TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
|  Appeals court just protecting utility ratepayers
Not everyone in Lafayette voted to approve this deal. And the Appeals Court is just protecting the electric/water/gas ratepayers from having to subsidize the fiber project if it can't pay the interest on the bonds.
LUS' plans to use residual revenues from its other utilities divisions to repay the fiber bonds violates the cross-subsidization prohibition of the Local Government Fair Competition Act.
The appeals court, in Thursday's ruling, agreed with BellSouth, noting a clause in the state law that says the bonds "shall be secured and paid for solely from the revenues generated by the local government from providing the covered services." In effect the court is just making sure that the fiber project can pay its own way and not depend on income from other utilities to make up for losses.
Of course, Lafayette can change the bond ordinance to comply, but then they may have trouble finding a financial underwriter for the bonds. And that may mean they might not find buyers for the bonds if not cross subsidized.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
My Web Page |
|
broadbander
join:2005-07-21
Brooklyn, NY
| Of course, Lafayette can change the bond ordinance to comply, but then they may have trouble finding a financial underwriter for the bonds. And that may mean they might not find buyers for the bonds if not cross subsidized.
Exactly.
And the voters democratically CHOOSE to the be cross-subsidized. The majority of individuals who voted, said yes.
BellSouth's continued attempts to subvert the muni-fiber project in the face of a city-wide vote are audacious. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
1 edit | said by broadbander  :Exactly. And the voters democratically CHOOSE to the be cross-subsidized. The majority of individuals who voted, said yes. Guess what. The courts protect minorities(and thwart democratic voting results all the time. E.G. numerous Calif propositions). I guess that when courts do that to advance civil rights for some minorities(like illegal immigrants) it is OK. But if they do that to protect ratepayers on the losing side of a vote, it isn't OK. Well that sword cuts both ways.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
My Web Page |
|
Octopussy2
Premium
join:2003-03-30
Batavia, IL
| reply to broadbander
BS wanted a vote - they got a vote. The citizens voted YES FOR FIBER. They didn't like the results. One of the the arguments against the muni broadband project in Lafayette had been to let the people vote...They threw up how many lawsuits until they found one that finally stuck?! DISGUSTING!!!
I think Durel and Company should continue to fight against BS and their bs. It is clear BS wants no competition and wants their monopoly to remain unthreatened. It is also clear they could care less about the will of the people....um, their customers. Otherwise they would upgrade their plant, give people fiber, and lower their prices. They are unwilling to do that as well.
--
It's muni-licious! »www.tricitybroadband.com |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA | reply to TKJunkMail
That would be called legislating from the bench and it's a popular pastime of the modern judiciary.
--
WAR HAS NEVER SOLVED ANYTHING, except ending slavery, facism, communism, Nazism.... |
|
packetscan
Premium
join:2004-10-19
Bridgeport, CT
clubs:
·Optimum Online
| reply to Octopussy2
Re: Appeals court just protecting utility ratepaye
WE NEED serious reform before this gets any worse.
If 20 people were bribed by 2 guys and you multiply that by how many more people are in the house and senate.
This corruption probe will reach wider then just these folks mentioned so far.
--
This is the Curse of Being a college graduate. |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Appeals court just protecting utility ratepayers
We need a loser pays system. Corporations like BS try to outspend their opponents with frivolous lawsuits until they find one that sticks. If they had to pay all court costs and opposing lawyer fees, PLUS penalties they may choose to avoid this tactic.
--
WAR HAS NEVER SOLVED ANYTHING, except ending slavery, facism, communism, Nazism.... |
|
Octopussy2
Premium
join:2003-03-30
Batavia, IL
| reply to TKJunkMail
You must mean how bonding for a muni project is so awful like in Glasgow, KY? Right...that is so awful for those rate payers...they pay the lowest prices in the nation for cable TV service. And I could name muni projects all day that have benefitted the rate payer.
--
It's muni-licious! »www.tricitybroadband.com |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| reply to oliphant
said by oliphant :We need a loser pays system. Corporations like BS try to outspend their opponents with frivolous lawsuits until they find one that sticks. If they had to pay all court costs and opposing lawyer fees, PLUS penalties they may choose to avoid this tactic. Actually a loser pays system favors big business and NOT the little guy. BS can afford to pay all costs if it loses. The little guy(who usually loses anyway) would not be able to risk bringing a case, if they knew they had to pick up the costs of BS as well.
Now a loser pays system would surely reduce the number of court cases, but big business would be the big winner under that system.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
My Web Page |
|
Octopussy2
Premium
join:2003-03-30
Batavia, IL
| reply to oliphant
First they try to outspend them during the referendum process (which itself is a huge joke because they have such deep pockets), now they will try and sue cities and towns "into submission" until the cities give up about serving their community with what they want.
Are we ready to let Telcos and Cable Cos dictate what we can and cannot have in our own community? Why would I ever want SBC/AT&T dictating to me what speeds I will have, what cost they will be, and when I will get them? If my community wants to provide for me, and it is voted on by my community, then what business is it of the corporate American THUG to dictate otherwise?
--
It's muni-licious! »www.tricitybroadband.com |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
2 edits | reply to TKJunkMail
It benefits everyone except those who lose. When it comes to corporations, the penalty rulings handed down would simply be larger; large enough to discourage them from doing it again. |
|
scrummie02
Bentley
join:2004-04-16
Arlington, VA
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Appeals court just protecting utility ratepaye
that isn't even the same thing and to compare them is completely asinine.
If that's the case than anyone can repeal any democratically initiated vote and any time and nothing would get done. If things work in your case than Bush shouldn't be elected and it should be in appeals courts....
Civil rights and ratepayers isn't exactly the same thing. The point is the majority won, go through with the project...that's what our supposed democracy is built on..unless of course everything I learned in school and college is wrong. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| said by scrummie02 :If that's the case than anyone can repeal any democratically initiated vote and any time and nothing would get done. That pretty much describes the way things are now. If things work in your case than Bush shouldn't be elected and it should be in appeals courts.... It was handled by the US Supreme Court - the ultimate appeals court. unless of course everything I learned in school and college is wrong. You said it, not me.;)
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
My Web Page |
|
broadbander
join:2005-07-21
Brooklyn, NY
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Appeals court just protecting utility ratepayers
I guess that when courts do that to advance civil rights for some minorities(like illegal immigrants) it is OK.
GolfnSun, I think you know some of my posting history and you know that's NOT something I'm okay with. 
So in this case, the sword should cut where it should legally cut. The legality of this matter has nothing to do with the "rights of the minority." That minority also have the right to not live in the town altogether if they so choose.
Two things are matters of contention in this particular case ...
1. the word "pledge"
2. the audaciousness of BellSouth in calling for a vote and than working to overturn the express results of that vote |
|
Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| reply to scrummie02
Re: Appeals court just protecting utility ratepaye
said by scrummie02 :Civil rights and ratepayers isn't exactly the same thing. The point is the majority won, go through with the project...that's what our supposed democracy is built on..unless of course everything I learned in school and college is wrong. That would be true democracy...but college education or not, we don't live in one. Checks, balances, bribery, and corruption are a part of US political life, nomatter how many civic classes you take.
My recommendation is to step out and get a big dose of modern-day reality when the opportunity next presents itself. It'll benefit you more than most political science & civic classes ever could.  |
|
Jigsaw
Stardust We Are
Premium
join:2000-10-21
Cleveland, OH
·Cox HSI
1 edit | reply to broadbander
said by broadbander :Of course, Lafayette can change the bond ordinance to comply, but then they may have trouble finding a financial underwriter for the bonds. And that may mean they might not find buyers for the bonds if not cross subsidized.
Exactly. And the voters democratically CHOOSE to the be cross-subsidized. The majority of individuals who voted, said yes. BellSouth's continued attempts to subvert the muni-fiber project in the face of a city-wide vote are audacious. Just goes to show you vote all you want the big company's will do whatever they want regardless of anything.Im really thinking it's time for someone or something to kick these 500 pound gorilla's in the nuts.All of em.You have to be smoking Crack if you think your Government is in control there not there run by the Big Corporations now and are in there pocket.
--
»www.auralmoon.com/html/ Open your mind and your ears. |
|
sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ
·Optimum Online
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Appeals court just protecting utility ratepayers
said by TKJunkMail :Not everyone in Lafayette voted to approve this deal. And not everyone voted for Bush, but he's president.
--
enjoy zesty ranch man-flavored baby tacos responsibly |
|
Octopussy2
Premium
join:2003-03-30
Batavia, IL
| reply to broadbander
Number 2 is the big one I am having problems with. BS worked so hard to call for the vote in the first place. Then, because they didn't like the outcome, they are throwing around their corporate weight like the 300LB gorilla that they are, to prevent LUS from starting to buildout their broadband utility. It is disgusting. Unfortunately, it appears disgusting behavior is becoming par for the course for BS.
--
It's muni-licious! »www.tricitybroadband.com |
|
scrummie02
Bentley
join:2004-04-16
Arlington, VA
| reply to Thaler
Re: Appeals court just protecting utility ratepaye
I have been out of college for a while...the point i was making is this is supposed to be a democracy (that's what our policiticians tell us....Representative Republic...Democracy..whatever you want to call it). People need to start holding politicians accountable for their actions and decisions. No one raises a stink enough to make a difference.
As a former Republican (now Independent), I am sick of the way our GOP has turned into a government enlarging, big spending over expanding pile of beaucracry that goes against the very party's principles. I am also sick of the Dems and their anti-Bush stance (that's all they have to stand on, no unified platforms). Someone needs to hold the politicians accountable for their actions, they are in effect blocking the citizens rights because they voted to have fiber, so it needs to be done. If the local or state politicians don't allow this measure to go through they are responsible for answering to their constituents for their failures to uphold the citizens wishes.
Unfortunately this type of behavior will persist until someone really revamps Campaign and lobbying finance or a third or fourth political party is given equal chance at candidacy... |
|
