According to Edmonton city Councillor Kerry Diotte (11th Ward), Rogers Communications told him the company needs up to 1,000 new cell towers in the Edmonton area alone to meet the growing demands from cell phone, smartphone, and tablet owners who are putting pressure on the company’s wireless network.  That’s a number Rogers disputes, but regardless of how many towers eventually get erected, few residents want to live next door to one.

Diotte is caught in the middle of a major, some say inevitable, fight between the telecommunications giant and homeowners living near the proposed home of a new 25 meter cell tower that is as tall as an eight story building.

Diotte

Diotte attended a heated public meeting Tuesday evening between residents of Hazeldean and Rogers officials over plans to place the new monopole antenna right in the center of town in a residential district.

“I will absolutely bring everything that I can to try to stop this,” Diotte told CTV Edmonton. “It’s the will of the people in this ward.”

CBC Radio in Edmonton explored the cell tower controversy in Hazeldean back in July when Rogers first announced plans to erect an 82 foot monopole cell tower at a local senior’s center. Rogers says increased demand requires the company to place new cell towers in residential neighborhoods to meet demand. July 14, 2011. (7 minutes)
You must remain on this page to hear the clip, or you can download the clip and listen later.

Rogers officials found themselves shouted down at times during Tuesday evening’s meeting, as dozens of residents complained the new tower would reduce property values and could pose a health risk.  At least one resident wants Rogers to pay moving expenses to allow her family to leave the area before the tower is built.

Hazeldean residents say a better spot for the antenna would be in an industrial neighborhood a few blocks away.

Rogers Communications says wireless data demands are growing exponentially, and constructing new cell towers improves reception, data speeds, and divides up the increasing load of data traffic on their network.  Unfortunately, cell towers are increasingly required where customers live, work… and use their wireless devices.

For the immediate future, Rogers has plans for 20 new cell towers in Edmonton, a number dwarfed by their competitor Telus, which has plans to install 80 new cell towers across the province this year.

Industry Canada has the final say on whether Rogers will ultimately win approval to place its proposed cell tower in Hazeldean.

[flv width=”480″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/CTV Edmonton Residents Upset Over Rogers Cell Tower 9-21-11.flv[/flv]

CTV Edmonton covered the Hazeldean cell phone tower controversy and spoke with a city councilman who shared Rogers told him they would need another 1,000 cell phone towers in the Edmonton area alone to meet growing demands for cell phone users.  (5 minutes)

Burlington Telecom offices in Burlington, Vt.

Citibank has sued the city of Burlington, Vt., and the city’s legal firm demanding municipal-provider Burlington Telecom hand back their fiber-to-the-home network and pay damages in excess of $33.5 million dollars.

Citicapital, which owns the equipment that operates Burlington’s community network, says Burlington Telecom has defaulted on their lease payments, and has demanded the city “de-install and return” the fiber network — everything from set-top boxes and in-home wiring to ripping fiber cables directly out of underground vaults and off telephone poles.  Citi also wants BT’s vehicle fleet turned over to them.

Burlington Telecom has been a poster child of poorly-planned and implemented city-owned broadband, and a series of financial and operational scandals led state investigators to consider criminal charges for misappropriating taxpayer funds to sustain the network.  While prosecutors ultimately declined to file charges, the resulting scandal in the mayor’s office has left the city with a network it stopped paying for, and the potential much of it could be auctioned off to the highest bidder, which could turn out to be Comcast or FairPoint Communications.

Citicapital claims the city has not made a direct lease payment since November, 2009.  The bank had been drawing down funds deposited in a special escrow account the city was required to open as part of the lease-to-purchase transaction.  That account has also run dry, and the bank claims it has received no payments since May of 2010.

Citibank’s attorneys filed suit:

“BT continues to use Citibank’s equipment and vehicles unlawfully and without its permission and continues to depreciate the value of Citibank’s assets in order to generate revenue for itself,” the bank’s attorneys charged.

Citibank wants a judge to award punitive damages in excess of its remaining loan balance “because Burlington’s intentional breach of the agreement amounts to a reckless or wanton disregard of Citibank’s clear contractual rights.”

“It’s ironic that a bank that received a taxpayer-financed multi-hundred-billion-dollar bailout now wants taxpayers in Burlington to pay them excessive damages,” shares Stop the Cap! reader and Burlington resident Joe, who shared the story with us.  “I think we should be calling it even after three years of big bank bailouts.”

The lawsuit has city residents worried because attorney fees, and any resulting damages or settlement agreement with the bank, will likely run well into the millions of dollars.  Every month the city remains in arrears, Citibank’s agreement calls for at least $235,000 in missed payment fees and interest.  Taxpayers will likely cover most, if not all of that amount.

“I don’t think anybody should be surprised,” City Councilor Paul Decelles, R-Ward 7 told the Burlington Free-Press. “I always believed this day was going to come. Now we have enormous mess on our hands.”

Citibank wants their fiber back.

Christopher Mitchell from Community Broadband Networks notes Burlington Telecom was an aberration in a country with many successful community-owned broadband networks.

“We have watched in dismay as Burlington Telecom transitioned over the past four years from a model community network to the worst case scenario,” Mitchell wrote on the group’s blog. “This situation proves only that community networks can suffer from bad management in some of the many ways private telecom companies can suffer from bad management (resulting in anything from bankruptcy to prison).”

“Communities can learn lessons from Burlington’s situation — chief among them that transparency is important,” Mitchell observed. “As with other public enterprise funds, the operation should be regularly audited and oversight must be in place to catch errors early, when corrections are easier and less costly.”

Among Burlington Telecom’s problems included overpriced, uncompetitive broadband service that never took full advantage of fiber’s speed and versatility.  Earlier news accounts included speculation BT had trouble securing sufficient connectivity with a backbone provider to sustain faster speeds, but it left the company at a competitive disadvantage against incumbent cable operator Comcast.  Burlington Telecom also failed repeatedly to build community support to establish a firewall against frequent political shots fired at the network as it became a partisan hot potato.

The city promises a “vigorous defense” against the lawsuit, and observers suspect a judge will not order the city to shut the network down, because it would cease the only revenue stream the company generates that could be used to pay a negotiated settlement with the bank.

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WCAX Burlington Citibank Sues BT 9-20-11.mp4[/flv]

WCAX in Burlington explores how much of a case Citibank has in its lawsuit against the city and its attorneys over Burlington Telecom.  (4 minutes)

A Tampa woman claims that a cable installer who engaged in alleged inappropriate sexual conduct has left her traumatized for life, and she may end up moving to cope with the bad memories that she cannot escape.

Katelyn Breadmore broke her silence Tuesday in an exclusive interview with WWSB-TV in Sarasota-Bradenton, Fla.

Breadmore told the station she has trouble sleeping at night and dreams that the installer is hiding in her closet.

Since Stop the Cap! originally reported this story, new facts have come to light:

Comcast has released a statement indicating the accused installer, Shane Wheatley, is not a Comcast employee.  He is a contractor working for FTS Communications, a third party company hired by Comcast to handle installations and other customer service work.

“We are appalled by the alleged behavior of Mr. Wheatley and can confirm that he is no longer working on any Comcast accounts. Comcast is prepared to cooperate fully with authorities in their investigation if asked,” said Bill Ferry, Regional Vice President of Government Affairs, Comcast Cable.

The Sarasota County’s Sheriff Office also reported Wheatley was charged after a lengthy investigation which included at least one failed lie detector test — a test Wheatley demanded.

A trial date for Wheatley has not yet been announced.

[flv width=”360″ height=”290″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WWSB Tampa Victim speaks about cable man’s lewd behavior 9-20-11.mp4[/flv]

WWSB aired this exclusive interview with a Tampa-area woman who says a contractor working for Comcast left her traumatized for life.  (3 minutes)

A similar group in Baltimore placed bus advertising complaining about the lack of FiOS in that city in 2010.

A Buffalo group backed by the Communications Workers of America is demanding a federal and state investigation into whether Verizon is intentionally bypassing urban, ethnic, and economically-challenged neighborhoods for its fiber-to-the-home service, FiOS.

The Don’t Bypass Buffalo Coalition has stepped up the pressure on Verizon with a new billboard campaign that accuses the company of exacerbating the digital divide in western New York.

“The Verizon FiOS deployment in Buffalo is a corporate redlining scheme undermining the City of Buffalo with intentional discriminate design,” said Coalition member Jim Anderson.

Verizon suspended FiOS deployment during the height of the economic downturn, leaving some cities with a patchwork of FiOS service in some locations, traditional copper phone wiring in others.  In Buffalo, suburban areas that quickly approved the FiOS network with few franchise pre-conditions were among the first to get the fiber network.  Other suburbs, and the city of Buffalo itself, were effectively bypassed when franchise agreements and negotiations were left uncompleted at the time Verizon suspended further expansion.

The Coalition released a letter signed by two dozen local officials and community leaders that suggests Verizon may be up to something more sinister, suggesting possible racial and economic discrimination by the company over its choice of areas to deploy the service.

Coalition members note that in the 10 suburbs where Verizon offers FiOS, the proportion of African American residents in those areas is more than 13 times lower than it is in the city of Buffalo, and the Hispanic population is nearly four times lower. Even more telling, the Coalition writes, is that the network infrastructure is already in place to deploy FiOS within Buffalo city limits.

The Coalition is among the most vocal among local pressure groups Verizon has faced since its decision to suspend further FiOS expansion.  Other cities, especially Baltimore, have their own coalitions to complain about Verizon’s apparent lack of interest in restarting fiber projects.

Verizon rejects most of the charges the Buffalo-based Coalition has made.

“As Verizon has told the Coalition and local officials countless times, our focus these days is meeting the buildout commitments in the 182 municipalities across the state where we currently have TV franchises,” a Verizon spokesman said in a statement. “The allegation of discrimination with respect to FiOS deployment is just plain wrong…period. The coalition simply needs to look at other FiOS deployment areas in New York and other states to see those allegations are off base.”

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Is Verizon Redlining Baltimore City 3-16-10.flv[/flv]

In March, 2010 Progressive Maryland held a public rally protesting the lack of Verizon FiOS in Baltimore.  (8 minutes)

The Florida Attorney General’s office is taking notice of an increasing number of consumer complaints regarding service providers auto-renewing contracts for subscription services without notifying customers in advance.

Among the worst offenders is satellite radio and Internet streaming provider SiriusXM, which some consumers say is notorious for shady billing and collection policies.

SiriusXM provides free trial service in any new and most used vehicles where receivers come pre-installed.  Most dealers activate the service trial for consumers, and pass along the name, address, and phone number of the individual buying the vehicle.  Within two weeks, SiriusXM will begin mailing customers invitations to convert their free trial into a paid subscription, usually with a discount offer.  Consumers who sign up for promotions like SiriusXM’s “5 months for $25” are invited to charge their subscription with a major credit card over the phone.

That’s where the trouble starts, several customers report.

Unbeknownst to them, SiriusXM will “automatically renew” active subscriptions with a credit card on file for “the convenience of the customer,” once the promotion expires.  Customers usually find out when they find a substantial charge on their credit card, often representing the next quarter of service, billed at the regular price of $12.95 per month, plus a “music royalty fee” and any additional state and local taxes.

Some subscribers find even bigger headaches when taking advantage of discounted annual rates that als0 auto-renew.  If the subscriber isn’t automatically billed for the renewal on a credit card, they will often find a bill in the mail, along with a fee for mailing the unexpected invoice.

Getting SiriusXM to cancel surprise bills can become a major headache, and has led to thousands of complaints with the Better Business Bureau.  SiriusXM’s overseas call centers can leave customers waiting on hold for more than half an hour, only to be connected with an English-challenged, uncooperative customer service agent that refuses to waive unexpected charges.

To be fair, SiriusXM’s subscriber agreement provides warnings that canceling service requires more than ignoring a billing statement.  Service will continue (along with billing) for up to three months before the service is suspended and the account is turned over to collections.  Consumers should not consider -any- SiriusXM plan or promotion a one-time, non-renewing offer.  Every promotion we’ve encountered will end with an account converted to regular price service.

Florida state law requires providers like cable, satellite, and phone companies to warn subscribers at least 30 days in advance of any scheduled automatic renewal of a contract.  The law gives consumers time to opt out before they find themselves committed to a service they no longer want.  But many customers accuse SiriusXM of ignoring the law, and the first indication the radio service has been renewed arrives in the form of a bill.

Coping with the third party collection agency SiriusXM uses can be even more difficult than dealing with the company directly, according to several complaints.

Customers who have filed complaints with the BBB report the company usually bends to customer demands at that point.

We have had some long-standing experience dealing with SiriusXM customer service ourselves.  Here are some tips:

1. Don’t give them a credit card number over the phone.  Tell them to send you a bill in the mail and you will write them a check.  You can make a “one-time” credit card payment on their website that has never resulted in auto-payments for us.  Most of the automatically-renewing charges we’ve encountered came from overzealous telephone customer service representatives enrolling us in the “auto-payment” service without our authorization.
2. You almost never have to pay regular SiriusXM prices.  Their retention offers can be renewed over and over again just by telling them the regular price is too high.  But retention plans do not include “best of” channels from the sister provider (Sirius customers can get certain XM channels and vice-versa).  Routine promotions these days are 5 months for $25 or a year for $77 if you don’t want the hassle of calling every five months to renew your retention deal.  Either is much better than $12.95 a month.
3. Although getting “late fees” and “paper billing fees” waived is easy, getting the bill-padding “music royalty fee” forgiven is not.  But you can try.
4. The “lifetime” promotion only covers the life of the receiver (or your automobile).  It’s not a good deal.
5. When you sign up for a promotion, use a calendar application to start reminding you 30 days before it expires so you can call and extend it.  If your promotion expires, you will be billed regular prices and it is a major hassle to get them to waive or discount those charges in-between promotions.
6. If you want to listen to the music channels on offer from SiriusXM these days, you can sample them for free using their streaming service.

SiriusXM recently announced they intend to raise their monthly subscription price to $14.49 in January — just another reason not to pay the regular price.

[flv width=”360″ height=”290″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WFTS Tampa Satellite radio irks some customers 9-19-11.mp4[/flv]

WFTS-TV in Tampa reports on increasing complaints about SiriusXM’s billing and auto-renewal practices.  (4 minutes)