 | ||
|
Note to the Meredith, NY Town Board
Where the State and Federal governments have the Senate and a House of Representatives (or equivalent) to pass codes, rules and regulations through, the Town Board does not. A purpose of the senate is to ensure that such codes, rules and regulations which are presented for consideration (bills) are in the best interests of the state (at a state level) or the federal government (at the federal level). If such proposed new or altered "laws" (bills) are not in the best interests of the government, the bills should not pass a senate vote, and should never become a law. A purpose of a "house of representatives" (or similar entity) is to ensure that the bills presented for consideration are in the best interests of the people of the state or nation. If so, the bills should pass into law; if not, the bills should not pass into law. Granted, those are "ideal" scenes and aren't always the way it works. The Town Board, in my Constitutionally protected opinion, has here a sort of double-burden: the one entity must consider the best interests of both the the people of the Town of Meredith, and the government entity of the Town of Meredith. Doubling the Double BurdenTo further the already "double burden" in considerations is the fact that the Town Board also has responsibilities of enforcement, an executive branch function. According to an article on Wikipedia (though not authoritative), "The town board exercises both executive and legislative functions." I completely understand such high level responsibilities to the people, the town, the county, the state, and even the nation. According to the Constitution of the State of New York, Article IX, §2(c)(i), "[E]very local government shall have power to adopt and amend local laws not inconsistent with the provisions of this constitution or any general law relating to its property, affairs or government..." Why Disregard the Requirements of the Law?Knowing that such a tremendous amount of research into codes, rules and regulations was needed, as required by such Town Board responsibilities, I wanted to help make things a little easier on the Town Board. I did a LOT of research, and presented to the Board how the DTC "franchise renewal agreement" was not in compliance with 16 NYCRR 895.1(b). I gave my own print out of the law, and that section was even highlighted.
On the issue of quality of service, one only needs to go to the Quarter Moon in Delhi - which, by the way, I couldn't find a fiber connection to the Quarter Moon, which would mean it's fed the TV signal over COPPER, quite contrary to what Mr. Edwards said in the hearing about the decision "two years ago" to only give TV over fiber. The quality SUCKS. (Watch the video for the exact statement.) To make matters worse, the DTC head end is not even a half mile away. (To keep it simple, it's my understanding that the "head end" is where the company receives a signal then sends it out over their own plant, facilities, cable, fiber - their own lines - in their "configuration".) In the mean time, across the street is TV from TWC which is very much higher quality - and if I'm not mistaken, the TWC head end is over 50 miles away! To me, that shows a certain lacking in technical ability from DTC. Furthermore, when Mr. Edwards said that he would not agree to include written plans (see the video) as required by the law mentioned above, that seems like it would be a reflection on the Character of the company. Yet, in the agreement is says, in the 4th paragraph of the agreement, "WHEREAS, the Municipality has conducted negotiations with the Company and has conducted one of more public hearings...affording all interested parties due process...said deliberations included consideration and approval of the Company's technical ability, financial condition, and character; said public hearing also included consideration and approval of the Company's plans for constructing and operating the cable television system... There are other issues that I believe need to be brought out, but now I have to bypass the Board to get anything done on this. And the State has to be bothered with it. (Apparently, though, that's a good thing?) You Recognize that Television is Important to People
The point is the recognition of the importance of television to the people by the board members. Since it is certainly recognized, why would the Board still move forward on the alleged franchise renewal when there was any question of legal requirements being fulfilled? Why not just adjourn the hearing for DTC for further investigation and consultation or assistance? You know, sort of like with the wind issue? What about the quality and reliability of the service? Shouldn't the Town request to review support ticket records (minus the info on who needed the support) which must exist (according to the previous alleged franchise agreement with DTC, under Section 14(b) and 14(c)) on the technology being deployed into the Town of Meredith? It's my opinion that such records should have been requested, or should be requested in any subsequent franchise hearing. Because the Board apparently (obviously, in my opinion) recognizes the role and importance of television to the people of Meredith, it seems to me that the Board would want to ensure that the people get good, reliable service. Let me know, please, so I can post your response here on this site. Or is this going to be ignored by the Town Board of Meredith, NY? I'm quite curious as to the answers, because in this case now, no answer IS an answer to me about the level of responsibility of the Town Board. Anyway, I have one question that is unrelated, and I just can't figure it out: Why would the following statement be in the Town of Meredith Comprehensive Plan? In effect we require those people who take pride in their property to subsidize the exploitation of their community by the few entrepreneurs whose sole interest is in securing a maximum profit from real estate development. (It's on Page 6, Introduction, last sentence of the second quoted paragraph.) Have a phenomenal day and I look forward to hearing from you.
| |
It seems to me that the requirements of relevant state laws should be filled before passing or agreeing on things. I don't think any responsible level of government would disagree with me.
There are even other sections of 16 NYCRR 895.1 which are not met, and I was really not even heard on what I did say (as evidenced by the fact that the Town Board still agreed to let it through). There was quite a bit more where the DTC agreement was not in compliance, but now I'm going to be taking up more of those issues with the State's Department of Public Service - when they never should have had to have been bothered with it in the first place.
It was obvious that the Board recognizes that television is an important part of people's lives. Just review the issue when the false threat of having to turn off everyone's television was thrown into the hearing. That introduction of a false and misleading statement by the Town Supervisor only needs the factor of "intent" to become a real legal issue. I'm not asserting that here, and that's not the point of this or what follows. (Even though I personally believe that the false statement by the Town Supervisor is what swayed the quick action thereafter.)