9.a application for cable communications franchise from citizens Telecommunications of Minnesota, LLCCommunications
14450 Burnhaven Drive, Burnsville, MN 55306
Jack Phillips
Director- Gov't and External Affairs
Frontier Communications
(v) 952-435-1373
(f) 952-435-2111
iack.phillips@ftr.com
DELIVERED VIA OVERNIGHT MAIL AND E-MAIL
October 27, 2016
Neil Soltis. City Administrator, Deputy Clerk
City of Scandia
Scandia Community & Senior Center
14727 209th St. N.
Scandia, MN 55073
Re: Application of Citizens Telecommunications Company of Minnesota LLC for
Cable Communications Services Franchise in City of Scandia, Minnesota
Dear Mr. Soltis:
In response to the City of Scandia's Notice of Intent to Consider Issuance of
Franchise, please find one original and two copies of Citizens Telecommunications
Company of Minnesota, LLC's notarized application for a cable communications franchise
in the City of Scandia, Minnesota ("City"). Frontier reserves the right to make and redact
any information it determines to be Trade Secret information. Also enclosed is a check in
the amount of $5,000 payable to the City in full payment of its application fee. This
application fee constitutes the City's "entire reasonable and necessary costs of processing
a cable communications franchise" as contemplated in Minn. Stat. § 238.081 Subd.(8).
Very t - ours,
Jack ' ips
CITY OF SCANDIA
APPLICATION OF CITIZENS TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPANY OF MINNESOTA,
LLC
FOR A COMPETITIVE CABLE FRANCHISE
Citizens Telecommunications Company of Minnesota LLC ("Frontier") respectfully files
this application for a competitive cable communications franchise with the City of Scandia,
Minnesota ("City") pursuant to the City's published Notice of Intent to Consider Issuance of
Franchise this 26`h day of October, 2016.
Background:
Overview of Frontier
Frontier's motto is "We can help?" Frontier goes the extra mile for our customers and is
extremely proud to serve our communities. Local engagement is more than a strategy to
Frontier. It is in our DNA. Broadband and communications are central parts of daily life
and are requirements for our communities to thrive and grow. Frontier takes seriously
our responsibility to reliably deliver these services to the millions of customers we serve.
Frontier's parent company is Frontier Communications Corporation, Frontier
Communications Corporation is an S&P 500 company and is included in the Fortune
1000 list of America's largest corporations. Frontier serves predominantly a mix of
urban, suburban, and rural areas in 29 states across the United States. Frontier offers a
variety of services to customers over its fiber-optic and copper networks, including video,
high-speed internet, advanced voice and Frontier Secure digital protection solutions.
Frontier Business Edge offers communications solutions to small, medium, and enterprise
businesses.
Frontier's Values
Frontier is committed to its core value of being the leader in providing communications
services to residential and business customers in its markets by putting our customers
first, treating our customers, business partners, and employees with respect, keeping our
commitments, being accountable at all times, being ethical in all of ours dealings, being
innovative and taking the initiative, being a team player, being active in our communities,
doing right the first time and continuously improving, using resources wisely and always
having a positive attitude.
2 1 P
Overview of Frontier in Minnesota
Frontier is one of Minnesota's largest incumbent local exchange carriers and our
Minnesota infrastructure is essential to the success of businesses large and small,
educational institutions, healthcare facilities and public safety agencies in the
communities we serge. Frontier's network is also critical to the support of other
telecommunications (such as wireless carriers) and information service providers. All
Frontier products and services offer 24/7/365 support from a 100% U.S.-based
workforce.
Frontier employees live and work in the Minnesota communities they serve. They are our
customers' friends and neighbors and the subject matter experts on the best
communications technology for home and business. They are customer -focused and
empowered to make the right decisions for the customer. Employees support programs
and initiatives important to their communities and live Frontier's values every day.
Recent examples include:
➢ We belong to and actively participate in the Chisago Area Chamber (Lindstrom
Chisago), Wyoming Area Business Association (Wyoming)
Our ABC — America's Best Communities team is a finalist promoting economic
development, revitalization and community vibrancy in the Chisago lakes are
touching all communities. The ABC team has used the prizes awarded to date to build
and implement a 9 project vibrancy plan for the area and is a finalist competing for
$1M, $2M and $3M finalist prizes.
➢ Frontier Communications employees actively participate in Community Events such
as Karl Oskar Days, Shafer Days Parade and Ki -Chi -Saga Days in Chisago City.
➢ We operate a local retail store with the ability to contact Frontier in person
We have implemented 61 CAF (Connect America Fund) projects in 2016 to improve
broadband reach and capabilities in the rural areas around these communities
investing more than $3.7M and improving service capabilities to more than 2600
households in the area
➢ Several of our technicians participate as volunteer firefighters in these local
ZD
communities
Frontier's Commitment to Our Customers
Each of Frontier's markets across the 29 states we serve has a General Manager who is
personally accountable for delivering extraordinary service. Decisions are made at the
local level taking into account local needs and interests. In the City area, the General
Manager is Tom Murn. Frontier's regional Vice President handling Minnesota is George
Meskowski. Frontier's regional, state and local leadership are actively involved in day-
to-day operations and personally see to it that customers in their markets are receiving
our best. From the CEO down, we are all accountable to our customers every day. When
storms or natural disasters strike our regions, we are among the first to respond, and have
the national resources to call upon. When members of our community fall on tough times,
31P�
we pride ourselves on being there to support them. Our technicians work around the
17
clock in some tough conditions to keep your services running smoothly. Know that when
a person becomes a Frontier customer, they are signing up for over 28,600 employees at
their back. Every day, our employees put the customer first.
Frontier's Commitment to Veterans
Frontier is also an award-winning Veteran employer and proud to support those who
served our nation. More than 1 out of every 10 Frontier employees is a veteran, reservist,
and/or the spouse of a veteran. Frontier is a member of The Military Spouse
Employment Partnership, The 100,000 Jobs Mission, The Employer Partnership of the
Armed Forces, Honor and Remember, and Joining Forces.
Citizens Telecommunications Company of Minnesota LLC, the applicant, is a Delaware
limited liability company in good standing and authorized to do business in the State of
Minnesota.
The following responds directly to the requested information set forth in the Notice of
Intent to Consider Issuance of Franchise pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 283.081 Subd. 4:
(1). Plans for channel capacity, including both the total number of channels
capable of being energized in the system and the number of channels to be
energized immediately.
Frontier's underlying technology allows for an almost unlimited channel capacity.
While a final channel lineup has not been finalized at this time, please see "Exhibit A -
channel lineup and programming packages" from another jurisdiction Frontier offers
service. Frontier will provide the City with a copy of the actual channel lineup prior to
launching service. Frontier also provides a robust library of Video on Demand content.
(2). A statement of the television and radio broadcast signals for which
permission to carry will be requested from the Federal Communications
Commission ("FCC").
Frontier will make all appropriate filings and preparations prior to the turn up of its
video service including (1) filing a community registration with the FCC via FCC Form
322; (2) providing notice to local broadcasters and requesting either must -carry or
retransmission consent election.
In its existing markets, Frontier complies with many additional federal requirements in
providing its service, including all of the FCC requirements applicable to multichannel
video programming distributors (such as equal employment opportunity and set-top box
requirements), the FCC requirements applicable to EAS participants that are wireline
video service providers, other FCC requirements applicable to provision of Vantage TV
(Frontier Broadband Service in Minnesota) (such as receive -only earth station license
requirements and annual regulatory fees for 1PTV providers), and the Copyright Office
4lPBg
requirements for cable systems filing semi-annual copyright statements of accounts and
paying statutory license fees. Frontier does not file an FCC Form 327 relating to CARS
microwave facilities because Frontier does not use such facilities in connection with the
provision of Vantage TV. Similarly, Frontier does not file FCC Form 320 and FCC
Form 321 as they relate to the use of aeronautical frequencies that are not applicable to
the JPTV technology.
In these areas where Frontier offers service, area, Frontier will negotiate retransmission
or must carry agreements with the following stations:
KTSP (ABC)
WCCO (CBS)
KMSP (FOX)
KARE (NBC)
WFTC (My Network)
WUCW (CW)
KSTC (This/Antenna)
KTCA (PBS)
WUMN (Univision)
KPXM (ION)
The planned carriage of the stations identified above could include both primary and
multicast signals of each station.
(3). A description of the proposed system design and planned operation,
including at least the following items:
The following provides a general description of the technology and infrastructure:
Frontier Communications' Vantage TV video offering is powered by Ericsson's
Mediaroom software platform. Mediaroom is the world's #1 IPTV platform — one that is
proven and widely adopted by Network Service Providers worldwide — with over 16.4
million subscriber households and 32 nullion connected devices running the software to
date. Vantage TV is an innovative, scalable, and highly reliable video service designed
to run over our IP enabled networks (xDSL, FTTP/FTTN, etc.). Our customers'
satisfaction has been extremely high to date — relative to our competitor's video offerings
in the same markets in which we are deployed.
Vantage TV's core product features include:
• Secure delivery of SD (Standard Definition), HD (High Definition)
and 4K/UHD (Ultra High Definition) content — via integrated Digital
Rights Management �- to set-top Boxes on each TV.
• Superior HD, SD & UHD picture quality.
5 1 P a g e
• WiFi-enabled set-top boxes are also a deployment option allowing
our customers to place their TVs wherever they want in their homes.
• Live TV broadcast with instant channel change allowing super -fast
navigation through our Interactive Programming Guide.
+ Video On -Demand library that will contain more than 100,000
movies and shows.
• Total Home DVR records up to 6 shows at once and lets our
customers pause, rewind and play back live TV and store over 170
hours of HD progranuning. We provide our customers with up to 1
Terabyte worth of on -premise storage capacity.
• Next generation EPG (Electronic Program Guide) and enhanced
search functionality deliver real time results with a rich, new visual
poster -art driven experience that allows our customers to easily
discover and consume content on their terms.
• Integrated interactive applications include Social TV (access to
Twitter and Facebook), Weather, Interactive Workout, Home
Shopping Network and interactive games.
It is important to note that Vantage TV is more than just a "middleware" or a User
Interface; it is an end-to-end platform that covers all video functional dependencies starting from
Content Acquisition all the way through to Service Consumption. These are described below:
Content Acquisition: Frontier processes Live and On -Demand content through encoders
and content packaging tools at our Video Headend in Fort Wayne, Indiana and Video
Serving Offices (VSDs) in markets that we serve. Acquisition Servers (A -Servers) in
our service delivery architecture encrypt streams, encapsulate in RTP and/or Smooth
Streaming format, and put multicast streams out on our network for devices to seamlessly
connect to and consume content.
Content Protection: Frontier secures all of the content it received through leveraged
Digital Rights Management (DRM) and Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) systems, which
in turn, establishes trust across its entire server environment and its set-top Box clients.
Service Management. Vantage TV leverages a complex TV Services management tool
to configure and manage subscriber information, Live TV Services, Channel Line -Up /
Channel Maps, and Video On Demand Services all from a web -based interface that our
Video Operations team controls.
Subscriber Management: Frontier integrates Vantage TV with our internal Billing and
Provisioning systems (OSS/BSS) in a seamless fashion to ensure the most efficient
customer experience. We continuously monitor the system end to end and manage
subscriber groups, entitlements, and user authentication to all content and packages,
while at all times protecting customer information
A subscriber group is essentially a category to which one or more client set-top boxes
are associated with. For example, a single client device might be in the following
subscriber groups: "HD -capable," "Premium Content Package," and/or "Suburban
Minneapolis metro area."
Subscriber groups also have Server clusters associated with them (for VOD and Linear
TV Services). For example "South Metro" might be used to associate a subscriber group
to a set of live channels, public -access channels, and correlated to a specific set of video
distribution servers that provide content.
The TV Services Management tool then offers the ability to associate clusters of Servers
with a subscriber group and to associate subscriber groups with client devices
(propagating associated content rights and entitlements).
Service Deliverv: Frontier delivers high-quality Live and Video -on -Demand content
over our Managed IP Network to the customer premise. Distribution Servers (D -Servers)
in our service delivery architecture buffer streams, generate instant channel change
bursts, and do forward error packet correction.
Service Consumption: Frontier presents content to our customers' TVs in a secure and
reliable manner through Vantage TV's client software. That software, which decrypts the
stream (via SOC / System on a Clip), resides directly on our customers' set-top boxes.
In summary, Vantage TV is an end to end software solution that enables Frontier to deliver
next -generation TV experiences including standard and high-definition/ultra-high-
definition live TV channels, video -on -demand (VOD), digital video recording (DVR) and
connected entertainment experiences to our customers.
(i). The general area for location of antenna and headend, if known;
71 Page
Frontier has a "super head end" in Fort Wayne, Indiana which has a satellite
"farm" used to download national content. This super head end has
redundancy to receive terrestrial secondary feeds from Verizon, i.e., should an
emergency interrupt service from one of its national content sources. The
national content is encoded and then deployed over diverse 10 GIG circuits to
the local head where the local content, including public, educational and
government access channels, is inserted for delivery to end users. Customers in
the City will be served out of the head end in Apple Valley. Frontier will pick
up the local broadcast signals via fiber circuits and/or will also capture those
signals by antennae located at the local head end and /or as a back-up,
precautionary measure.
(ii). The schedule for activating cable and two-way capacity;
While an exact launch date has yet to be determined, Frontier is working
diligently to complete all necessary work and required testing and operational
readiness reviews to offer service to customers upon successful execution of a
Franchise Agreement. Frontier will meet with Commission and appropriate
member jurisdictions to share the actual launch date when it becomes finalized.
(iii). The type of automated services to be provided;
As noted in Section B above, Frontier has provided a sample channel
lineup. See Exhibit A. This illustrates the vast selection of content
available to subscribers.
Vantage TV offers:
• Incredible 100% digital picture and sound.
• Total -home DVR with ability to record up to six shows at once and view
on any TV with a set-top box.
• Instant channel change and super -fast navigation through our interactive
program guide and Video on Demand.
• The ability to watch up to six different channels at once with Multi -View.
The ability to Pause, Fast Forward, Rewind live or recorded shows on up
to eight TVs in your house.
• Next generation enhanced search which delivers real-time results by
program name, actor/actress and other keywords across Live TV, Video
On Demand and DVR recordings.
• Introducing Channel Peeks which maintains full -screen viewing while
"peeking" into other programming.
• Recent & DVR Peek allows you to preview and tune to any of the last five
channels or DVR recordings.
8 1 P a g e
(iv). The number of channels and services to be made available
for access cable broadcasting; and
Frontier will carry the same number of PEG stations as the incumbent.
(v). A schedule of charges for facilities and staff assistance for
access cable broadcasting;
Frontier will make all franchised cities' access channels available to
its subscribers. For purposes of acquiring the signal, Frontier will
pick up the particular City's access channel signals at the point(s) of
origination via fiber facility and transport such content back to the
local VSO for insertion in the channel lineup. At the point(s) of
origination, Frontier will need rack space and power for its
equipment to receive the signal(s) handed off by the City to Frontier.
Frontier will pay for all facilities and equipment located on its side of
the demarcation point where the City will hand off its content to
Frontier and as is industry practice the City will be responsible for all
equipment on its side of the demarcation point.
(4). Terms and conditions under which particular service is to be provided to
governmental and educational entities.
Frontier will provide at no charge expanded basic service to all government buildings,
schools, and public libraries located within its service footprint so Iong as those locations
are capable of receiving service from Frontier and no other cable provider is providing
service at such locations.
(5). A schedule of proposed rates in relation to the services to be provided
and a proposed policy regarding unusual or difficult connection of
services.
Final rates have yet to be determined, please see "Exhibit B for a general description
of the tiers of service that will be available.
(6). A time schedule for construction of the entire system with the time
sequence for wiring the various parts of the area requested to be served.
Frontier is still finalizing its initial footprint for the deployment of cable services within
the City service area. Frontier's planned deployment is highly confidential. Pursuant to
an executed franchise agreement(s), Frontier will meet regularly with the City and the
Commission to discuss where service is available and any plans for additional
deployment. Frontier is the second entrant into the wireline video market in the City.
As a second entrant, investment in and expansion. of Frontier's cable system should be
driven by market success, and not a contractual requirement for ubiquitous coverage.
9IPas
The following sets forth some critical background with respect to employment of both
telecommunications and cable infrastructure. Initially, local telephone companies were
granted monopolies over local exchange service in exchange for taking on a provider of
last resort obligation- a duty to provide service - to customers in its service territory.
Similarly, with respect to video services. The incumbent video provider (and its
predecessors) operated as a monopoly over facilities -based video. In exchange for
making the capital investment to deploy facilities, the incumbent cable company got
100 percent of the customers who wanted cable television.
Subsequently, with respect to telephone services, the federal and local governments
effectively eliminated the local telephone monopolies and fostered robust competition. It
should be noted that in doing so, the telecom second entrant had absolutely no obligation
to build any facilities or to serve any particular location(s) at all. As the FCC noted,
imposing build -out requirements on new entrants in the telecommunications industry
would constitute a barrier to entry (13 FCC Red 3460, 1997). Cable companies were free
to enter the telecom market on terms that made business and economic sense to them.
This very environment was the catalyst for robust wireless and wireline competition and
the proliferation of higher broadband speeds.
Congress became concerned about the lack of competition in the video world and in
1992 amended federal law to prohibit a local franchising authority from
"unreasonably[y] refusing] to award an additional competitive franchise." 47 U.S.C. §
541(a)(1) provides a direct avenue for federal court relief in the event of such an
unreasonable refusal. 47 U.S.C. § 555(a) and (b). Until the advent, however, of state
statutes granting statewide cable franchises without a mandatory build requirement
(e.g., Florida) or progressive cities willing to grant competitive franchises, cable
monopolies continued to the detriment of consumers and competition. Level playing
field requirements are just one example of barriers to competitive entry erected by
cities at the behest of the cable monopolies.
Courts have ruled, however, that "level playing field" provisions do not require
identical terms for new entrants. See, for example, Insight C0191771U77ications v. Cite of
Louisville, 2003 WL 21473455 (Ky. Ct. App. 2003), where the court found: There will
never be an apple -to -apple comparison for Insight and other franchisee simply because
Insight is the incumbent which in its own right and through its predecessors has been
the exclusive provider of cable services in the City of Louisville for almost thirty years.
No new cable franchisee can ever be in the same position as a thirty-year veteran. See
also, .hz Cable TV Fund 14-A, Ltd. v. Cite of Naperville (1997 WL 209692 (N.D. 11I);
and New England Cable Television Ass'77, Inc. v. Connecticut DPUC 717 A.2d 1276
(1998).
In sharp contrast to the monopoly provider, a second entrant faces a significant capital
outlay with absolutely no assurance of acquiring customers; rather, it must compete
with the monopoly incumbent and win each and every customer over. As Professor
Thomas Hazlett of George Mason University has explained, "[flncumbents advocate
build -out requirements precisely because such rules tend to limit, rather than expand,
10jP g
competition." The federal Department of Justice has also noted that "...consumers
ID
are best served if market forces determine when and where competitors enter.
Regulatory restrictions and conditions on entry tend to shield incumbents from
competition and are associated with a range of economic inefficiencies including higher
production costs, reduced innovation, and distorted service choices." (Department of
Justice Ex Parte, May 10, 2006, FCC MC Dkt 05-311)
The fact is that the, incumbent cable provider has (1) an established market position; (2)
all of the cable customers; and (3) an existing, in-place infrastructure. These disparate
market positions make imposing a build -out requirement on a competitive entrant bad
public policy. Under the guise of "Ievel playing field" claims, incumbent cable operators
seek to require new entrants to duplicate the networks the incumbents built as
monopolies, knowing that such a requirement will greatly reduce, if not eliminate, the
risk of competitive entry.
lit 2007, the FCC issued its findings with respect to facilities based video competition
and held as follows: (1) with respect to level playing field requirements, the FCC
stated that such mandates "unreasonably impede competitive entry into the
multichannel video marketplace by requiring local franchising authorities to grant
franchises to competitors on substantially the same terms imposed on the incumbent
cable operators (Para. 138); and (2) with respect to mandatory build out, the FCC held
that "an LFA's refusal to grant a competitive franchise because of an applicant's
unwillingness to agree to unreasonable build out mandates constitutes an unreasonable
refusal to award a competitive franchise within the meaning of Section 621(a)(1) [47
U.S.C. § 541(a)(1)]."
Those two FCC holdings alone should put this entire matter to rest - level playing field
requirements and unreasonable mandatory build requirements are barriers to competitive
entry in the cable market and violate the federal Cable Act and the FCC's order.
Minnesota, however, codified its requirements in a state law and the FCC expressly
declined to "preempt" state laws addressing the cable franchising process.
It is clear, however, that the FCC did not intend to protect the Minnesota statute which
mandates the imposition of barriers to entry on each and every local franchising
authority. As various providers were trying to enter the competitive cable market and
encountering barriers such as level playing field requirements and mandatory build out
provisions, many states passed statutes to facilitate competitive entry and to prevent
local franchising authorities from erecting barriers to entry. Such laws were passed in
26 states including Florida, Missouri and North Carolina, where incumbent video
providers have taken advantage of the streamlined process to enter a market without a
mandatory build obligation. These laws have facilitated competitive entry as
evidenced, for example, by the presence of four facilities based competitors in the
Orlando, Florida market, including CenturyLink and Comcast. As such, these state
laws are aligned and not in conflict with the FCC's and Congress' policies for
promoting competition in the video distribution market.
111 Page
Minnesota's cable Iaw, however, is quite the opposite. Minnesota's cable act dates back
to the 1970s and directs each local franchising authority to impose not only a level
playing field across a broad range of issues (many of which Frontier does not oppose),
but also a five year mandatory build out requirement. Both of these provisions have
been deemed to be barriers to entry by the FCC. The incontrovertible fact is that the law
has been extremely successful in barring cable communications competition in the City:
The City has not experienced any facilities -based competition because of the barriers to
entry Minnesota codified in Chapter 238.
In support of this position, that the FCC's 2007 Order preempts Minn. Stat. Chapter
238, Franchisee notes the following:
Conflict preemption: State law may be preempted without express
Congressional authorization to the extent it actually conflicts with federal
law where state law "stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and
execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress." English v.
General Elec. Co., 496 U.S. 72, 79 (1990).
Whether state law constitutes a sufficient obstacle is a matter of judgment
to be informed by examining the federal statute as a whole and
identifying its purpose and intended effects. Crosby v. Nat'/ Foreign
Trade Council, 530 U.S. 363 #372 (2000).
Minn. Stat.§ 238.08 mandates terms that each municipality must
implement in granting a new or renewed cable franchise.
Minn. Stat. § 238.084 sets forth the required contents of a franchise
ordinance and sets forth very precise requirements in an initial franchise
about the build: commence build within 240 days; must construct at Ieast
50 plant miles per year; construction throughout the franchise area must
be substantially completed within 5 years of granting the franchise; and
these requirements can be waived by the franchising authority only upon
occurrence of unforeseen events or acts of God.
Section 621(a)(1) initially gave local authorities the authority to grant
franchises, but this broad grant resulted in exclusive
franchises/monopolies. Congress "believe[d) that exclusive franchises are
contrary to federal policy ... which is intended to promote the
development of competition." H.R. Coni. Rep. No. 102-862, at 77
(1992).
Legislative history clearly supports that Congress was focused on
fostering competition when it passed the 1992 Act. Owest Broadband
Servs. Inc. v. City of Boulder, 151 F. Supp. 1236, 1244 (D. Colo. 2001).
12 1 f> ai. 2, e
In its 2007 order, the FCC found that "an LFA's refusal to grant a
competitive franchise because of an applicant's unwillingness to agree to
unreasonable build out mandates constitutes an unreasonable refusal to
award a competitive franchise within the meaning of Section 621(a)(1)."
The FCC order, however, targeted local and not state laws.
• Arguably, the Minnesota build requirements set forth in Section
238.084(m) are in conflict with Section 621(a)(1) and are, therefore,
preempted.
• In the Boulder case, the court applied Section 62I's prohibition on
unreasonable refusals to grant franchises to find conflict preemption
where local rules required voter approval for any new franchises.
• The mandatory build out in the Minnesota statute could be considered a
de facto "unreasonable refusal" to grant a franchise and thus conflict with
the pro -competition purpose set forth in Section 621(a)(1).
• in upholding the FCC's ruling, the Sixth Circuit stated that "while the
[FCC] characterized build out requirements as 'eminently sensible' under
the prior regime in which cable providers were granted community -wide
monopolies, under the current, competitive regime, these requirements
'make entry so expensive that the prospective provider withdraws its
application and simply declines to serve any portion of the community."
All ia77ce for C77101 Media v. FCC, 529 F. 3d 763, 771 (6th Cir. 2008).
The FCC ruling targeted local rules and actions and the FCC refrained
from preempting state regulation because it lacked "a sufficient record to
evaluate whether and how such state laws may lead to unreasonable
refusals to award additional competitive franchises." FCC Cable
Franchising Order (FCC 06-180, at n.2 &126). That is not to say,
however, that upon full consideration, the FCC would not find the
Minnesota mandatory build requirements to constitute an unreasonable
refusal under Section 621.
o The franchising laws which were being enacted about the
time of the FCC order facilitated competitive entrants into
the facilities based video market.
o In sharp contrast, the Minnesota statutes mandates
individual cities and commissions to include onerous build
out schedules which, standing alone, would run afoul of
the FCC's order.
It should also be noted that at least two cities in Minnesota have chosen to award
competitive franchises to second entrants without satisfying all the mandates of
131 Pa
Chapter 238. See Mediacom Minnesota, LLC iv. City of Prior Lake, Minn. Ct. of
Appeals, A09-1379 (Unpublished decision, Filed June 22, 2010). In October 2014, the
City of Owatonna awarded a competitive franchise to a second provider, and the
franchise did not contain the five year build requirement set forth in Chapter 238.
Rather, it contained a market success model expressly endorsed by the FCC. The
competitor will provide service to 25 percent of the City of Owatonna and will have
no further obligation to enable the provision of cable communications services until
48 percent of households in the footprint subscribe to its service.
Finally, nothing in the FCC's Order on Reconsideration released in January of this year
alters the above analysis.
(7). A statement indicating the applicant's qualifications and experience in
the cable communications field, if any.
Frontier Con-.munications is an S&P 500 company and is included in the Fortune 1000
list of America's largest corporations.
General Manager, Northern Minnesota (Including North Metro): Tom Murn is the
General Manager overseeing Frontier's Northern Minnesota Operations. He has overall
responsibility for the operations organization serving this area including customer service
experience and community relations. Tom has a wealth of knowledge in business,
operations, sales and community leadership. Murn joined Frontier in May of 2010 as part
of their acquisition and transition activities in Northern Idaho. Prior to Frontier, Murn
was a Regional Manager in charge of large timberland businesses in Northern Minnesota
and Idaho. He more than 20 years' experience in executive roles and has served in
numerous BOD / Leadership roles supporting the communities he has been part of. Tom
is a graduate of the University of Minnesota with a Bachelor of Science degree and has a
Master of Arts in business management from the College of St. Scholastica in Duluth.
Area General Manager, Minnesota, Iowa and Nebraska: George Meskowski is
Frontier's Area General Manager with overall operations responsibility for the states of
Minnesota, Iowa and Nebraska. He lives and has his office in the South Metro area. He
has overall responsibility for the entire operations organization in the three states and is
responsible for all customer service and community relations for these areas. George was
formerly a general manager with Frontier in Michigan and Indiana prior to being
promoted to his current position in 2014.
President and Chief Executive Officer: Daniel J. McCarthy became a member of the
Frontier Board of Directors in May 2014. He has been President and Chief Operating
Officer since April 2012 and was Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer
from January 2006 to April 2012. Before this, he was Senior Vice President, Field
Operations from December 2004 to December 2005, Senior Vice President, Broadband
Operations from January 2004 to December 2004, and President and Chief Operating
Officer of Electric Lightwave from January 2002 to December 2004.
14 1 P az Ue
Mr. McCarthy has been with Frontier Communications Corporation since 1990, when he
joined the company's Kauai, Hawaii, electric division. In 1995, he moved to Flagstaff,
Arizona, and assumed responsibility for the company's energy operations. In 2001 he was
promoted to President and Chief Operating Officer of Citizens Public Services sector,
responsible for the company's energy and water operations. He earned a bachelor's degree
in marine engineering from the State University of New York Maritime College at Fort
Schuyler, and holds an M.B.A. from the University of Phoenix.
In October 2013, he was appointed a Trustee of The Committee for Economic
Development, a nonprofit, nonpartisan, business -led, public policy organization that
combined with The Conference Board, a nonprofit business membership and research
group organization. In December 2013, Mr. McCarthy was elected to the Board of
Trustees of Sacred Heart University in Fairfield, Connecticut. He is also a member of the
Western Connecticut Health Network Corporate Advisory Council.
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Prior to joining Frontier, Perley
McBride was the Chief Financial Officer of Cable & Wireless Communications Plc until
its May 2016 acquisition by Liberty Global plc. Previously, Mr. McBride served as Chief
Financial Officer at Leap Wireless International, which operated the Cricket
Communications mobile brand, from December 2012 through May 2014 and was part of
the Executive team that led the business through its acquisition by AT&T Inc. Prior to
Leap Wireless, he served as Executive Vice President of Finance at The Weather
Company, owner of The Weather Channel among other assets, between 2010 and 2012,
where he was instrumental in achieving sustained EBITDA growth and reducing leverage
by two turns. He served in several senior financial management roles at Frontier between
1999 and 2010, and also between 1994 and 1997. During that period, he created a culture
of expense discipline that enabled Frontier to achieve a consistent track record of
sustaining industry-leading margins. He also worked in the finance department at Sprint
Corporation early in his career. He holds a Bachelor of Science degree from Mount
Allison University in Canada and has an MBA from the University of Houston.
Executive Vice President, Frontier Secure and Administration: Cecilia K. McKenney
is Executive Vice President, Frontier Secure and Administration, responsible for Frontier
Secure, Human Resources, Marketing, and Product Development. Before this, she was
responsible for Human Resources, Sales Operations, Corporate Communications and
Public Relations. She was Executive Vice President, Human Resources and Call Center
Sales & Service from February 2008 to May 2012. Ms. McKenney joined the company as
Senior Vice President, Human Resources in February 2006. She is a member of the
company's Senior Leadership Team and reports to the CEO.
Frontier Secure, a service of Frontier Communications, offers products and services to
protect every aspect of digital life, including computer security, cloud backup & sharing,
the connected home, identity protection, equipment protection and 2417 U.S.-based
premium technical support. Its products and services are sold nationwide directly to
consumers and small businesses, and wholesale through strategic partnerships. Prior to
Frontier, Ms. McKenney was Group Vice President of Headquarters Human Resources
15 1 P
for the Pepsi Bottling Group, Inc. (PBG) in Somers, New York, responsible for all
Human Resources functions supporting PBG's worldwide operations. Her organization
supported PBGs headquarters and call center in addition to providing long-term strategic
direction and day-to-day business support for Staffing, Compensation and. Benefits,
Diversity, Training, Talent Development and Human Resources Systems.
Ms. McKenney joined the Pepsi-Cola Company in 1989 in its headquarters -based
employee benefits group. She became Human Resources Manager in Pepsi -Cola's
Northeast Business Unit in 1992. In less than two years, Ms. McKenney transferred to
Northern California to manage HR issues for the company's San Francisco market. In
1995, she was appointed Director of Human Resources for PBG's California Business
Unit. When PBG became an independent company near the end of 1998, Ms. McKenney
was appointed Vice President, Staffing and Diversity at Company's headquarters. In
2000, she was promoted to Vice President, Headquarters Human Resources and was
named Group Vice President, Headquarters Human Resources, in 2004.
Prior to Pepsi, Ms. McKenney worked for Mutual of New York and L.F. Rothschild in
Human Resource and Management roles. She earned a bachelor's degree in business
administration from Franklin & Marshall College and is a Certified Employee Benefits
Specialist.
Ms. McKenney is a member of The Leadership Council of Franklin & Marshall College
and a member of the Board of Directors of The Child Care Council of Westchester
County, Inc. In May 2014, she was honored with the HR Leader Award in the Large
Company category at the 2014 Fairfield County HR People of the Year Awards. The
awards are given each year by The Southern Connecticut Chapter of the Society for
Human Resource Management to recognize individuals whose performance and
contributions have significantly benefited their organizations, the Human Resources
profession and the community.
Executive Vice President, External Affairs: Kathleen Quinn Abernathy is Executive
Vice President, External Affairs, responsible for the company's governmental and
regulatory affairs. From March 2010 to June 2012, she was Chief Legal Officer and
Executive Vice President, Regulatory and Governmental Affairs. Prior to joining
Frontier, she was a Partner at Wilkinson Barker Knauer LLP, advising clients on a wide
range of legal, policy and regulatory issues related to telecommunications and the media.
Before this, she was a Partner at the law firm of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, LLP.
Ms. Abernathy served as a Commissioner with the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) from 2001-2005. While a Commissioner, she chaired the Federal -State Joint
Board on Universal Service and participated as a U.S. representative in numerous
international bilateral and multilateral negotiations, including the 2002 International
Telecommunication Union (ITU) Plenipotentiary Conference and the 2003 ITU World
Radiocommunications Conference. She was appointed by the ITU to chair the 2004 ITU
Global Symposium for Regulators.
16 1 Page
Prior to joining the FCC, Ms. Abernathy was Vice President for Public Policy at
BroadBand Office Communications; Vice President for Regulatory Affairs at US West;
and Vice President for Federal Regulatory Affairs at AirTouch Communications. Earlier
in her career, she was Legal Advisor to two FCC commissioners and a Special Assistant
to the agency's General Counsel.
Ms. Abernathy has received numerous honors and awards in recognition of her
contributions to the profession. In 2011 she was named one of the "Top Ten Women in
Telecom" by Fierce Telecom and honored by Legal Momentum with an "Aiming High
Award." She was featured in Chambers USA's "Leaders in their Field" in the Telecom,
Broadcast & Satellite: Regulatory category (2009); included in the Washington, DC
edition of Super Lawyers (2009, 2010); and named one of Washington's Top Lawyers by
Washingtonian magazine (2007, 2009).
Ms. Abernathy served on Frontier Communications' board of directors from April 2006
through February 2010. She is currently on the boards of the John Gardner Fellowship
Association, which is affiliated with U.C. Berkley, and Stanford University and Children
Now. She also serves on the board of ISO New England Inc., the operator of New
England's bulk power and wholesale electricity markets.
Ms. Abernathy received her B.A. magna cum laude from Marquette University and her
J.D. from Catholic University of America's Columbus School of Law, where she was a
Distinguished Practitioner in Residence. She is a member of the District of Columbia Bar
and the Federal Communications Bar Association, of which she is a Past -President, and
has served as an adjunct professor at Georgetown University Law Center and The
Columbus School of Law.
Senior Vice President, General Counsel Secretary: Mark D. Nielsen joined Frontier in
March 2014 as Senior Vice President, General Counsel, and Secretary. Prior to this, he
was Associate General Counsel and Chief Compliance Officer for Danbury, Conn. -based
Praxair Inc. From 2007 to 2009, he was a Vice President and Assistant General Counsel
of defense contractor Raytheon Co. Before that, Mr. Nielsen served as Chief Legal
Counsel, and then Chief of Staff, to Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney (2004-2007).
Mr. Nielsen began his legal career in 1990 as an associate with the Hartford law firm of
Murtha, Cullina LLP. He also served three two-year terms in the Connecticut Legislature,
one term in the House (1993-1995) followed by two terms in the Senate (1995-1999).
Mr. Nielsen graduated from Harvard College magna cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa. He
earned his law degree, cure laude, from Harvard Law School.
Steve Gable, Executive Vice President and Chief Technology Officer: Mr. Gable
joined Frontier in November 2012 as Senior Vice President and Chief Information
Officer. In April 2015, he became Executive Vice President and Chief Technology
Officer (CTO). Prior to Frontier, Mr. Gable was Executive Vice President/CTO of
Tribune Company. At the same time, he was President, Tribune Digital, with expanded
17 ?;
responsibility for the strategy and supporting technology that powered the company's
digital brands "latimes.com" and "chicagotribune.com."
From 2008 to 2010, he was Senior Vice President and CTO for Tribune Company,
responsible for all aspects of information technology systems for its TV and newspaper
operations.
Before this, he served as Vice President of Technology for Clear Channel Radio,
responsible for the technology strategy and direction of over 1,200 radio stations.
He earned a Bachelor's degree in Business Administration and a Master's degree in
Systems from Northwestern University
Scott Mispagel, Senior Vice President Network Planning and Engineering:. Scott is
the Senior Vice President of Technology Planning and Engineering at Frontier
Communications where has responsibility for developing, deploying and managing
Frontier's network technologies and architecture nation-wide. He has over 18 years of
telecommunications experience engineering and managing carrier and video networks.
Prior to Frontier, Scott held a similar position as the Vice President of Network Planning
and Engineering at Windstream Communications and Valor Telecom where he led all
Voice, Video and Data engineering efforts.
Scott Abbott, VP, Video Strateg3T and Sales: Scott is a 33 year cable
telecommunications industry veteran specializing in video content negotiation and
management of national cable satellite networks and broadcast television retransmission
consent agreements. He joined Frontier Communications in 2012 and is currently the
Video Content lead whose video portfolio is in excess of $1B annually. Scott provides
input and guidance on the overall corporate video and content strategy as Frontier grows
its video business. In addition to his direct responsibilities for negotiations, relationships
and management of all content matters, he has specific ownership of the large omnibus
content owner portfolios; Fox Cable Networks, CBS, NBCU, Viacom and Discovery,
etc. Scott guides compliance issues with various internal groups; Product, Settlements
and Legal to ensure contractual obligations are met. Most recently, Scott was the Content
lead and integration expert delivering ready -to -go at close of the video portfolio for
Frontier's acquisition of ATT's CT property in 2014 and the 1.2 MM Verizon acquisition
that closed in Q1 2016. Prior to joining Frontier, Scott worked at the National Cable
Television Cooperative for 14 years where, among other duties, he negotiated and
managed a video portfolio of more than $1B annually. As EVP, second in command, he
provided strategic oversight of the entire video portfolio in excess of $2B annually. He
also worked for several major programming networks including HBO, Disney and
NBC. Scott has a Bachelors and a Master's Degree in Telecommunications from
Michigan State University.
Jon Davis, Assistant Vice -President Information Technology: Jon is an experienced
video operations expert with 12 years of experience in 1PTV and video delivery
systems. He joined Frontier Communications in November 2015 to run and unify our
181 n
P ae
��w
video operations. Previously he was Head of Video Support and Managed Services for
Alcatel -Lucent and supported customers across the globe that had over 25 million end
user customers. Jon Ied the overhaul of Alcatel-Lucent's support and managed services
to create a streamlined, efficient best in class support organization that directly led to
successful service provider video rollouts year after year.
Peter Milhan, Assistant Vice -President of Video Product and Sales: Peter joined
Frontier in mid -2015 from Ericsson, where he was responsible for TV/Media portfolio
sales and business development. Previously he worked for Microsoft for 19 years,
joining Microsoft's Mediaroom division in 2005. His background with Mediaroom
includes video deployment, architecture, marketing and sales. Mediaroom was acquired
by Ericsson in 2013 and is the platform used by Frontier in Connecticut and future
market deployments. Mihan holds a degree in Mechanical Engineering from Vanderbilt
University.
Enrique Ruiz -Velasco, Director- Information Technology: Enrique is a technology
leader with over ten years of experience in the field of cable television and is a pioneer of
internet video streaming apps. He joined Frontier in 2015 and is currently responsible for
software applications and back -ends that power Frontier's TV customer experience.
Previously he worked at Verizon Communications as Director of Technology and where,
for ten years, he oversaw the software development and various systems that power the
FiOS TV service for 6 million video customers and 15 million set top boxes. In 2010 he
introduced video streaming to tablets and mobile devices as well as Apps for smart TV's
and game consoles.
Francie Leader, Director Content Strategy & Partnerships: Francie is a veteran with
over 30 years of experience in the cable telecommunications industry. She joined
Frontier in July 2010 as part of the Video Content team to manage linear content for 350+
channels of programming. She is directly responsible for negotiating national satellite
program carriage contracts, (ESPN/ABC/Disney, A&E, Scripps) including broadcast
retransmission consent agreements to capitalize on revenue opportunities and bandwidth
efficiencies. Francie directs all internal constituencies that intersect with video
programming content and also manages the NCTC relationship (National Cable
Television Cooperative) to ensure Frontier maximizes the benefits of its
membership. Prior to joining Frontier, Francie began her career in the cable industry in
franchising where she successfully franchised over 20 cities in Metropolitan Detroit for
cable television service via grassroots marketing efforts. From there, she represented
various national cable satellite networks, The Learning Channel, The Travel Channel,
TNN, CMT, WGN, etc. and drove revenue and distribution growth for those networks as
well as contributed to local and national promotional marketing campaigns to increase
Network value. Francie is a well-connected relationship builder and a creative,
resourceful deal -maker and catalyst for change.
(8) An identification of the municipalities in which the applicant either owns
or operates a cable communications system, directly or indirectly, or has
outstanding franchises for which no system has been built.
19 1 P a g e
Frontier (Citizens Telecommunications Company of Minnesota, LLC} has
filed applications seeking franchises in the cities of Cannon Falls, Delano and
Wyoming and Frontier is in the process of working with these cities to
establish cable franchise agreements. Frontier's Minnesota affiliate, Frontier
Communications of Minnesota, Inc. received cable franchise agreements in
September in the cities of Burnsville, Lakeville, Apple Vallee, Rosemount and
Farmington and began offering service in October. Frontier affiliates also
have franchise agreements and operated cable systems serving approximately
1.5 million subscribers in Washington, Oregon, California, Texas, Indiana,
Connecticut, North Carolina, South Carolina and Florida.
(9). Plans for financing the proposed system, which must indicate every
significant anticipated source of capital and significant limitations or
conditions with respect to the availability of the indicated sources of
capital. This information should include:
1. Current financial statement
Frontier's ultimate parent company is Frontier Communications Corporation. Frontier
Communications Corporation's most recent Form 10-K (along with all other SEC
filings) may be found here: http://investor.froutier.com/sec.cfm.
2. Proposed sources and uses of funds for the construction project
Frontier's parent company is Frontier Communications Corporation. Frontier
Communications Corporation is an S&P 500 company and is included in the Fortune
1000 list of America's largest corporations with reported fourth quarter 2015 revenue
of $1,413 million and operating income of $182 million. Frontier does not require
any unique or additional funding sources (i.e. special notes or bonds) in order to
deploy its Vantage TV service in this, or any other market.
3. Financial budgets for the next three (3) years
Please see response to Section I (4) below.
4. Documentation regarding the commitment of funds, and
As a publicly traded company, Frontier releases a very limited amount of forward-
looking information for the company as a whole, but it does not provide forward-
looking information at the individual market level because it could lead to incorrect or
inappropriate assumptions or conclusions by its current and potential investors regarding
the business as a whole. Given the extremely sensitive nature of the information
contained in the requested pro forma, Frontier cannot file this information as part of its
application.
201 Page
5. Any other information that applicant determines would be useful in
evaluating its financial qualifications.
Please see response to Section 1 (1) above.
(10). A statement of ownership detailing the corporate organization of the
applicant, if any, including the names and addresses of officers and directors and
the number of shares held by each officer or director, and intercompany
relationship, including the parent, subsidiary or affiliated company.
Citizens Telecon-in-iunications Company of Minnesota LLC operates as a subsidiary of
Frontier Communications Corporation.
Frontier Communications Corporations Board of Directors believes that the purpose of
corporate governance is to ensure that Frontier maximize stockholder value in a manner
consistent with legal requirements and the highest standards of integrity. The Board has
adopted and adheres to corporate governance practices which the Board and senior
management believe promote this purpose, are sound and represent best practices. Vire
continually review these governance practices, Delaware law (the state in which we are
incorporated), the rules and listing standards of the NASDAQ Exchange and SEC
regulations, as well as best practices suggested by recognized governance authorities.
Frontier's Board of Directors' Code of Business Conduct and Ethics reflects Frontier's
commitment to maintain a culture of integrity, honesty and accountability when dealing
with our business partners, our customers, our stockholders and each other. It is intended
to help us focus on areas of ethical risk, recognize and deal with ethical issues, and to
provide us with the resources and procedures. The code applies to all of Frontier's
directors, officers and employees, including those at Frontier's subsidiaries and affiliates.
Directors:
Pamela D. Reeve, Chairman
Leroy T. Barnes Jr., Director
Peter C.B. Bynoe, Director
Diana S. Ferguson, Director
Edward Fraioli, Director
Daniel J. McCarthy, Director
Virginia P. Ruesterholz, Director
Howard L. Schrott, Director
Larraine D. Segil, Director
Mark Shapiro, Director
21 Pa
Byron A. Wick, IH, Director
Officers:
Chief Executive Officer and President
Executive Vice President, External Affairs
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Executive Vice President. and Chief Custom. Office
Executive Vice President, Field Operations
Executive Vice President and Chief Technology Officer
Senior Vice President, General Counsel, Secretary
Executive Vice President and Chief People Officer
Daniel McCarthy
Kathleen Quinn Abernathy
Perley McBride
Cecilia K McKenney
John Lass
Steve Gable
Mark D. Nielsen
Kathleen Weslock
Contact information for the members of Frontier's Board of Directors and Management,
as well as their profiles, may be found at http//investor.frontier.com/directors.cf and
Frontier's Management's profiles found at http://investor.frontier.coni/manaaement.cfm.
For information concerning the number of shares held by each officer or director of
Frontier, please see Frontier Communications Corporation's most recent Form 10-K
(along with all other SEC filings) found at: htip://investor.frontier.com/sce.cfm.
(1.1.). A notation and explanation of omissions or other variations
with respect to the requirements of the proposal.
None at this time.
Jack Phil
Director -Government & External Affairs
Subscribed and sworn to before me
this �V- 2-4 i '?-C,((,f
t t
'A4
Notary public
My Commission Eft xpires:
MICHELLE :ANNSCHLItNotarMinMy Commiires
Jan 3
Exhibit A
23 1 P zg e
Vant�`
-
DURHAM,NC
By chanl. nom e and packoee,
2 4 1 P a Zg e
Loop jwg�n 0."',
Rowswor
3,07"
As an: now
AWF con,
�ln
Now sm"-,
of 60 UMMOW hi
vy'Uphy anvwDimp 1017 rann, n too your ;Qjw-vO§w rs Onger vsw ve
Zum boo AV OMMAg RM&MW one
MnWAMO,
der.
,D ta Frosntie�rxo-n v--
c'n
ZWOMIMMn" Mqr=ze=&=n MO
25 1 ," a g e
INI
Son
WAS";
wM7.
-n��. i-0-
Bw
no not -
on
SZr
1 2
?
'47
IN
rti
%Isms
0
WAS";
wM7.
-n��. i-0-
Bw
no not -
on
SZr
f4omvlil
25 1 :1 a g e
1 2
?
'47
IN
f4omvlil
25 1 :1 a g e
1 2
'47
IN
sih
M.7.
own up,
ow "
MAC Am nm So"
Fusco QW.,
A=
Wun
Wet cnsvjers 2,1/j at Frontierxom/Wpcenter -or caP; 1,800.921.8101,
ova my n thnnow t nmn z it Wa=�:q'n,
27 [ P a g e
Exhibit B
28 a', Z�ln, e
Vantage T
L=me:i€b1e 1 4 � atl ri. `:tee and s,- d 7�
sh--w:x m tt C2 xn Tnewc' m mv f ,'-vvlth
x:
+
Lm—am ci=el C =—e and sG�>- i � «' ��4i3 C s s?ll� Gf w g� :?i'c � pTq=--r, i Ra
+ See U-- To M. ` iii = at Qmce -'l-W1.13
3
Put: ... --ZZ Ylc-rwxA, Re"s?:1:.. !.,ve m, h o�'; C az to 9 TVs m ti'a#z-li=,—
► a {
genceration . ter :, c&d s -,=h & ,vius Mame
iStd o ar 3Cc i .our n r'Ms L:`e TUji&v O' be' ;z and D
inTo ffiz
Call! 1 S-481,05- 6 teat Uv
29 1 P a, Z e
TI aking innovation to the next level
an r, . 1, iDn'4;st. 1. s;?.<:.er zjU- r %,11: 01' n. rl . r,
'I:,.v: ,I g "t u: p-r;i,7p ntC! rt ;C:bc'n n�-?#..'"'`a."lY:
Ef-,` ; _.v.: "•i a;iJ�,� .,. ,�!'.:i..�i�i 1 -.-C oa; v and m tiiw h,- Iarc en- 14 .
_:._., ,auta,,ew.dIza&ft"7 On Na..w- fle)EL mnt
200+.
�Eyaxis^i��s
i w }^3,.<✓eog a.p!- €.r. CrTanrifr .. and -N-P,-r
',, Well as C"i `r`ti fa7m:'.€J
Vantage' TV Extreme
w 1l..1 H5 t 1.: ma , Fox S; pc a n p'n
�;A,n , -. _ t_ a_ mar �: . TV &z� �Es .p_
t 112
; t'1.m. a2w`?s?~. ,..:d'nm. s,:'.
30 1 Page
VantageTV
ente.ria,nmenT pnaWanmyno at vourAqubps. Cr-;StA
YaVne TV pw"ns Se Eem in 7V ft-ir'_,. S
c:g Z'nL-i Lrz : t W -,'z F�.v.,m_-S. _t.
O�rmo5L
Chasms, FOY Spods and Mon.
—am q we map Amoy how S!"iws M.'any C
Fz,- st-E�z77��
mv�"-:fts Z's _naw_ ana walaws I vic-ss as pal C� , 7,'
sm he Wmay TV wnw- cn yzx S- n4e'-E` rr".Z-B 3
-ar ,v;'
V� "n,
z mams we a7%)(
MW M��ell
I '- F=Vr�; 'u_Ll;n'a Fw Tv tz
;Army DvF zod my aa=vws_.= Z��fi. .rz="Ss >uT 1, ar!"� f�Ls7
a ��' -v-...v3.- 7,14,
a 1 Z.--l.,e-cLzran, a I--'V,�Mg- E, U2y-- r�.s A
on"" WNW
te'=-z'37,1- Z.lc SEV".
7-' �aai-tvex 'w;n='.v u= a" a7 '? f -T -.ET
, rf=' �i5LT
311 Page