise be performed. Other interests may lie in making sure that the four
members of the regional group who have not yet signed franchises complete those
discussions and sign franchises. Based on recent discussions, Erik feels this is likely to
occur before this transaction actually closes. Councilor Rohman asked about rates. Erik
explained that the Council can not directly regulate rates, but can look at the overall
financial picture and do some forecasting about whether their revenue demands will
necessitate a future rate increase. If it looks like that may be the case, it may be
possible for the City to deny transfer of the Bangor franchise on that basis. If that
occurs, there are provisions in the franchise as to what happens to the system.
Councilor Aube asked if they were to offer intra-state telephone service, would they be
subject to PUC? Erik commented that the PUC had an opportunity, some time ago, to
� become a regulator of cable television in the state and declined. It is unclear what their
position would be and if it would be subject to PUC regulation.
2
Bangor resident Charlie Birkel expressed his concerns about the issue
• Councilor Rohman asked if the Council has to go on record at this point. Ed answered
that this is informational and staff, at this time, is asking to go forward and work with
the other communities in the consortium and other communities in the state that
expressed an interest in looking at this on a joint basis. The Committee directed staff
to go forward on this issue.
3. Save Outdoor Sculptures Treatment - Grant Applications
Staff is requesting permission to apply for a grant which will be used for improvements
to three City sculptures: Lady Liberty, River Drovers, and Hannibal Hamlin. The grant
requires a 50% local match. The information has been received from the conservatory
with the estimated budget. The total cost to the City would be approximately $20,500
to do all three. There are three separate grants to be applied for. Approved
recommendation to Council.
4. Cumberland/York Aggregation Coalition Meetina - Draft Feasibility Report
Bob Farrar provided the Committee with an executive summary of the recent Coalition
meeting. In addition to that, he showed a 10-minute video that the PUC put together
on energy deregulation. Bob explained that the City of Bangor will be a customer.
Bangor uses approximately 1.7 million kilowatts a year. The electric bill citywide is
� approximately $1.8 million. In looking at a breakdown, about $600,000 is actual
electrical use, and the projected savings potential is estimated at about 3-10%. The �
City could potentially save between $18,000-$60,000 per year depending upon what
the power supply bids come in at. The most important upcoming date will be
December 1, when the "standard offer" bids come in. The PUC will be holding a
national competitive process where any company who wants to provide this standard
ofFer bid can bid to provide service to all the groups of towns, residences, businesses,
etc., who don't want to go out and aggregate themselves. This number will be very
telling in that once it is established, it will send a message to all the other bidders who
want to come in and provide electricity to other groups. Bangor is part of the
Cumberland/York Aggregation Coalition, which currently consists of approximately 50
towns and cities, mostly in the Cumberland/York area. The coalition hired a consulting
firm called Energy Futures to undertake a feasibility study to tell whether we had a
good group mix. The group makeup at the moment is approximately 135 million KW
hours of usage, about $15 million per year in electricity consumption. As it currently
stands, this constitutes about 1.5% of the total state electric usage. The state uses
about $930 million per year worth of energy. The consultant indicated that the current
makeup of the group is favorable. The load of the group is such that there should be
some favorable bids below the standard offer bid that comes in through the PUC
process. The consultants have made the recommendation that this group should
continue to pursue aggregation. There were three essential options:
� 1. Continue to form a group as it is now constituted
2. Form a larger group and invite other towns and cities to join.
3
3. Expand the group to a larger extent by inviting other entities such as hospitals,
colleges, not-for-profits, etc.
� Bob explained that there is a group called the Maine Health and Higher Education
Facilities Authority along with the Maine Municipal Bond Bank who would like the
Cumberland/York Aggregation Coalition to join them and form a much larger group.
Councilor Palmer asked if there is a limit as to how many can join the group and can
residents be offered the opportunity to join? Bob explained that it could be problematic
because you don't know who might want to be involved or not. The City of Bangor can
commit its energy requirements to the group, but Bangor does not have the ability,
under law, to mandate that all City residents join. It would have to be an opt-in
procedure. At the moment, this group is not pursuing individual residences because of
the complexity of doing that. Councilor Palmer asked about heavy users, such as Great
Northern? Bob answered that the group have looked at that, but one of the issues
becomes who do you pick? Should the group pick the best of the private sector groups
to the detriment of the others who are left out? .
Bob explained that sometime in April the Cumberland/York Aggregation Coalition will ,
need to make a decision whether they are going to join with another group or go out
and selectively invite other communities to join or not. Bob will be attending the
meeting to participate in that decision, and he will inform the Committee of any
developments.
• 5. Application for Funds Pursuant to the Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Act of
1998.
There are potentially federal funds. available at a 50% matching rate to purchase
bulletproof vests. The Department replaces a few vests a year and this would give staff
the opportunity to only pay half the price. Approved.
With no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned.
�
4