dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
322
share rss forum feed


asdfdfdf

@xtraport.net

... I think this is being misread

I think this is bad law, but I don't read it as saying verizon has to approve city activity.

I think the reference is to this:
"2) A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION MAY OFFER ADVANCED OR BROADBAND SERVICES IF THE POLITICAL SUBDIVISION HAS SUBMITTED A WRITTEN REQUEST FOR THE DEPLOYMENT OF SUCH SERVICE TO THE LOCAL EXCHANGE TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPANY SERVING THE AREA AND, WITHIN TWO MONTHS OF RECEIPT OF THE REQUEST, THE LOCAL EXCHANGE TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPANY OR ONE OF ITS AFFILIATES HAS NOT AGREED TO PROVIDE THE DATA SPEEDS REQUESTED. IF THE LOCAL EXCHANGE TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPANY OR ONE OF ITS AFFILIATES AGREES TO PROVIDE THE DATA SPEEDS REQUESTED, THEN IT MUST DO SO WITHIN 14 MONTHS OF RECEIPT OF THE REQUEST."

This is not a requirement to get ilec approval, rather it is a requirement to allow the incumbent the opportunity to provide demanded services before municipalities can provide service themselves. If the service can not be provided, by the ilec, within the time frame above, then a municipality can move ahead and proved the service.
Of course this is a restriction that the incumbent is going to play with to stall any municipal development, but it isn't the same thing as saying that the government has to get ilec approval before it can act.


Octopussy2
Premium
join:2003-03-30
Batavia, IL
I see what you are saying...but I think this should still be vetoed. For a muni to be denied a right to provide any service at any time without first "requesting permission" from the ILEC just seems ridiculous. If folks in a town want services provided by their municipality why does only the ILEC get to provide those services? This is a very bad law and it shouldn't have even gotten this far. What a bunch of idiots in that Legislature.

--
It's muni-licious! »www.tricitybroadband.com


Esme Vos

@speed.planet.nl
reply to asdfdfdf

City must talk to Verizon before it can act

The city cannot build it without first asking Verizon (that amounts to asking permission). Verizion can say yes, go ahead build your network we don't care, or no we're going to do it but in 14 months. Within that 14 month period they can ask for a 12 month extension. 26 months to wait for a network is a pretty long period of time.


DrTCP
Yours truly
Premium,ExMod 1999-04
join:1999-11-09
Round Rock, TX
reply to asdfdfdf

Re: ... I think this is being misread

said by asdfdfdf:

I think this is bad law, but I don't read it as saying verizon has to approve city activity.

I think the reference is to this:
"2) A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION MAY OFFER ADVANCED OR BROADBAND SERVICES IF THE POLITICAL SUBDIVISION HAS SUBMITTED A WRITTEN REQUEST FOR THE DEPLOYMENT OF SUCH SERVICE TO THE LOCAL EXCHANGE TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPANY SERVING THE AREA AND, WITHIN TWO MONTHS OF RECEIPT OF THE REQUEST, THE LOCAL EXCHANGE TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPANY OR ONE OF ITS AFFILIATES HAS NOT AGREED TO PROVIDE THE DATA SPEEDS REQUESTED. IF THE LOCAL EXCHANGE TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPANY OR ONE OF ITS AFFILIATES AGREES TO PROVIDE THE DATA SPEEDS REQUESTED, THEN IT MUST DO SO WITHIN 14 MONTHS OF RECEIPT OF THE REQUEST."

This is not a requirement to get ilec approval, rather it is a requirement to allow the incumbent the opportunity to provide demanded services before municipalities can provide service themselves. If the service can not be provided, by the ilec, within the time frame above, then a municipality can move ahead and proved the service.
What is holding the imcumbent ILEC to provide the service at inflated prices and with so many strings attached to be useful? What if the city wants to provide free services. Will the ILEC agree to that? I do not think so. This is another example of politicians bought by telephone monopolies. Greed at its best!

Of course this is a restriction that the incumbent is going to play with to stall any municipal development, but it isn't the same thing as saying that the government has to get ilec approval before it can act.
It does not clearly say so but why should the governent be required even to petition the ILEC before it can do something on its own. This gives more power to a private for profit organization over elected government. If the local government thinks that ILEC will do so anyway, they would not be involved in this operation at all. This is all wrong. It is the result of politicians returning political favors. Follow the money trail of those who voted in favor of these bills.


Octopussy2
Premium
join:2003-03-30
Batavia, IL
Follow the money and then vote them out of office! What are these politicians thinking?! Well, obviously they are not thinking about their local municipalities. Why put local munis under the thumb of ILECs? Why should private industry have the right to tell the local govt. what to do for their residents?
--
It's muni-licious! »www.tricitybroadband.com