My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Res 2000-045
San-Marcos
>
City Clerk
>
03 Resolutions
>
2000 s
>
2000
>
Res 2000-045
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/19/2006 4:04:23 PM
Creation date
7/19/2006 4:02:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
City Clerk - Document
Resolutions
City Clerk - Type
Agreement
Number
2000-45
Date
2/28/2000
Volume Book
140
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
79
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />99.09 <br />Subject: <br /> <br />FCC's Rule & Order 94-102, Phase I & II. It was stated in response to <br />regional councils that PSAPs under the jurisdiction of the ACSEC should <br />not respond to this or any other solicitation of wireless service requests <br />until the Commission has completed its study of this important issue. <br /> <br />Wireless distributions and fluctuations <br /> <br />Reference: ACSEC response <br /> <br />Source: <br /> <br />Policy: <br /> <br />99.10 <br />Subject: <br /> <br />April 24, 1998 memorandum on wireless distributions <br /> <br />Questions were raised regarding fluctuations in the 9-1-1 wireless <br />service fee distribution. It was noted that trends to date, the statewide <br />deposits for December and January of 1998 were hiqher than what was <br />expected from the normal deposits. It was stated that it was primarily <br />caused by the transition between the Telcos remitting directly to the <br />different 9-1-1 entities and remitting to the State Treasury. The time <br />lapse caused a bulk of deposits during December and January to "catch <br />up" for the prior months (September through November). <br /> <br />It was further stated that timing issues may explain the remaining other <br />variances. Wireless fees were short in February due to the fact that the <br />Telcos had an additional 2-3 days to remit while still remaining within the <br />30-day deadline. This caused service fees to be remitted in March <br />instead of February. March's total deposit was also low because of a <br />$550,000 deposit that came in April 1, but should have been made in <br />March. In closing it was noted that ACSEC anticipates receiving <br />steadier, more predictable deposits in the next few months. <br /> <br />Use of wireless fee distribution <br /> <br />Reference: ACSEC policy <br /> <br />Source: <br /> <br />Policy: <br /> <br />August 27, 1997 letter to regional council <br /> <br />ACSEC has separated the wireless revenues from projected service fee <br />remittance so that appropriate wireless projects and activities can be <br />funded. Because of the nature of the legislation passed, ACSEC must <br />comply with the direction provided by the legislature and clearly identify <br />wireless projects. <br /> <br />ACSEC Policies and Procedures <br />February 1999 <br /> <br />Page 34 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.