|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Recent Articles
Search
Login Daily Archive
By Month |
Cable Franchise Meeting in Des Moines
Cable Franchise Meeting in Des Moines
By Stevie Converse Join us at our forum Saturday March 10 at the Clive City Hall from 10 a.m. to noon. Proposed Bill Would Eliminate Cable Franchise Fees Des Moines Register March 6, 2007 By Rep. Libby Jacobs As a member of the House Commerce Committee, I have the opportunity to consider legislation that provides regulation for certain aspects of the business community. One such issue is cable franchise law, and it appears this issue will face us again during this session. Reforming the way Americans get their cable has been a long-discussed idea. Across the nation, states have moved to provide more competition as technology grants different industries the ability to distribute video programming. Going into 2007, 11 states had already approved some form of cable franchise reform legislation. Those states are Arizona, California, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, New Jersey, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia. This issue had been considered by Congress last year, with the House overwhelmingly approving a bill to create a national franchising structure. So what does the proposed Iowa bill do? Under current Iowa law, Iowa Code section 364.2, each city has the authority to grant a franchise for cable television service. The proposed bill would dramatically change this process. The bill would require a person or company providing cable service or video service to apply to the state or a municipality for a "certificate of franchise authority" to provide cable in a specified service area. Companies already providing cable under a franchise agreement entered into prior to July 1, 2007, are not required to apply for a certificate of franchise authority until the agreement expires or is terminated. When a company applies for a certificate of franchise agreement under the new arrangement, they would have to comply with a number of requirements. These requirements include: -Describing the area that the company plans on providing service to -Agreeing to comply with federal requirements for cable service -Agreeing to comply with local right of way ordinances and -The address of the principal place of business In what might be the most controversial aspect of the bill, the new law would put strict limits on the power of cities over holders of the certificates. Code section 364.2 relating to the powers of cities to grant franchises, would not apply to a holder of a certificate of franchise authority under the bill. Cities also would no longer be able to get certain conditions inserted into the franchise agreements. Among the things cities would no longer be able to require of a holder of the certificate are: - Mandatory build-out provisions - Requiring the company to be granted a separate franchise from the city - Paying fees that are not permitted under the bill and - Requiring other conditions not mentioned in the bill If a cable-service provider receives a certificate of franchise authority and chooses to enter into a market, they would be required to give that city 30 days notice of their intentions. If a company enters into a market where there is an existing franchise, the company holding the franchise would have the opportunity to renegotiate the agreement with the city so that both companies are operating under similar conditions. Proponents of the bill will state that the main focus of this effort is to provide competition and reduce the cost to the consumer. According to their data, the national rate of inflation has increased 12 percent since 2002 and median family income has risen 11 percent in the same time period. Cable rates in Iowa for this time frame have risen by 36 percent. I would expect cable providers in the state will put up strong opposition to the bill. Cities, which fear the loss of revenue from franchise fees and the loss of control over the service in their cities, will also have issues. One of their main concerns will be the build-out of services to underserved areas. Since this bill has ramifications for consumers I expect quite a bit of debate on this topic. Join us at our forum Saturday March 10 at the Clive City Hall from 10 a.m. to noon.
Keywords:
media
Comments
Re: Cable Franchise Meeting in Des Moines
by
Mike Brau
on Thu 08 Mar 2007 11:45 AM CST | Permanent Link
Readers should be aware that the forum mention in Rep. Jacobs article is not specifically about cable TV but will cover a wide range of issues, according to Rep. Jacobs. Also, the bill SF 368, does not eliminate franchise fees. I will be providing information about what the bill does propose and how you can help ensure fair cable TV compeition in the coming days. In the mean time you can visit:
www.iowaleague.org and click on the video franchising link on the daily dozen for a summary of SSB 1206, the predessor to SF 368 and essentially the same bill. Mike.... Re: Cable Franchise Meeting in Des Moines
by
Fat Cat
on Wed 11 Apr 2007 04:11 PM CDT | Permanent Link
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS “PROTECT THE INCUMBANT’S INVESTMENT”
“By managing the deployment as we do, we protect the incumbent’s investment in existing infrastructure, we protect the public from unnecessary disruption to private business and to their safe use and enjoyment of the public right-of-way, and we ensure that new entrants are provided with unfettered access in a reasonable and timely fashion, while ensuring that they comply with all safety requirements. This system has worked well for cable, traditional phone and other providers for many years, and is necessarily performed by the local government.” – Arvada Colorado Mayor Ken Fellman’s Testimony before the U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet Wednesday, April 27, 2005 (Fellman is also a cable franchise lawyer and VP at NATOA) "PROTECT THE INCUMBANT'S INVESTMENT", YOU BET THEY DO, SO WELL THAT YOUR CABLE BILL SHOT UP 93% INCREASE (1995-2005 FCC source) WHY DO THEY JUST JACK UP THE TV BILL Comcast is raising the price of the average metro-area customer's cable bill by 6.9 percent starting March 1, yet they held the line on prices for high-speed Internet and phone services. – RMNews January 2007 THEY “PROTECT THE INCUMBENT’S INVESTMENT”, THAT MEANS NO COMPETITION. RESULT FOR YOU IS A 93% INCREASE IN YOUR CABLE BILL. Comcast Profit Triples - Reuters, 2/1/07 How’s that for a double whammy – one week after Comcast announces a 7% increase for its captive cable customers, the cable monopoly announced record profits. And as they rake in the cash and their executives get richer and richer, they fight every effort by their employees to get fair wages and benefits – all the while milking customers for everything they got! As American Rights At Work found in a special report, wages for Comcast’s cable techs are a third lower than wages in traditional land-line telephone companies like at&t, where unions represent about three-fourths of the workers. Benefits are less generous and jobs are less secure, with annual turnover about twice as high. Worse, Comcast fights tooth-and-nail to keep unions out, or decertify them once their in. Northwest Labor Press reports of a 37-page Comcast anti-union management training document that stated: “Comcast does not feel union representation is in the best interest of its employees, customers and shareholders.” But it gets worse. Comcast is waging war against union employees – literally. During the AT&T days, unions made headway organizing in a handful of cities, including Beaverton, OR. But once Comcast acquired AT&T’s cable systems they began to systematically dismantle union shops…and show union workers the door. In Beaverton, Comcast vice president Curt Henninger made the company’s intentions crystal clear when he told commissioners in videotaped testimony: “I will tell you we are going to wage a war to decertify the CWA.” Cable is anti-consumer & anti-competition Legislators must send them the message that their days of pillaging customers and exploiting workers are over. |
Blog for Iowa
BFIA Writer's Guidelines We welcome Submissions Iowa Sites Child & Family Policy Center - Iowa Genetic Engineering Action Network Iowa Citizen Action Network - ICAN Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement Iowa Federation of Labor, AFL-CIO Iowa Physicians for Social Responsibility Iowa Public Interest Research Group Midwest Environmental Justice Advocates Progressive Action for the Common Good Progressive Coalition of Central Iowa QCAD (Quad-Citians Affirming Diversity - GLBT) Iowa Blogs The Deprogrammer (Quad Cities) Iowa True Blue (Gordon Fischer's Blog) Iowa Voters for Open and Transparent Elections Political FalloutFight Iowa Rapid Response Network - Iowa
Iowans for Better Local TV
Air America
The Counterpoint
National FAIR: Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting
Media Matters for America
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||