Magnolia Park/FP-CS 980701From: Steve Goram
To: Pert Virtanen
Date: 7/1/98 11:50am
Subject: Re: Municipal Consent Granted to CoServ
Pert, the consent granted does not allow CoServ to offer cable services. It does give them the authority to offer
telecommunication services. It is my understanding that Paragon Cable refused to sign the plat at the request of the
City. I suggested that the CoServ representative contact the Planning dept. to determine the situation. Should
CoServ desire to enter into an agreement with the City to offer cable services, they will be required to do so under a
separate instrument Call me if you have any questions. Thank you.
>>> Pert Virtanen 06/30/98 04:49PM >>>
Ordinance 98837 grants CoServ use of public r.o.w, for telecommunications services, excluding cable service as
defined in Subchapter VI of the Communications Act of 1934. Chapter 9-20 of the City Code requires that those
desiring to use public r.o.w, for the purpose of providing services subject to the Cable Television Consumer
Protection and Competition Act of 1992 shall first obtain a required franchise from the City.
The developer of Magnolia Park has refused to obtain a signature from Paragon Cable on the plat, because he
contends that CoServ will provide the cable TV sen/ica within the subdivision. This would be okay with me, if I knew
for sure that CoServ had proper authorization. Since I am unfamiliar with the federal laws cited, I remain clueless.
Can you shed some light? Did Ordinance 98837 authorize CoServ to provide cable TV in Coppell, or did it authorize
something other than that?