Topic 'Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill?' in forum '' - dslreports.com http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22318946 en Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:44:37 EDT Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:44:37 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22341569 said by Matt:

There is a lot of language in that bill that would allow a private communications company to sue the government for tactics they themselves use.

#3 would allow Time Warner to come in, price their service at $9.99/month and then because of that same section, drive the municipality out of business in a few short years. This was most evident with UTOPIA, but has happened in every area a muni operates. Just look at the Time Warner rates you can get in Wilson.

Then #4, #5, #6 do nothing but to make sure the municipality can't price their services any lower than the local private company and on top of that, add the additional expense of ridiculous tracking of every nickle.

It's a BS bill and is meant to make it impossible for a local government to offer a superior service for less money.
Yes. Make no mistake. It is *ALL* about control. Control of the market. Control of the bandwidth. Control of when they upgrade the network to offer better service.

Oh and let's not forget, control of the throttle, and control of UPSTREAM bandwidth. The incumbents still sell the idea that "ordinary consumers" don't "need" upstream bandwidth, only business customers running servers need that. Which is to say that they reserve their upstream bandwidth to sell to people willing to pay for business class service. And PAY you will. The last time we looked, to get a 2 megabit symmetrical business class cable service plan here in Claytown, it would cost as much as we can get the 100 megabit SYMMETRICAL service in Wilson.

TWC is just mad because somebody else came in and proved to everybody watching that you don't HAVE to sell asymmetrical bandwidth, and that bandwidth isn't as expensive and hard to provide as they want you to think it is.

Hypocrites. For years they scream and whine about fair competition etc. and now look at them.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22341569 Tue, 05 May 2009 09:43:20 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22341429
It has been a LONG time since I've been involved with posting here. I'd be pretty surprised if anyone remembered me, but who knows.

Glad to see DSLreports is still flourishing.

Once upon a time, I was a contract DSL technician for a Florida-based contractor outfit who provided DSL techs to Sprint in pretty much any market DSL service was available.

Believe this or not, but Wilson, NC was my work area for roughly 3 years. I was able to get myself transferred from the Greenville, NC area to working the Wilson, NC market in or around 2001 and worked that area until I was contacted by a Linux OS vendor about a support job in May 2004.

There are a few things I want to say, but something I want to make sure folks understand. There are a lot of folks who don't live around here giving their opinions about this topic, quite understandably, but I want to make sure this is not lost in all the words flying back and forth:

Both Sprint and TWC are present and offering broadband service in Wilson city limits, and have been since at least 2001. The problem is _NOT_ that Embarq and TWC refused to offer service in the city of Wilson. They just didn't want to lose CONTROL of the service and offerings.

As "the DSL guy" that worked Sprint's Wilson, NC market for 3 years, I can say from firsthand experience that service was not great everywhere back then. Crappy service "just tends to happen" when you put a mini-DSLAM like an MRT (~30 customers) into a carrier and FEED THE WHOLE DAMN THING with one or two T1 lines.

There were a lot of places served by fullblown DSLAM's that had one or sometimes two DS3's. But after their initial rollout of equipment they installed in CO's -- when they started "reaching out" to get service to areas they just couldn't reach well with cables coming out of the DSLAM-equipped CO's and remotes, they expanded as cheaply as they could get away with.

This is completely aside from problems they had with Sprintlink, Redbacks, etc. which I know got worse after I left. We ended up switching from Sprint DSL to TWC at our home in Clayton, NC because the service went to crap and the folks on the phone were as idiotic as ever.

The point of all this is: TWC and Embarq WERE providing "service" in Wilson, NC. If the service they were providing was really good - and consistent in quality from one part of town to the next - then I would venture to say that the people of Wilson, and in turn, their elected officials, would not be looking to get something better in place.

Wilson, NC is a pretty unusual place. A lot of you probably don't know this, but a little over a year ago, much of the state of North Carolina was under very severe drought. VERY severe. Yet while many cities and communities were so low on water that many people were not allowed to water their grass AT ALL, the city of Wilson had a SURPLUS of water and was actually selling it to surrounding communities who had run out.

Why? Because the leaders of their community had VISION several years ago to take the kind of steps it would take to be prepared for such an eventuality. Some extra money they spent several years ago to build extra reservoirs etc. saved them a lot of trouble, and once again drew attention to them while everybody else around them was languishing. Sound familiar?

I am preparing to move to Wilson, NC from Clayton.

Cheers,
Machrider

PS: peace and "wassup" to all you other ex-outsource folks :)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22341429 Tue, 05 May 2009 09:09:35 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22327312 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22327312 Fri, 01 May 2009 23:00:12 EDT Re: I've read the bill... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Ive-read-the-bill-22323250
768/128 - $25
1.5/256 - $30
7.0/384 - $45
10.0/512 - $54

The 7.0+ tiers have powerboost now I believe.

Those are all bundled prices too. Tack on an extra $5 per tier if you only have Road Runner.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Ive-read-the-bill-22323250 Fri, 01 May 2009 09:27:22 EDT Re: I've read the bill... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Ive-read-the-bill-22322662
768/128 - $25
5/384 - $35 (used to be 3/384...at least 5 is what the website says)
7/512 - $40
15/2 - $50 (with download PowerBoost)

Of course, this might be due to some sweet deal the city made with TWC, though I don't see it anywhere. Or maybe it's because we're lumped in with the Austin rate center (all e-mail addresses are @austin.rr.com) but something is up, and people in NC are getting screwed.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Ive-read-the-bill-22322662 Fri, 01 May 2009 04:59:15 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22321987 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22321987 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 23:09:14 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22321964 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22321964 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 23:05:00 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22320904 said by RayW:

said by Matt:

Because of where it is. The areas UTOPIA serves don't understand the difference in Satellite, Fiber, or Comcast. Trust me, I've been asked by more than one person when visiting the area. Most think satellite is faster because "It's a satellite!"
You have to stop talking to the homeless folks and folks out here skiing from back east, the people I know who live here in Utah do know the basic differences in the technologies and companies available out here, although I do know some folks who listen to QWEST and Comcast propaganda and take it as gospel, so we are not that far ahead of you.

However, you do have an apples, oranges, and Ford comparison there, so I can understand where your confusion is....mixing two technologies and a company and implying there is a technological difference between all three?
Actually, my GF was born and raised there. So although you may know the difference as a technical member of this site, I typed exactly how I was asked the question. I tried to explain to them the benefits of UTOPIA, but I got blank stares in return.

If UTOPIA was deployed in more technology oriented area, it would be doing much better.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22320904 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:20:03 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22320875 said by Matt:

Because of where it is. The areas UTOPIA serves don't understand the difference in Satellite, Fiber, or Comcast. Trust me, I've been asked by more than one person when visiting the area. Most think satellite is faster because "It's a satellite!"
You have to stop talking to the homeless folks and folks out here skiing from back east, the people I know who live here in Utah do know the basic differences in the technologies and companies available out here, although I do know some folks who listen to QWEST and Comcast propaganda and take it as gospel, so we are not that far ahead of you.

However, you do have an apples, oranges, and Ford comparison there, so I can understand where your confusion is....mixing two technologies and a company and implying there is a technological difference between all three?
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22320875 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:12:40 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22320733 said by travelguy:

You're right - forgot that Provo opted out, but it doesn't change the request. Make that "I would really like to see an economic analysis of why Utopia isn't working as that seems to be the ideal model."
Because of where it is. The areas UTOPIA serves don't understand the difference in Satellite, Fiber, or Comcast. Trust me, I've been asked by more than one person when visiting the area. Most think satellite is faster because "It's a satellite!"]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22320733 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:48:18 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22320722
Yes RR will offer 100/100 but it will cost you, much more then what Greenlight cost which they also offer. TWC/RR are in the business to make money. While Greenlight is in the business to connect people in a community that TWC wouldn't even touch before Wilson did this.

I have a property in rural WV, that also wants internet to come in, dial-up and sat is all that you can get. But no service provider wants to bring in service because it will cost too much. But I bet as soon as the city lays down the network themselves the providers will be all over it.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22320722 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:45:48 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22320655 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22320655 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:31:33 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22320639 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22320639 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:29:17 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22320544 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22320544 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:10:03 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22320529 said by travelguy:

I would really like to see an economic analysis of why Utopia isn't working in Provo as that seems to be the ideal model. Let the government build the 'tubes' and let any ISP/Telco/Cable Company/Content Aggregator that wants to serve those residences. That's an equal playing field.

Probably because the last I heard, Provo is not served by UTOPIA? »www.utopianet.org/service-area
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22320529 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:06:02 EDT Re: I've read the bill... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Ive-read-the-bill-22320301 said by iansltx:

I can see that Wilson gets 15/2 cable whereas other places get 10/512, but I must be missing the huge discount TWC is giving Wilson. Care to post the info?
They even get their own webpage: »www.timewarnercable.com/Carolina···son.html

Faster speeds and lower prices.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Ive-read-the-bill-22320301 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 17:25:03 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22320298
I don't think the model of a government run cable/internet/phone system is fatally flawed. If that is what a community wants, more power to them. They can fund construction and operation any way they want and it doesn't have to be break even. Just don't expect an overbuilder to come in and compete.

It would be interesting to run the numbers on what it would take to run the infrastructure as a government sponsored enterprise with zero content or retail face, and let whoever wanted to provide services over that network do so. The services companies would trade the capital investment in physical plant for a monthly cost based recovery charge.

But the more I think about it, even if the economics worked I'm not sure they would want to as the barriers to anyone else offering a competing service over the same network would be next to nothing.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22320298 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 17:24:52 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22320141 said by iansltx:

The problem here is that, in order to run Greenlight out of business, the telco/cableco duopoly might well lower prices to below cost for "as long as it takes". Now I'm not saying other utilities should subsidize broadband, but to get the 'net out there Greenlight might need to price the service below cost for a bit, especially if the cableco/telco decide to offer screaming deals to prove their talking point that muni broadband isn't a good thing.
Good point. There is nothing stopping Time Warner or any other cable provider from pricing their offering in Wilson artificially low to lure customers from the competition. It would be easy enough for TW to set their prices lower in Wilson and offset the losses in that area with earnings from other areas (pretty much what they are trying to prevent Wilson's Greenlight from doing).

I personally think Greenlight should be beholden to the same laws as any other carrier. They should operate as a independent, self sustaining entity. But it's the incumbent ISP's I'm worried about. They have absolutely no credibility. The proposed bill may be fair but knowing who's behind it and their history is cause for concern. Look at the facts: Greenlight hasn't created any "consumer groups" to lobby their position, they haven't used push polling to "educate" the public and spread misinformation. This has been the ploy of incumbent ISP's looking to prevent competition and protect their piece of the pie.

A quick check of both the City of Wilson's and Time Warner Cable's website shows the real reason why TWC has so much to fear. For $99.85 TWC offers cable, phone and internet (their Lite tier at 768K, amusingly offered as "high speed"). For a mere $0.10 more, Greenlight offers phone, cable (5 channels more than the cable company per their website) and internet (real internet, a 10Mbps symmetrical connection). The only way TWC competes is by lowering prices or offering a similar/better service, something they haven't had to do in a long time.
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22320141 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 16:47:57 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22320042 already decided that they can't provide the services requested. I've not seen any governments jumping at building a broadband delivery system when a modern system already exists. The current situations are a bit like a little kid grabbing his ball and running home, saying that if he can't set the rules then no one can play.

As to Utopia, like I said a bit further up, I'd really like to read a disinterested third party analysis of that situation. Seems like some BYU business professor could do a great service with that as a grad student project.

I'm not so sure they should be wholesaling anything (if they are) and their objective ought to be to just break even on the infrastructure costs. Let the content/service providers bring the content to Utopia's network and let Utopia manage the physical delivery of the bits to the house.

Shoot - Utopia shouldn't even need to manage connections or system maintenance. Connections could be done by the providers themselves under rules established by Utopia and maintenance could be contracted out as well. Basically a physical plant management contract that someone like Qwest could bid for, if they really wanted to.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22320042 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 16:24:37 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22319940
Greenlight provides their service at what seems to be their cost. Which is probably why they would be exempt from taxes in the first place. If TWC and Embarq or any other service provider was willing to provide their services at no profit I would assume they would also be exempt from taxes.

The private business models fear this because more and more communities will see that they can get a lot more and pay a lot less if they band together and throw out the greedy big business practices. They want to charge a arm and a leg for service, while being the only player in town. With the whole we need to add caps stories, it only proves they are after more money for even less.

And that bill does make it almost impossible for a city to put up a Greenlight type system in place. They would need a whole accounting division just to prove that they are doing as number 4 5 6 are stating, which means they would have to prove they are handicapping themselves. Which private business do not need to do.

In the end if something like Greenlight was in my city, and was the same cost and same connection speed as say TWC. I would choose Greenlight, I rather know that the money is going to the community rather then some guy in a office so he can buy a new $400k watch.

This bill may not say "local government can not offer service". But it is saying we are going to make it almost impossible for you to do so.

But you really have to ask the question, why are these service providers lobbying so hard spending so much to get bills like this even on the table. When these type of networks being put up are in areas they do not even want to service in the first place.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22319940 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 16:02:32 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22319744
I'd guess the main problem is #3. Incumbents cross subsidize all the time. Comcast can offer internet & phone services BECAUSE they had cable tv services in place. Similarly, AT&T can offer TV services on the back of its internet & phone services.

As to Utopia, its main problem is that it can offer services directly (only wholesale) versus competitors that can. Its being held back from the most profitable end of the business - services.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22319744 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 15:27:01 EDT Re: I've read the bill... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Ive-read-the-bill-22319590 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Ive-read-the-bill-22319590 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 14:53:45 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22319558 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22319558 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 14:49:22 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22319536 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22319536 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 14:46:47 EDT Re: I've read the bill... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Ive-read-the-bill-22319424 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Ive-read-the-bill-22319424 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 14:24:00 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22319419
#3 would allow Time Warner to come in, price their service at $9.99/month and then because of that same section, drive the municipality out of business in a few short years. This was most evident with UTOPIA, but has happened in every area a muni operates. Just look at the Time Warner rates you can get in Wilson.

Then #4, #5, #6 do nothing but to make sure the municipality can't price their services any lower than the local private company and on top of that, add the additional expense of ridiculous tracking of every nickle.

It's a BS bill and is meant to make it impossible for a local government to offer a superior service for less money.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22319419 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 14:22:49 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22319382
Bottom line is as it is my understanding.... the incumbents were asked to provide service and have refused. So this city is free to do what it wants. Again, you have these greedy bastards that don't want to serve the very people they should be serving because it isn't profitable enough for them, yet they don't want to allow them to serve themselves. They were given a chance and have declined so screw em, they can leave if they don't like the playing field.

If this city wants to create another tax just for the incumbents and have them pay for this 100% through that tax, then so be it. If they want to build a city owned broadband company and fund it any way they want that the people have approved, so be it. The city serves the people and if the people have spoken then the city does what the people have asked. If the private companies don't like and and don't want to compete then they can close up shop and move on. They aren't doing anyone any good being there, so they might as well leave.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22319382 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 14:13:27 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22319342
The Phoenix Cardinals NFL team does not allow cell companies to install equipment on their property. Instead of having hundreds of antennas hanging around the stadium with varying levels of coverage, they installed a single common antenna system that provides great coverage everywhere (inside and out) of the stadium.

Anyone who wants to serve that property must contract with the Cardinals, and interface at a common location about a mile away. The Cardinals take things from there.

That kind of model can work...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22319342 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 14:05:15 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22319324
Just like the trash pickup guys, this will eventually run private business (TW and Embarq) out of town if successful as it did with Bob's Trash pickup when they started collecting trash. If that is what the people of Wilson want, then thats that. However with the electrical debacle that Wilson got themselves into (google electricities), I would think most folks would not trust their local gov't to handle another utility.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22319324 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 14:03:01 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22319274
I would really like to see an economic analysis of why Utopia isn't working in Provo as that seems to be the ideal model. Let the government build the 'tubes' and let any ISP/Telco/Cable Company/Content Aggregator that wants to serve those residences. That's an equal playing field.

What I suspect is happening is that the cablecos and telcos realize that they can't compete on content, price and service; that they need the artificial scarcity of being the only supplier in order to run through those annual price increases they've become addicted to.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22319274 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 13:54:26 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22319080 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22319080 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 13:19:48 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22319043
I might even be persuaded that the cost of capital should be included, although I suspect that many governments do not build the cost of garbage trucks or water line improvements into their rates for those services. Capital investment is typically paid as a part of a bond issue and recovered by general taxes.

Forcing an enterprise service to pay tax equivalences to the government is just dumb. No water or garbage department has to do that, why should a broadband department?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22319043 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 13:14:58 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22318994
In the end millions of dollars got moved around never repaid. City run electric department seemed to fund the brunt of it. They ended up selling it off for a major loss.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22318994 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 13:07:04 EDT Re: Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22318961
If gov't wants to compete with private business, it should follow the same rules!

BTW Karl - please show in the blog where Embarq is behind this or any other poll? That is sloppy reporting!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22318961 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 13:00:16 EDT Has anyone bothered to read the bill? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22318946
§ 160A‑329. City owned or operated communications service.

(a) Definitions. – The following definitions apply in this section:

(1) Communications network. – A wired or wireless network for the provision of communications service.

(2) Communications service. – The provision of cable, telephone, broadband, or Internet access service to the public or any sector of the public, regardless of the technology used to deliver the service.

(3) High‑speed Internet. – Internet access with transmission speeds that are consistent with requirements for high‑speed broadband Internet access as defined by the Federal Communications Commission from time to time.

(b) Requirements. – A city that operates a public enterprise under G.S. 160A‑311 that provides communications service to the public for a fee over a communications network that is directly or indirectly owned or operated by or provides a financial benefit to the city or another city shall meet the following conditions with respect to the provision of communications service:

(1) Comply with all local, State, and federal laws, regulations, or other requirements that would apply to the communications service if provided by a private communications service provider.

(2) Establish a separate enterprise fund for communications service and shall use this fund to separately account for revenues, expenses, property, and source of investment dollars associated with the provision of communications service.

(3) Shall not subsidize the cost of providing communications service with funds from any other noncommunications service, operation, or other revenue source, including any funds or revenue generated from electric, gas, water, sewer, or garbage services, but excluding funds from State or federal grants and other governmental stimulus programs. In complying with this requirement, a city owned communications service provider shall not price any communications service below the cost of providing the service.

(4) Shall, in calculating the cost incurred and in the rates to be charged for the provision of communications service, impute: (i) the cost of the capital component that is equivalent to the cost of capital available to private communications service providers in the same locality; and (ii) an amount equal to all taxes, including property taxes, licenses, fees, and other assessments that would apply to a private communications service provider including federal, State, and local taxes; rights‑of‑way, franchise, consent, or administrative fees; and pole attachment fees.

(5) Shall annually remit to the general fund of the city an amount equivalent to all taxes or fees a private communications service provider would be required to pay the city or county in which the city is located, including any applicable tax refunds received by the city owned communications service provider because of its government status and a sum equal to the amount of property tax that would have been due if the city owned communications service provider were a private communications service provider.

(6) Shall prepare and publish an independent annual audit in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles that reflect the fully allocated cost of providing the communications service, including all direct and indirect costs. The indirect costs shall include amounts for rights‑of‑way, franchise, consent, or administrative fees, regulatory fees, occupation taxes, pole attachment fees, and ad valorem taxes. The annual accounting shall reflect any direct or indirect subsidies received by the city owned communications service provider, and any buildings, equipment, vehicles, and personnel that are jointly used with other city departments shall be fully allocated to the city owned communications service. The North Carolina Utilities Commission may adopt rules and regulations to ensure compliance with the provisions of this subdivision, and all records demonstrating compliance shall be filed with the North Carolina Utilities Commission and made available for public inspection and copying.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Has-anyone-bothered-to-read-the-bill-22318946 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 12:58:20 EDT