North Carolina: Banning Community Fiber Is For Your Own Good NC Senator David Hoyle: Broadband Problems 'BS' IndyWeek takes a closer look at the recent efforts in North Carolina by incumbents AT&T, Time Warner Cable and Embarq to get laws passed that would ban underserved cities from wiring themselves with broadband (even if locals vote to do so). Dozens of such bills were passed in multiple states while people were napping, but such efforts faded in recent years as the public became more aware of the efforts. This particular bill is courtesy of State Sen. David Hoyle, D-Gaston -- who says he's simply concerned about "competing with private enterprise who pay the taxes." Except many of these projects aren't using taxpayer dollars, and carriers usually get plenty of tax breaks: However, according to a 2009 analysis by Democracy North Carolina, two telecommunications companies, AT&T and Embarq, both benefited from tax breaks on the purchases of telephone equipment that costs the state an estimated $31 million annually in lost revenue. In 2008, political action committees for AT&T and Embarq contributed $140,500 and $151,250, respectively, to legislative candidates, statewide candidates and party committees. Hoyle meanwhile insists that the bill isn't influenced by telecom lobbyists -- except for the fact (like with all of these bills) it was written by them. He also insists that any broadband availability issues in the state are "bullshit," based entirely on figures from Connected Nation (which is a lobbying and policy extension of major carriers): Hoyle says broadband access is not an issue in the state. "I've heard that BS, and it's just not trueperiod," he said. "Anybody that needs service has got served in this state and will continue to get served." Hoyle's words sound a lot like those of Time Warner Cable, which also contends broadband availability is not an issue. "Based on a map of the state done in 2009 by Connected Nation, more than 92 percent of homes in North Carolina have broadband available to them," said Buscher. Of course Hoyle's words "sound a lot like" Time Warner Cable's because that's who wrote the bill, that's who wrote the talking points that Hoyle's reading, and that's who contributed to Hoyle's campaign. You'll of course recognize Connected Nation, the industry-backed broadband mapping organization. Their primary job is to convince the public there is no broadband penetration or competition problems -- just in case anyone gets the pesky idea of doing something about either. They just received $1.6 million in taxpayer money to accomplish this task in North Carolina (strange Hoyle and company didn't mind that). Meanwhile, operations like the community fiber build in Wilson, North Carolina say Hoyle's bill forces them to hold a referendum any time they want to finance repairs or add new customers, and is designed to bog them down in bureaucracy. Wilson's " Greenlight" project -- which doesn't use taxpayer money and offers speeds that shame Time Warner Cable -- has helped deliver competition (pdf) to Wilson residents for the first time ever. Wilson residents are seeing lower rates from Time Warner Cable as a result -- something Hoyle clearly wants to "protect" Wilson residents from.
|
 DaveDudeNo Fear join:1999-09-01 New Jersey kudos:1 1 edit | Spend, Spend Spend How can someone say its good to raise taxes to pay for this ? Especially in states like NJ, where people are leaving as fast as possible. How about contracted fiber, where the liability if off the tax payers. | |
|  |  | | Re: Spend, Spend Spend Count me in. I'm out of NJ as fast as I can be, for many reasons. | |
|  |  |  FBGuyyippee ki yayPremium join:2005-03-19 Reviews:
·Comcast
·T-Mobile US
·AT&T U-Verse
| Re: Spend, Spend Spend said by SterlingJ85:Count me in. I'm out of NJ as fast as I can be, for many reasons. like it being new jersey? -- sbcglobal.net speedtest result 11/11/09 - 5256kbps | |
|  |  |  ff1324Everybody Goes HomePremium join:2002-08-24 On Four Day | It doesn't take poor broadband or taxes to make me want to leave NJ. That would take something far more significant...like a day ending in "y." -- My rants get raves. | |
|
 |  | | I do not live there but could this guy be iunvestigated for corruption.i mean he must be corrupt as he is screwing his own state for big business interests.and those business give money to his party and they wrote the bill. | |
|  |  |  | | Re: Spend, Spend Spend said by gorehound:I do not live there but could this guy be iunvestigated for corruption.i mean he must be corrupt as he is screwing his own state for big business interests.and those business give money to his party and they wrote the bill. HAHAHAHA
no that's just regular everyday politics! that's how bills get written in this country!! | |
|
 |  marigoldsGainfully employed, finallyPremium,MVM join:2002-05-13 Saint Louis, MO kudos:1 | Wilson's "Greenlight" project -- which doesn't use taxpayer money and offers speeds that shame Time Warner Cable -- has helped deliver competition (pdf) to Wilson residents for the first time ever. So, limit the bill only to those projects which require tax revenue to pay bonds or pay directly for the projects. If tax revenue is not going to the project or to primary bond payments, exempt the project. -- ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet telnet://bbs.iscabbs.com Professional Geographer Geographic Information Science researcher | |
|  |  |  DaveDudeNo Fear join:1999-09-01 New Jersey kudos:1 Reviews:
·Vonage
·ViaTalk
| Re: Spend, Spend Spend said by marigolds:Wilson's "Greenlight" project -- which doesn't use taxpayer money and offers speeds that shame Time Warner Cable -- has helped deliver competition (pdf) to Wilson residents for the first time ever. So, limit the bill only to those projects which require tax revenue to pay bonds or pay directly for the projects. If tax revenue is not going to the project or to primary bond payments, exempt the project. forever ? -- They Live... We Sleep...
Spreading the wealth around never results in a better outcome for people. It always results in destruction.
| |
|  |  |  |  marigoldsGainfully employed, finallyPremium,MVM join:2002-05-13 Saint Louis, MO kudos:1 | Re: Spend, Spend Spend said by DaveDude:said by marigolds:Wilson's "Greenlight" project -- which doesn't use taxpayer money and offers speeds that shame Time Warner Cable -- has helped deliver competition (pdf) to Wilson residents for the first time ever. So, limit the bill only to those projects which require tax revenue to pay bonds or pay directly for the projects. If tax revenue is not going to the project or to primary bond payments, exempt the project. forever ? Yes. Remember that what is being "exempted" here is the financial mechanism of the project. The law is not requiring a vote; a vote is already required for general obligation bonds. The law is requiring all financing to be done through general obligation bonds instead of revenue bonds. -- ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet telnet://bbs.iscabbs.com Professional Geographer Geographic Information Science researcher | |
|
 |  |
 Alky join:2001-08-12 Cleveland, OH | BS? Looks like a case of the stupid leading the stupider to me. Just goes to show you when you throw money at a politician, they become a sock puppet, babbling bs and not knowing what they are talking about | |
|  |  | | Re: BS? It is a simple case of power corrupts but absolute power corrupts absolutely. | |
|  |  gaforcesUnited We Stand, Divided We Fall join:2002-04-07 Santa Cruz, CA | This bill and others like it are road blocks to deter the will of the people so they can keep raking in the cash.
Big dump trucks of CASH, CHACHING! | |
|  |  |
 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD | Wow
I wish we had more legislators who applied this type of thinking all over government.
Local governments do NOT need any more excuses to raise taxes on those of us who are not interested in a local Internet racket. They already have enough expenses and they are whining about "declining tax revenues" or other BS and yet they can cough up the cash to build this sort of thing? -- "Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
|  |  | | Re: Wow Maybe you missed the point in the story that mentions Wilson's project does NOT use taxpayer money? | |
|  |  |  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD | Re: Wow said by Chuck_IV:Maybe you missed the point in the story that mentions Wilson's project does NOT use taxpayer money? Oh I saw it. But if no taxpayer money was supposedly needed then why did this have to be run by the government? Why couldn't a private, local, perhaps even a non-profit entity do this project instead, and be on the hook for all the risks in the process? -- "Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
|  |  |  |  en102Canadian, eh? join:2001-01-26 Valencia, CA | Re: Wow Probably because there wasn't enough profit for them. Wall Street/Major ISP (Telco/CableCo) need at least a certain profit margin + room for future business model before they'll consider deployment. They'll protect the possibility (lobby against muni) until they get their profit margins or regulations removed. -- Canada = Hollywood North | |
|  |  |  |  | | You know, this is exactly why I continue to say, "America: Of the corporations, by the corporations, for the corporations".
Believe it or not, America was not actually founded to enable businesses to make money in any way possible. In fact, there was nothing in any of the founding documents stating that America is a capitalist company.
So here's the reason why the government should do it: BECAUSE THE PRIVATE COMPANIES AREN'T!!! And there are some things that are important enough to the public good that they shouldn't be left to private interests. And because they aren't ENTITLED to business without competition. | |
|
 |  |  Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium join:2002-03-03 USA kudos:4 | said by Chuck_IV:Maybe you missed the point in the story that mentions Wilson's project does NOT use taxpayer money? ONLY true if the project succeeds. If the project starts losing money the city(and its taxpayers) are on the hook for the BONDS that fund the project.
»www.greenlightnc.com/index.php/about/FAQ
The funds for constructing the fiber network come from bonds issued by the City of Wilson. Tax revenues are not being used to fund this project in any way. Again, only as long as the system can pay off the interest on the Bonds. -- Are you happy with your rep in Washington, DC? | |
|  |  |  |  | | Re: Wow Wilson has repeatedly reported to the very committees, along with the Local Government Commission(which allows muni's to issue debt here in NC) that Wilson is ahead of schedule to repay the revenue bond and that the other muni projects are all in good standing to repay as well.
Hoyle wants to make this General Obligation Bonds only, which would cost the taxpayer for the bond directly and would cost the taxpayer for issuing a referendum vote as well. Also required to have a GO Bond are repairs and maintenance to systems.
If he is so worried about the taxpayers, them why force the debt on them? Oh yeah..because that is how Time Warner can ensure their little monopoly here in NC. | |
|  |  |  |  | | If you can be so kind to point me to where it says the bonds are guaranteed bonds?
Because if these are not guaranteed bonds, then they are a risk to the investors just like stocks, venture capitalist, and others. | |
|  |  |  |  |  Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| Re: Wow said by Skippy25:If you can be so kind to point me to where it says the bonds are guaranteed bonds? Because if these are not guaranteed bonds, then they are a risk to the investors just like stocks, venture capitalist, and others. Are you suggesting the city of Wilson would default on the bonds rather than increase taxes (or divert existing revenues)?
I didn't think cities do that unless they're on the verge of bankruptcy. And then their credit ratings (Moody's, Fitch, S&P) is downgraded, costing them more to raise money through bonds (which is like a tax increase).
Mark | |
|  |  |  |  |  | | No bonds are guaranteed. What I am talking about is the source of funding for the bonds. Hoyle's bill would require General Obligation bonds, which comes directly from taxpayer money, and in NC requires a referendum vote that taxpayers pay to have. Funding before this for projects in NC have been revenue bonds, which are borrowed from private sources and, after careful scrutiny by the Local Government Commission, paid back by the projects themselves.
All bond projects are a risk, but without bond projects things like firehouses, libraries and yes better broadband would not be possible. I believe that our Local Government Commission has done a fine job in vetting the good projects from the bad. Hoyle and Time Warner can come up with what ever numbers they want to try and show failure in these projects, but they are just that made up numbers. | |
|
 |  |  |  marigoldsGainfully employed, finallyPremium,MVM join:2002-05-13 Saint Louis, MO kudos:1 | Looking at the ordinances involved, looks like the bonds are backed by municipal utilities before general revenue. Those municipal utilities are not likely to be losing money any time soon. | |
|
 |  woody7Premium join:2000-10-13 Torrance, CA | Did you read the article? -- BlooMe | |
|  |  |  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD | Re: Wow said by woody7:Did you read the article? I did indeed.
I look at other similar projects around the country... consider UTOPIA in Utah. This boondoggle is already close to $200 million in the hole. Who is going to cover the cost when they can't even get the customers needed just to break even?
»Re: "floating some bonds" is an attack vector
At least if it was a private effort that crashed and burned, the local taxpayer would be safe. -- "Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
|  |  |  |  en102Canadian, eh? join:2001-01-26 Valencia, CA | Re: Wow A privatized version likely would have never existed.... too risky, or rates would have gone up to ensure that there would be no losses. -- Canada = Hollywood North | |
|  |  |  |  |  joebarnhartPaxio evangelist join:2005-12-15 Santa Clara, CA | Re: Wow said by en102:A privatized version likely would have never existed.... too risky, or rates would have gone up to ensure that there would be no losses. Let's see.... fiber to the home, low rates, private ownership, open-access...
Sounds to me like PAXIO | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  | | Re: Wow said by joebarnhart:said by en102:A privatized version likely would have never existed.... too risky, or rates would have gone up to ensure that there would be no losses. Let's see.... fiber to the home, low rates, private ownership, open-access... Sounds to me like PAXIO Tiny, fringe service with no hope of ever expanding? Check. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  joebarnhartPaxio evangelist join:2005-12-15 Santa Clara, CA | Re: Wow said by sonicmerlin:Tiny, fringe service with no hope of ever expanding? Check. Now, Sonic.... Don't get all jealous on me. It's true that Paxio will probably never serve Cleveland -- but who on earth would want that market??  | |
|
 |  |  |  Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| said by pnh102:At least if it was a private effort that crashed and burned, the local taxpayer would be safe. But, if it was a successful private effort, you'd have another privately-owned infrastructure using public easements and rights of way, insisting it's a "free" market (raising rates every 6 months).
To me, the ideal would be something like a co-op backed by the city, their charter overseen by the city, and ultimately treated like a public utility.
However, it seems like the internet has become as ubiquitous and essential as roads (or, mass transit in urban areas). In some cases cities contract out road maintanence and (bus operation) to service providers. But, they don't leave it to the whims of those companies to develop roads and transit services.
Mark | |
|  |  |  |  |  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD | Re: Wow I wouldn't mind a tax-exempt locally-based non-profit non-government organization doing the job if that's what it took. It will help keep the money in the community, and rates would be more likely to remain reasonable. -- "Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  | | Re: Wow Who cares if it's a government organization doing the job? How are you coming to the conclusion that Wilson's rates won't "remain reasonable"? | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  Reviews:
·SureWest Internet
·AT&T Yahoo
·Comcast
| Re: Wow said by sonicmerlin:Who cares if it's a government organization doing the job? How are you coming to the conclusion that Wilson's rates won't "remain reasonable"? if we dont put monopoly like att,roadrunner, embarq out of busienss symetrical 10/10, 20/20, 30/30 will always be a dream. | |
|
 |  |  |  | | said by pnh102:said by woody7:Did you read the article? I did indeed. I look at other similar projects around the country... consider UTOPIA in Utah. This boondoggle is already close to $200 million in the hole. Who is going to cover the cost when they can't even get the customers needed just to break even? » Re: "floating some bonds" is an attack vectorAt least if it was a private effort that crashed and burned, the local taxpayer would be safe. Your post is pure FUD. As I'm sure I've pointed out before, your utah taxpayers link is from March 24, 2008. Your other DSLReports link has absolutely nothing to do with UTOPIA's financials, and merely points out how the incumbents are spreading FUD to confuse people into thinking UTOPIA is trying to rip them off.
Do you have any up to date financial information on UTOPIA? If not, then stop posting propaganda. | |
|  |  |  |  |  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD | Re: Wow said by sonicmerlin:Do you have any up to date financial information on UTOPIA? If not, then stop posting propaganda. Why don't you go find it then if you want to make this argument. But a reasonable person would not conclude that an operation which has been losing money from day one is going magically turn things around in the span of 2 years without making any changes. -- "Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  | | Re: Wow said by pnh102:Why don't you go find it then if you want to make this argument. But a reasonable person would not conclude that an operation which has been losing money from day one is going magically turn things around in the span of 2 years without making any changes. You're the one alleging UTOPIA's financials are weak. It's up to you to provide up-to-date information.
UTOPIA's struggles with the incumbents have been documented on various sites such as DSLReports, stopthecap, and even Arstechnica. They had to overcome all manner of obstructionist, back-handed tricks by the incumbents, and even now are fighting against predatory pricing.
With all that in mind, FTTH is an inherently long-term investment, which is why a government-funded network that doesn't have to worry about immediate ROI is ideal.
Either way, the residents of UTOPIA are already saving money by paying significantly less for internet, cable, and VOIP services than they were before. | |
|
 |  |  |  mole2 join:2000-12-08 Longs, SC | said by pnh102: ... At least if it was a private effort that crashed and burned, the local taxpayer would be safe. You mean like GM, AIG, Chrysler etc?
 | |
|  |  |  |  marigoldsGainfully employed, finallyPremium,MVM join:2002-05-13 Saint Louis, MO kudos:1 | said by pnh102:At least if it was a private effort that crashed and burned, the local taxpayer would be safe. That's not quite true now, is it? If it was a private effort that crash and burned, in nearly all states the local government(s) would be required to purchase the video infrastructure from the private entity (and it would certainly be classified as video infrastructure just for that reason). And even if it was not video infrastructure, the local government would still have to take possession of the infrastructure (after extension condemnation hearings that would still require paying fair value for it) in order to remove it from the right of ways, with no recourse for recovery. | |
|  |  |  |  |  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD | Re: Wow said by marigolds:That's not quite true now, is it? If it was a private effort that crash and burned, in nearly all states the local government(s) would be required to purchase the video infrastructure from the private entity (and it would certainly be classified as video infrastructure just for that reason). And even if it was not video infrastructure, the local government would still have to take possession of the infrastructure (after extension condemnation hearings that would still require paying fair value for it) in order to remove it from the right of ways, with no recourse for recovery. Why would there be such an obligation? And even if there was, it is highly unlikely the local government will be paying top dollar for the assets owned by a defunct private entity. -- "Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  marigoldsGainfully employed, finallyPremium,MVM join:2002-05-13 Saint Louis, MO kudos:1 | Re: Wow said by pnh102:said by marigolds:That's not quite true now, is it? If it was a private effort that crash and burned, in nearly all states the local government(s) would be required to purchase the video infrastructure from the private entity (and it would certainly be classified as video infrastructure just for that reason). And even if it was not video infrastructure, the local government would still have to take possession of the infrastructure (after extension condemnation hearings that would still require paying fair value for it) in order to remove it from the right of ways, with no recourse for recovery. Why would there be such an obligation? And even if there was, it is highly unlikely the local government will be paying top dollar for the assets owned by a defunct private entity. State telecom law: over and over requires the local government to take possession of and to pay fair market value for the infrastructure of a failed broadband video provider in the right of way. The local government can either acquire just the infrastructure in the right of way, and then pay for its demolition, or they can acquire the right of way infrastructure as well as any additional structure the failed company will sell them at the price set by the failed company (but at minimum fair market value), and attempt to resell the system to a new provider. Yes, fair market value is not top dollar, but it is not cheap either. -- ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet telnet://bbs.iscabbs.com Professional Geographer Geographic Information Science researcher | |
|
 |  |  |  |  See 7 replies to this post | |
 |  patcat88 join:2002-04-05 Jamaica, NY kudos:1 | said by pnh102:I wish we had more legislators who applied this type of thinking all over government. Local governments do NOT need any more excuses to raise taxes on those of us who are not interested in a local Internet racket. They already have enough expenses and they are whining about "declining tax revenues" or other BS and yet they can cough up the cash to build this sort of thing? Would you support replacing your local police with Wakenhut contractors which deliver more value to taxpayers? If not, why then? | |
|  |  | | So your faith in government has an inverse relationship with taxation, or a direct relationship with business interests? In any case, it's becoming a bigger and bigger liability for communities without broadband access. When businesses can't be enticed by the states to offer services, it's understandably difficult for communities left out to not explore their own solutions. | |
|  |  ThalerPremium join:2004-02-02 Los Angeles, CA kudos:3 Reviews:
·DSL EXTREME
| said by pnh102:Local governments do NOT need any more excuses to raise taxes on those of us who are not interested in a local Internet racket. Shouldn't the tax-paying constituents of the local government still have the option to seek tax-funded internet options, especially when competitive businesses have made it clear that they have no intentions to ever wire their area?
I just never see a state-wide ruling to limit what local governments do with their own tax base as a good thing. | |
|
 Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium join:2002-03-03 USA kudos:4 | Advocates mislead on repairs and new customers
Meanwhile, operations like the community fiber build in Wilson, North Carolina say Hoyle's bill forces them to hold a referendum any time they want to repair service or add new customers. That is based on a misleading reading of the bill by advocates.
No vote is needed to make repairs. A vote MIGHT be needed if they wanted to spend millions to totally upgrade the system with new technology.
No vote is needed to sign up new customers in existing passed homes. A vote MIGHT be needed if the system was going to spend millions to expand in to new territories. -- Are you happy with your rep in Washington, DC? | |
|  |  See 12 replies to this post | |
 | | yeap well my city i live in was in a hurricane and comcast which had no back up or anything else. took well over a month to fix it. this was the ems network! so my city kick all their isp and kept their network and now has its own isp from iy | |
|  jophanPremium join:2009-07-12 Jenkintown, PA | Community owned utilities Having lived in a city which owns its own gas company, I can just see a future of community owned internet. No-show jobs for every rejected legislator, subsidies for the incumbent party's favored groups paid for by everyone else, deferred maintenance so the cash can flow back to the city's general fund. | |
|  |  patcat88 join:2002-04-05 Jamaica, NY kudos:1 | Re: Community owned utilities said by jophan:Having lived in a city which owns its own gas company, I can just see a future of community owned internet. No-show jobs for every rejected legislator, subsidies for the incumbent party's favored groups paid for by everyone else, deferred maintenance so the cash can flow back to the city's general fund. You can do exactly the same with the Public Works Dept, Parks Dept, Education Department, Library, etc. Any govt agency can hire rejected legislators as no-show "consultants" on retainer. | |
|
 | | $$$ this would be an outstanding time to be in politics. think of the money to be had! | |
|  CheesePremium join:2003-10-26 Naples, FL kudos:1 | NC Being ignorant is bad | |
|  RJ44 join:2001-10-19 Nashville, TN | Taxes Speaking of FUD...receiving a tax break on purchase of equipment does not equate to a company not paying any taxes as the story states. These "editorials" take a lot of liberty with facts. | |
|  |  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD | Re: Taxes said by RJ44:Speaking of FUD...receiving a tax break on purchase of equipment does not equate to a company not paying any taxes as the story states. These "editorials" take a lot of liberty with facts. I would imagine that any business that purchases equipment that is not intended for resale would be required to pay sales tax on those purchases. Of course the income they use to pay for those purchases is also taxed.
The real kicker of course is we pay the costs of those taxes in the form of higher prices for products and services offered for sale. -- "Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
|
 Z80APremium join:2009-11-23 Reviews:
·Cox HSI
4 edits | Hoyle is committing a felony Taking money in exchange for political favors is bribery and a Class F Felony in the State of NC.
said by NC Law : § 120-86. Bribery, etc. (a) No person shall offer or give to a legislator or a member of a legislator's immediate family, or to a business with which the legislator is associated, and no legislator shall solicit or receive, anything of monetary value, including a gift, favor or service or a promise of future employment, based on any understanding that the legislator's vote, official actions or judgment would be influenced thereby, or where it could reasonably be inferred that the thing of value would influence the legislator in the discharge of the legislator's duties.
»www.ethicscommission.nc.gov/colaws.htm
Where is the A.G. of N.C.? | |
|  |  See 12 replies to this post | |
 Z80APremium join:2009-11-23 Reviews:
·Cox HSI
| Just more totalitarianism It is not the job of the state to tell the cities what they can or can't buy or local voters what they can or can't spend their own money on or what projects they want.
This is just another case of bribery, plain and simple. Of the corporations, for the corporations. This democrat has ZERO interest in protecting taxpayers, just his contributors including TWC and AT&T who gave thousands to Hoyle. | |
|  |  2 edits | Re: Just more totalitarianism in most threads you seem to be alright with of and for the corporations.
why is this one different?
--
(okay I figured it out : because this one involves a Democrat)
you are mighty transparent. | |
|
 | | see that mans face start drawing horns now | |
|  |  gaforcesUnited We Stand, Divided We Fall join:2002-04-07 Santa Cruz, CA | Re: see that mans face Let them eat FIBER MuwAHAHAHAHAhahahah |  Just for funn |
Never, ever, put yer pic on the net ... -- Let them eat FIBER! | |
|
 | | I'm sick of all the BS about taxes. I am so sick of this LAME excuse about "tax payers money" being used whenever the issue of muni-broadband comes up. I am sick of all the freakin crying for something that is NOT hurting people like the talking heads would like for others to believe. Please, stop the BS and get a better accountant. OR learn how to do your own taxes (it's not hard) and save yourself some money. | |
|  | | Quote of the Article The telecommunications industry has some of the most powerful lobbyists at the statehouse. Hoyle contends he is not swayed by their support of the bill, even though the Time Warner PAC contributed $6,000 to Hoyle's campaign in 2009.
"The lobbyists don't influence me," he said. "I'm in the pocket of the people that provide jobs for this state, and Time Warner Cable employees, 8,500 in this state, and I can't imagine any one that would want to compete with that."
Enough said! | |
|  camaro92Question everythingPremium join:2008-04-05 Westfield, MA Reviews:
·Comcast
| Wake up people aside from buying politicians,these greedy SOB's want to come out and say no we won't wire up your town but you aren't also,i say a giant FUCK YOU to every single isp/telco,and for the republ.... side of the argument about using my taxes,well go out your front door and look around,roads,schools and tell me that you believe that a big chunk of your taxes goes right back in your city/town at least this way you can see the result of your hard earned dollars that get paid. | |
|  |  See 6 replies to this post | |
 Reviews:
·Optimum Online
·Verizon FiOS
| the time's come & gone why is it THE MOST IMPORTANT BUSINESS OF ANY STATE GOVERNMENT to protect it's monopoly telecommunications companies with new entrant regulation? no industry should get to lock out competition when it's needed more than ever.
stop screwing the people & tackle important things.... | |
|  WhatNowPremium join:2009-05-06 Charlotte, NC | City monopoly If the Wilson succeeds and TWC and Embarq pulls out then Wilson will be free to charge whatever they please.
The town I live in has power supplied by 2 vendors. The original city limits is supplied by the city utility and the newer annexed parts are supplied by a private power company. The city power utility charges higher rates.
Wilson is using the city utility department and the city's power utility rates are higher then surrounding areas. I original bill in the last session just wanted these fiber departments to be completely separate. The local government could help raise the money but City buildings, personal and other departments of the city could not be used by the fiber department.
TWC and Embarq are required to supply service outside the town but Greenlight does not have to expand outside the town limits. Instead of city fiber utility they should be run by county government and everyone in the county would have to be served.
I have read that in one of the New England states they started a co-op that everyone with a power hookup or phone would get FTTH. I am just afraid when the urban areas get fiber there will not be a drum beat for the areas as they become more rural to get fiber also. I suggest start with the more rural areas and work in so when the project run way over budget there will still be a demand to finish it.
| |
|  Core0000Premium join:2008-05-04 Somerset, KY Reviews:
·New Wave Communi..
| What competition? It's mentioned in the article about protecting private industries.... but what's to protect, if there not serving an area? Or they decided to not upgrade an area... "No you have to keep our crappy service, you can't upgrade to fiber!"....
I mean that's ridiculous... If anyone ever thought politicians were not bought and paid for and the system is not gamed... well they just got a wake up call. | |
|  cptmilesPremium join:2004-04-22 Swayzee, IN | Tax Break Why don't the cities just give a tax break to any business that can provide an Internet service at a qualified speed and quality? Or if that isn't enough ask the city to subsidize $10-$20 per high speed service.
I have a hard time with the fact that the current providers are paying taxes and will continue to pay taxes to a city that will take that money and try to put them out of business with it.
It's like your elderly parents taking money from their kids to help keep them comfortable and when the parents die they give everything to the dog. | |
|  | | Some Facts I realize this is a blog, but some actual facts never hurt.
Before it went into competition with private business, Wilson was 100% served with broadband by TWC, Centurylink and others. TWC's network was fully upgraded, offering same capabilities as the largest cities anywhere in NC. That private industry was not willing to provide service in Wilson is a complete myth perpetuated by -- guess who -- the City of Wilson. What private providers were not willing to do was to overbuild their own network with a FTTH system -- which is a completely rational position. (And of course, Wilson says it's doing great -- but it is surviving by taking money from captive utility ratepayers and, to date, has yet to extend its network to even 50% of its citizens. It's run out of money, so it'll probably never complete its network. It actually filed a first round BTOP application trying to get a federal bailout but was denied.)
What industry has been saying in NC since the emergence of Wilson's overbuild of private industry has been -- "if you want to compete, do it as a market entrant." In other words, you shouldn't have special tax advantages, etc.
Answer this. Companies like AT&T, TWC -- like 'em or not -- pay taxes and employ people. Why should the government subsidize *governmental* competition against these companies by permitting special tax breaks and other advantages?
The bill that Senator Hoyle has sponsored says that before a city enters into competition they must have a vote of the people. This simply undoes a bad court decision that created this mess in the first place.
Please read about what's happening with MI Connection, owned by Davidson and Mooresville. This system is losing money hand over fist and is about to bankrupt the town of Davidson -- which has already laid off 35% of its work force. Davidson now has to plug a hole caused by its money-losing cable operation which is equal to 30% of its entire city budget! This for a system that leaders promised would pay for itself. This for a system that private industry was ready, willing and able to operate.
The people of Davidson and Mooresville would not be in the situation they are in -- where their taxes are probably going to be increased to pay for this boondoogle -- if they had been allowed to vote on this beforehand. | |
|  |  | | Re: Some Facts said by CableRep:Before it went into competition with private business, Wilson was 100% served with broadband by TWC, Centurylink and others. TWC's network was fully upgraded, offering same capabilities as the largest cities anywhere in NC. That private industry was not willing to provide service in Wilson is a complete myth perpetuated by -- guess who -- the City of Wilson. But the city wanted real broadband, not 2, 5, 7 or 10Mb and not with anemic uploads capacity. They wanted their residents to have fast symmetrical connections to the internet, to help drive jobs and economic growth.
The great motivator for cable cos to implement DOCSIS 3 has been Verizon FIOS, FIOS isn't available in NC, and NC had poor DOCSIS 3 deployment at the time the city of Wilson decided to move forward with Greenlight.
Funny how TWC decided to upgrade the City of Wilson only after they moved forward with their plans.
No local competition, no reason to offer better services. Now you have local competition and you offer better service. Who was right? The City of Wilson.
Your incumbent spin is going to mostly fall on deaf ears on this board. | |
|  |  | | Answer this. Companies like AT&T, TWC -- like 'em or not -- pay taxes and employ people. Why should the government subsidize *governmental* competition against these companies by permitting special tax breaks and other advantages? I would ask why the information on how much TWC, Centurylink/Embarq and AT&T actually pay in taxes isn't on the table. Prove your point, I'd be glad to listen. But with all the money TWC and the like receive in tax breaks here in NC, the outcome of your answer would likely resemble Exxon/Mobile's ax returns and a lack of paying anything.
As for jobs, who do you think runs municipal systems? They also create jobs. Not just jobs for customer service, but installs, digging for fiber deployment, etc...
Tax advantages...let's talk about the JDIG grant from the NC Dept of Commerce that TWC received to build their new $29 million HQ in Charlotte or the countless tax breaks they get here in NC.
For your argument to be compelling you first have to put all the facts on the table. | |
|  |  Host: Road Runner PC gaming GAMES PC gaming Tech
| I realize this is a blog, but some actual facts never hurt. I realize you're a paid cable industry employee who repeats talking points whether they're true or not. Nice way to start a conversation.TWC's network was fully upgraded Wilson was seeing DOCSIS 3.0 upgrades?That private industry was not willing to provide service in Wilson is a complete myth perpetuated by -- guess who -- the City of Wilson. I think more accurately Wilson was saying Time Warner Cable's services were expensive and slow -- which in many uncompetitive markets, they are. Enter Wilson and -- perhaps you'd like to tell people what happened to Time Warner Cable's bi-annual rate hikes?What industry has been saying in NC since the emergence of Wilson's overbuild of private industry has been -- "if you want to compete, do it as a market entrant." In other words, you shouldn't have special tax advantages, etc. This from an industry where the wealthiest operators literally write the laws and see countless subsidies and tax cuts (usually for doing nothing)? You've got to be joking...The bill that Senator Hoyle has sponsored says that before a city enters into competition they must have a vote of the people. This simply undoes a bad court decision that created this mess in the first place. That's crap. The bill is designed to strangle these city fiber installations and force referendums for financing anything.
You seem loose with the facts for someone so concerned with factual accuracy. | |
|
 | |
|
|