Laserfiche WebLink
<br />18 <br /> <br />TJESDAY <br /> <br />FEBRUARY 22, 1966 <br /> <br />and Mr. Stafford G. Whittle, III, as successors to Messrs. Shumate and <br /> <br />Donavant. (In a subsequent informal meeting, Council established the <br /> <br />compensation at $2,500.00 for each of the two members.) <br /> <br />City Manager Noland, in reviewing recent bids received for the privilege <br /> <br />of operating a CATV system in Martinsville, informed Council as to the <br />following developments: <br /> <br />(a) The Federal Communications Commission has assumed regulatory <br /> <br />authority over CATV operations; <br /> <br />(b) The state Corporation Commission does not have authority or <br /> <br />jurisdiction over CATV systems in the sense that such systems <br /> <br />are not classified as public utilities or public service <br /> <br />companies; <br /> <br />(c) Information has been requested from each of the three bidders <br /> <br />as to their financial ability and as to their plans to develop <br />the market potential in Martinsville; <br />(d) One bidder, viz., WLW Corporation, has indicated that it desires <br /> <br />to conduct a new study of the local market potential in view of <br /> <br /> <br />recent assumption by the FCC of regulatory authority; <br /> <br /> <br />(e) Another bidder, viz., Booth American Company, has inquired as to <br /> <br />whether the City's gross receipts license tax ordinance would <br /> <br /> <br />apply to CATV operations, in addition to the bidder's offer, <br /> <br /> <br />and, if so, in what category would CATV be placed; and <br /> <br /> <br />(f) The third bidder, viz., Clearview Cable Television, has replied <br /> <br />to the matter referred to in "(C)11 above. <br /> <br /> <br />In discussing these matters, Council indicated its support of City Attorney <br /> <br />Cubine's recent opinion that the WLW bid bond does not meet requirements <br /> <br />set forth in the invitation to bidders. Council indicated, further, that <br />