- 12 -
By his affidavit, Mr. Bjorklund declares: From the date of
its organization in 1983, MetroVision has been engaged solely in
the business of providing cable television service to the
residents of the City of Livonia. The subject property was
installed in compliance with specific provisions of the Livonia
Franchise Agreement. In some instances, MetroVision installed
updated versions of equipment illustrated in MetroVision’s
application, which "had the incidental effect of increasing by
two channels the potential capacity of the sixty-two channel
Livonia cable television system."
By his affidavit, Mr. Kearse describes cable television
franchise agreements generally and declares that the core
provisions of the Livonia Franchise Agreement are consistent with
the terms of such agreements. By his affidavit, respondent’s
affiant, Mr. Gramlich, acknowledges that the Livonia Franchise
Agreement "contains fairly specific details as to such things as
performance standards, programming, and installation." He
rejects, however, Mr. Kearse’s declaration that a cable franchise
generally carries with it "the obligation to incorporate new
‘state of the art’ technology in the facilities and to extend and
improve service over the life of the franchise", and he concludes
that the Livonia Franchise Agreement contains no such obligation.
In reaching this conclusion, Mr. Gramlich apparently ignores the
state-of-the-art requirement contained in Ordinance 1651.
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011