Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-11-28 06-025 RESOLVEItem Ni 025 Dm: 11an-05 Item/Subject Resolve, Expressing Opposition to Senate Bill 1504, "Broadband Investment & Consumer Choice Act". Responsible Department: Legal This Resolve states opposition to Senate Bill 1504, entitled "Broadband Investment & Consumer Choice Act." If enacted, bill 1504 would preempt the OtV s Cable Television Ordinance, thereby depriving the City of the authority to regulate cable service, collect a fee for the cable company's use of the public right-of-way, and abrogate the Franchise Agreement with Adelphia/tlme-Wamer. The Government Operators Committee recommended passage at Rs November 15, 2005, meeting. Department Head Managers Comments: Recommend approval /ir d �aa[L City Manager Budget Approval: "QFinance Director X passage First Reading page _ M_ Referral November 28, 2005 06 025 CITY OF BANGOR (TITLE.) Resolve, Expressing Opposition W Senate Bill 1504, "Broadband Investment & Consumer Choice Ad." WHEREAS, on July 27, 2005, Senators John Ensign and John McCain introduced fine Broadband Investment and consumer choice Ad of 2005 (S. 1504); and WHEREAS, the Oty council of the Oty of Bangor, opposes the passage of S. 1504 for the following reasons - 1. The bill would preempt local authority over the provision of cable and video services within the community, including the ability of the local government to provide appropriate oversight to entities conducting business within their jurisdiction and In the local public right;mf-way; 2. The Oty's negotiated contract with its cable operator would be abrogated under the terms of the bill; 3. The bill would substitute a new compensation methodology on the parties to the City's existing franchise contract, depriving the City of the agreed-upon bargain by potentially lowering the exisdng franchise fee and replacing it with a fee which must be Justified as being "reasonable" in the eyes of the user, limited to management costs (which denies the rights of the property owner to obtain fair and reasonable compensation for the use of public property for private gain), and not in excess of 5%; 4. The bill woulo further substantially reduce the revenues that are now included in the definition of "Gros Revenues' so that even if me franchise fee did in fad remain at 5%, me Cry's revenues from the fee would be significantly less due to the smaller revenue base; 5. The bill would substantially reduce the amount of capacity which may be required by local governments N meet their public, educational, and government CPM) access needs, while stripping the Cry of the ability to attain capital support for the use of PEG capacity — part of the bargain cantalned within the City's negotiated franchise agreement— win the result that the community's cable -related needs and interests would not be met;. 6. The bill would eliminate any build -out requirements for any video service provider, thereby allowing providers N discriminate based on the wealm of the local neighborhoods they choose to serve; ]. The bill would prohibit the city from imposing any fee for issuance of rights-of-way construction permits, yet would require the City N ad on requests for permits in a timely manner as determined by the FCC, thereby insinuating inappropriate federal government involvement in the basic day-to-day management of local lights -of -way; S. The bill would prohibit municipalities and their utlines from providing communications services without giving a right of first rerusal to private industry and would then grant industry unfettered access to all municipal faculties and financing in the event privi ft 025 industry chooses to provide services; U 9. The bill would deprive the Gty of the authonty, to establish and maintain government owned and operated networks, known as institutional networks, that may be utilized by first responceis and other government officials in the day-to-day management of the Gty's business; 10. The bill would pennit broadened preemption of local zoning decisions relating to the placement of cell towers, depriving the Ory of the authority to ensure that such towers are sandy and appropriately located in areas to provide the greatest degree of acrylics without unnecessarily posing a hazard to the public health, safety and welfare; 14. The bill would eliminate the protection the Oty currently has against liability far damages and atWmeys fees in lawsuits brought by communication service providers against local governments; and WHEREAS, the City urges the Maine Congressional Delegation and other members of Congress to oppose S. 1504; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BANGOR THAT: Section 1: We hereby declare our opposition to S. 1504 and urge the Maine Congressional Delegation and all other members of Congress W oppose S. 1504. Section 2: We hereby direct that this Resodudon be forwarded immediately to the Maine Congressional Delegation and other members of Congress as deemed appropriate; and Section 3: This Resolution shall become of active immediately upon its passage. IN CITT WOOCIL November 28. 2005 Notion !lade and Seconded p 06-025 for P���ggg���ggg Be Pacts Y —I AKA/ 86 SOL VR CITT "ESK (TITLP) Lsoressing 0000sitfon to Seve[e Bill 1504 "Rroadbsad Investment 6 fusser Choice Act"