Home » community networks » Recent Articles:

An Analysis of HB 1252: ‘The Entrenched Monopoly Protection Act’

j0189616The first fallacy of HB 1252 can be found in its name, Level Playing Field/Cities/Service Providers. Would a level playing field exist where companies like Time Warner Cable and Embarq are exempted from the rules enacted in the bill, because they are private providers? No. The bill states very clearly all of the restrictions are on municipalities, all of the freedom from the restrictions go to private industry. This bill does not create a level playing field – it empties it of municipal projects leaving Time Warner and Embarq exactly where they are today, enjoying the fruits of a duopoly.

What do you think Time Warner would do if they had to follow these rules and regulations? They would fight the bill as anti-competitive, which it is. HB 1252 does one thing very well – preserves the de-facto duopoly for the companies that already provide service.

Sure, you could argue that municipalities could still technically set up service under this bill. But, what taxpayer is going to allow their City Council or County Commission to borrow money like a private business? Prohibited from consideration are bond initiatives and grants from foundations, as well as access to the $4.7 billion in stimulus money from the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA), to provide state of the art broadband to underserved parts of our country. So one could say that HB 1252 is prohibiting the Reinvestment and Recovery of North Carolina’s economy.

Congress’ own studies and research shows ARRA funding is critical to the deployment of rural broadband, which simply will exist in no other way. In this part of the country, outside of the largest cities we are are all underserved by cable and telephone broadband providers. What community wouldn’t if the incumbent providers capped and limited usage at radically higher prices.

… Continue Reading

North Carolina Denied Broadband Development Funds If Anti-Consumer Bill Passed

Phillip Dampier May 4, 2009 Community Networks, Public Policy & Gov't 1 Comment

get the factsThe cable and telephone industry only answers to their own interests and to those of their stockholders.  So it’s no surprise they have little interest in the collateral damage that will be done across the state of North Carolina when bad bills become worse law.  If it means forestalling competition, and remaining the sole provider of lackluster service to communities that need something better, so be it.  In rural communities where broadband is simply not feasible to provide under existing business models, the only opportunity for ANY network to be built comes from the same principles that assured homes of electricity and telephone customers in the smallest corners of the state equitable access to service, an equity of access fund.

That’s why it’s now up to the citizens of North Carolina to vehemently oppose SB 1004 and HB 1252, companion bills designed to kill competition and leave smaller communities and cities from one end of the state to the other in a broadband backwater, where they’ll provide what they think is good enough for you to have, if you have it at all.

Important Questions & Answers North Carolina Needs to Consider

Why does the industry want local governments subject to the requirements of SB1004 and HB1252? So local broadband networks don’t develop. Industry spokesmen say if local governments want to enter the broadband business they must play by the same rules as the private sector. But these large companies are not subject to the rules created by SB1004. SB1004 saddles local governments – even those who want to partner with private sector companies — with unique, new rules — numerous reporting, auditing, accounting, and rate setting requirements that the industry knows will stop these deployments in their tracks.

Will the industry be subject to the “level playing field” requirements of SB1004 and HB1252? No. The industry would cease providing broadband services if they were subject to the requirements of SB1004, due to the enormous burdens it places on broadband service providers. The industry will not be subject to SB1004’s prohibition on cross-subsidies, its rate setting provisions, its annual PUC reporting, auditing or public disclosure requirements. The purpose of S1004 is to slant the competitive playing field in the industry’s direction and prevent local communities from providing their residents the broadband they need.

Is it true that SB1004 and HB1252 prevent local communities from applying for the new $4.7 Billion in Federal Broadband Stimulus Grants? Yes. Section 160A-329 (b)(3) of SB1004 prohibits municipalities who provide broadband services to the public for a fee from using any revenues to build or operate the system other than those generated by the system. This means municipalities would not be able to use any federal grant money to offset the cost of building or operating their voice, video or data systems. This is in complete contradiction to Pres. Obama’s recent Financial Stimulus (ARRA) law which makes state and local governments, not the private sector, directly eligible for billions in low cost or free capital so they can provide affordable, state-of-the art broadband services to underserved areas of our country.

Are the cable and telephone industry really interested in the welfare of taxpayers? No. The industry does not care about local taxpayers; they care about profit. The telephone and cable industries want you to believe that local broadband systems will fail, and that they do not want local taxpayers to be harmed. Local broadband systems are not failing and that is why the industry is trying to stop them. Think about it. If local broadband systems were failing, the industry has nothing to worry about. If North Carolina’s largest cable provider cared about taxpayer money, then why did it raise rates 5-50% this year in all communities except those where municipalities were providing competitive cable service? Our State’s largest communication companies have maximized their profits instead of upgrading their networks to globally competitive levels. That is why Congress has now stepped in to stimulate municipalities to deploy needed broadband infrastructure. Congress has decided that taxpayer money should be used to build this broadband infrastructure so critical to our economic competitiveness.

How do we ensure public accountability on public broadband projects without SB1004 and HB1252? Local governments are subject to numerous state and local laws requiring public accountability and scrutiny of infrastructure projects. The General Assembly established The Local Government Commission to exercise fiscal control over, and approve all, local government public enterprise projects. Local laws require local governments to hold public hearings. All public documents are subject to public disclosure (“sunshine laws”), a device actually used by the industry to obtain access to municipal financial and strategic planning decisions. Federal grants carry extensive accountability requirements. In contrast, North Carolina’s telephone and cable companies are not required to reveal their finance and marketing decisions to anyone. The industry is not accountable to the public – they are accountable to short-term profits. Local governments are accountable to the public –their decisions are driven by the need to improve the quality of life, and the environment for local businesses.

Will SB1004 and HB1252 harm public safety networks? Yes. Public Safety networks are typically regional communications networks incorporating Counties, Cities, and Towns, all who pay-in to operate the network and who receive federal grants to subsidize operational costs. Because these networks are fee-based, they would be subject to SB1004 and shut down by its restrictive rate-setting and financing requirements, where only revenues generated directly from the system could be used to operate them. Public safety systems would no longer be eligible for Homeland, ARRA or Farm Bill grants.

Questions and Answers Courtesy of Seatoa.com

North Carolina HB 1252: The Language

Jay Ovittore May 4, 2009 Community Networks, Public Policy & Gov't Comments Off on North Carolina HB 1252: The Language

nc-legHere is the text of House Bill 1252 as approved by the Committee on Science and Technology on 4/23/09.

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED AN ACT TO REGULATE COMPETITION BETWEEN LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND PRIVATE BUSINESS BY REQUIRING CITIES THAT PROVIDE COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC TO COMPLY WITH LAWS APPLICABLE TO PRIVATE PROVIDERS, TO ESTABLISH SEPARATE ENTERPRISE FUNDS, TO NOT CROSS-SUBSIDIZE COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE WITH OTHER GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS, TO IMPUTE THE COSTS THAT WOULD BE INCURRED BY PRIVATE PROVIDERS, TO ANNUALLY REMIT TO THE CITY’S GENERAL FUND THE COSTS THAT WOULD BE INCURRED BY PRIVATE PROVIDERS, AND TO PREPARE AN ANNUAL AUDIT OF COMPETITIVE ACTIVITIES.

The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts:
Article 16 of Chapter 160A of the General Statutes is amended by adding a new section to read as follows:

… Continue Reading

Rep. Ty Harrell – Big Cable’s BFF Admits He Found a “Hornet’s Nest” – Gets Stung Anyway

Your ship's captain for a catastrophic anti-consumer cruise sponsored by Time Warner

Your ship's captain for a catastrophic anti-consumer cruise sponsored by Time Warner

Representative Harrell, we honestly cannot understand your surprise over the outrage and backlash that came after you handcrafted, on spec from Time Warner and its lobbying lawyers, an incredibly anti-consumer, anti-competitive, nightmare of a piece of legislation designed to destroy municipal broadband across the state of North Carolina.

Rep. Ty Harrell (D-NC), who normally considers himself a progressive Democrat, has so bumbled his way through this entire affair, he’s managed to end up on the same side as the ultra-big-corporate friendly Americans for Prosperity, which is now war-dialing its way through North Carolina with push polls and fear-monger phone messages.  If that doesn’t sound alarm bells that something isn’t right, what will?  He admits he didn’t realize North Carolina has been through this anti-consumer nonsense before.  In 2007, largely the same bill was bought and paid for by big telecom special interests, but failed to pass after elected officials realized it would antagonize their constituents into voting for anyone but them in the next election.  No kidding.

Harrell said he introduced the legislation, which amazingly channels industry wishes word for word, because ‘Time Warner approached him and asked for it,’ and even worse:

Opponents suggested a study bill, but Harrell says the industry representatives refused to consider it. “Having gone through those battles last time, the proponents of this bill were basically saying, ‘We’ve gone down that road before and we want to have it heard in committee. I said, ‘OK, since my name is on it and you’re in my district.’”

Time Warner evidently has direct access to the Ty Harrell’s Legislation Hotline, because when consumers call asking for protection from sky high rate hikes and municipal broadband competition, the only question from his office apparently is, “how did you get this number?”

Our conservative readers here get it. They know the best way to fight monopolies is to promote competition, which this bill certainly does not. Our progressive readers here get it. They know that an unregulated duopoly of providers (or monopoly in many areas) will deliver the slow service at high prices, so when private companies aren’t interested in delivering, their own community should step up and provide better service.  Your bill trashes the dreams and hopes of both by making competition impractical and monopolies/duopolies a sure thing across the state.

It’s a real shame the only ones that don’t get it are elected officials who do the bidding of big cable and don’t have the wisdom to realize the way to survive this consumer catastrophe is not to be a part of it in the first place.  Perhaps voters will need to remind them.

Contact Information:

Phone:      919-733-5602
Email:     [email protected]

Rep. Ty Harrell
NC House of Representatives
16 W. Jones Street, Room 2121
Raleigh, NC 27601-1096

Caps Are Coming, Says American Cable Association – But Look Who Is Saying It!

Phillip Dampier April 29, 2009 Community Networks, Public Policy & Gov't 5 Comments

The trade association for independent cable systems trumpeted their belief that broadband usage caps and metered pricing was inevitable, and pointed to Sunflower Broadband as a perfect example of how metering can work in a community.

Sunflower, a podunk provider in the Lawrence, Kansas area has been sticking it to their customers for the last four years with tiers as low as 1GB of usage with $2 a GB in overlimit fees thereafter.  For Patrick Knorr, who works for Sunflower and is also ex-officio chair of ACA, life is good.  But the people of Lawrence think otherwise.  They’ve recognized they are stuck in a broadband backwater with Sunflower sticking it to them with very high prices and not so great service, but for a lot of folks, it’s their only choice.  AT&T offers DSL service without caps, but many people in Lawrence are not close enough to get good speed.  When living in a backwater this bad, people try and innovate, and the Lawrence Freenet was the result.  It’s a non-profit organization offering wi-fi access without Sunflower’s caps within Lawrence.

For smaller cities across America, the lack of competition nearly always equals high pricing for limited quality service.  Sunflower illustrates that in action.  In rural areas, equity of access to broadband at affordable prices is becoming a national issue.  Perhaps regulation may be the best answer when providers get out of hand.

Search This Site:

Contributions:

Recent Comments:

Your Account:

Stop the Cap!