HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-125 Mediacom Deny Stay/~ PRjO\
~ " ~~
ti ~
U ~
4646 Dakota Street S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
RESOLUTION 09-125
A RESOLUTION DENYING A STAY PENDING APPEAL
Motion By: Hedberg Second By: LeMair
WHEREAS, Mediacom Minnesota LLC ("Mediacom") has filed a petition for certiorari with the
Minnesota Court of Appeals challenging the City's grant of a cable television franchise
to Integra Telecom ("Integra"); .and
WHEREAS, Mediacom has also requested that the City grant a stay of the Integra franchise
pending appeal; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Rule of Appellate Procedure 115.02 subd. 2(b}, as interpreted by the Court
of Appeals' staff, makes the body whose decision is being challenged (in this case, the
Prior Lake City Council) the body that must consider and act on requests for stays in
certiorari proceedings;
WHEREAS, The City has requested and received written submissions regarding Mediacom's
request from Mediacom and Integra, which the Council has considered in making its
decision on the Stay,. in addition to the Agenda Report, the terms of which are
incorporated herein by reference.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE,
MINNESOTA as follows:
1. The recitals set forth above are incorporated herein.
2. The City Council finds as follows:
a. The- City lacks the power to grant the request without risking a violation of the terms of the
Integra franchise. The terms of the Integra franchise and the governing statutes do not
reserve to the City the power to unilaterally suspend the rights conveyed under the
franchise based on such a request, and the franchise has very limited termination
provisions.
b. Even if the City Council had the authority to grant such a request in these circumstances,
Mediacom has failed to carry its burden of proof under the criteria that apply to such
requests.
c. Under Minnesota law, the availability of a stay pending appeal "depends on the ability of the
applicant to establish: (1) a strong likelihood of success on the merits of the appeal; (2) the
occurrence of irreparable injury, (3) the lack of substantial harm affecting other interested
parties, and (4) the lack of harm resulting to the public interest." David F. Herr & Roger S.
Haydock, Minnesota Practice: Civil Rules Annotated, § 62.7 at 134 (2005).
d. Here, Mediacom's letter does not address the merits of its appeal, and does not begin to
establish "a strong likelihood of success on the merits" of its appeal.
e. Its letter also fails to argue, let alone show, that Mediacom would. suffer irreparable injury
absent a stay.
'F' ~fvww.cityofpriorlake.com
Phone 952.447.9800 /Fax 952.447.4245
f. Its letter also fails to argue, iet alone show, that.Integra and the City would not suffer
substantial harm if a stay were granted.
g. Nor does it argue, let alone show, that there would be a lack of harm resulting to the public
interest.
3. Based upon these findings, the Council denies Mediacom's stay request.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 17th DAY OF AUGUST 2009.
YES NO
R:\Council\2009 Agenda Reports\08 17 09\Res 09-125.DOC
Hau en X Hau en
Erickson X Erickson
Hedber X Hedberg
LeMair X LeMair
Millar X Mil r