AgdaPkt 2006-06-05 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

AB 2987 from page 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AB 2987 responds to telecommunications' companies' desire to by-pass local franchising requirements for video services, by establishing a statewide franchise. The amendments (which at this writing are not yet in print) do the following: . Attempt, unsuccessfully, to convert the so- called "fee" of the original version (in actuality a tax) into a true franchise fee. . Impose some new requirements on the transfer of a state franchise from the original holder to a new entity. . Include some new provisions relating to PEG channels, but, significantly, in- clude new loopholes that may allow franchise holders to avoid providing channels that are dedicated exclusively to public or educational programming. Include intent language requiring a level- playing field to ensure competition is fair, and will require wide-spread build- out of state-of-the-art services so that competition will benefit the greatest number of customers, and will prohibit discrimination, redlining, and service abandonment. But this language lacks any enforcement mechanism, specificity, or definitions of the vague terms used. Provide that the local entity shall enforce customer service and protection stan- dards. It is unclear whether this would constitute a new state mandate or not. Permit the local entity to adopt an ordi- nance imposing penalties for material breaches of a state franchise. . Allow local entities to continue to impose generally applicable fees and taxes, including utility user taxes. . Provide that the state franchise would be administered by the Department of Consumer Affairs rather than the Department of Corporations. Next Steps. The bill is expected to be taken up on the floor of Assembly next week, probably on Thursday, June 1. (Friday, June 2, is the deadline for policy bills to pass their house of origin.) What You Can Do: Please Call or Write Your Assembly Members to Oppose This Bill! Here are talking points to use in either a conversa- tion or a letter (or both!): . Discriminatorv. Cities support competi- tion in telecommunications services, but it has to be FAIR TO ALL CALIFORNIANS! AB 2987 permits new entrants in the video service industry to discriminate, picking and choosing the neigh- borhoods they will serve in a community, while ignoring other neighborhoods in the same com- munity. The addition of intent language does not constitute protection against discrimination. Who is protecting the underserved? The Department of Consumer Affairs is only empowered to pro- cess applications, not evaluate their merit. We see no specific or detailed provisions that will prevent discrimination and decrease the "digital divide." . PEG Channels. Public access to broad- casting is not protected. The bill fails to ad- equately protect the community's public, educa- tion and govemmental (PEG) channels. These are important assets in a community that permit the televising of community events, governmental deliberations and educational opportunities. The current language seriously narrows the PEG options now open to a community. . New State Bureaucracv. The bill estab- lishes a new state bureaucracy that will grow to regulate what is essentially a local franchise process. The new state bureaucracy will be put in charge of determining issues relating to local street~. In short, the state is taking over local streets when it comes to industries providing video services. Have a problem on a local street? Go to Sacramento and ask the state to correct it! ConünuedonPage13 PAGE 12. PRIORITY FOCUS May 26, 2006 . Issue #21 Visit the League's Official Website..www.cacities.org ,,-_._.._-_..,--, -..- .---., '--0"-' ..c_-- .oo--