AgdaPkt 2006-05-08 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

There are two outstanding issues that are critical to a successful state rewrite of the franchise laws for telecommunications services. Those issues are: Public, EducatIon and Government (PEG) Channels/Institutional Networks (I NET). The provisions of AB 2987 pre-empt local authority when it comes to the issue of public, education and govemment channels as well as the institutional network (INET) services currently provided in some communities. The INET is a network of telecommunications lines connecting schools, libraries, nonprofit organizations and/or other governmental facilities. These services are critical in many communities. The immediate problem under AB 2987 is that there is no provision to continue these services after certain dates. It is not specified how a local community without !NET services currently can acquire these services in the future. AB 2987 does provide some standards for PEG services, but these standards may not be flexible enough to meet growing needs in California. The League has asked the Speaker's staff for more time to vet this issue of PEG channels and INET services and come back with an improved proposal. Build OutIDiscriminatlon Issues. Speaker Nunez's staff has indicated that the build out/discrimination issue is still a "work in progress" in the legislation. This is another critical issue in local communities. Under the current law for video services, local governments have the authority to demand build out of cable systems to ensure that all parts of a community receive these services. Local govemments have been successful in ensuring that our local communities receive cable services in California. The bottom line is that new entrants should not be given complete free- reign to pick and choose the parts of a community that receive these new telecommunications services. There has to be some reasonable standard to permit the deployment of these services in an equitable manner. The League pledges our cooperation in working toward such a solution. The League is actively engaged with the Speaker and Assemblymember Levine and plans to keep city officials closely informed as this legislation moves forward. Eminent Domain Continued from Page 1... The League is opposed to SB 1206, SB 1210, SCA 20 and AB 1990. These bills are problematic for cities that are working hard to build affordable housing, restore blighted areas and revitalize their communities. The League does not have a position on SB 1650. This measure is focused on ensuring fairness to property owners in the eminent domain process exercised by redevelopment agencies. The League and the California Redevelopment Association (CRA) support the purpose of the bill, and are working with the author to achieve this goal. Cities Urged to OPPOSE SS 1206, SB 1210, SCA 20 and AS 1990 Cities are urged to carefully study these bills and determine the impact they would have on your community. We urge you also to contact the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee to OPPOSE SB 1206, S8 1210 and SCA20, and contact the members of the Assembly Housing Committee to OPPOSE AB 1990. Explain the real world consequences of their provisions in your city. Senate Judiciary Committee Members: Senator Joe Dunn (Chair, D-Santa Ana), Senator Dick Ackerman (Vice Chair, R-Irvine) , Senator Martha Escutia (D-Whittier), and Senator Sheila Kuehl (D-Santa Monica). 4