 |  | 
marigolds
Gainfully employed, finally
Premium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
| Re: The FCC is trying to shove it down states throats said by supergirl  :I do think it shouldn't take more than 90 days to get a deal though if they take all the corruption out of the process. It depends on how often your city council meets.
At minimum, you have to do three readings for the enabling ordinance and one reading to accept the franchise. In most areas, this is going to take six weeks. If you city council meets only once a month, there's your 90 days right there (assuming you do the first reading of the enabling ordinance the same day you are notified on the franchise, otherwise you might as well not bother because it is impossible to pass a franchise in 90 days). Special meetings can help, but obviously with a 90 day timeline the city would not have the required time to advertise and report and agenda for a special meeting anyway.
This means the city has no time to hire a franchising consultant or run a community needs assessment. Without a community needs assessment (which has to be run by a qualified consultant or qualified city staff - which few cities have), the city cannot legally institute buildout requirements, PEG support, and several other requirements that they are otherwise legally allowed to make.
Without an enabling ordinance (which normally needs to be drafted by a telecommunications lawyer), the city cannot do franchise oversight.
When you add up the time to RFP and hire a consultant (who also is the telecom attorney for the city), drafting and passing an enabling ordinance, and approving a franchise (which in some states or cities requires three readings), there's not a whole lot of that 90 days left to do a community needs assessment or run public hearings. This means virtually zero time to negotiate any part of the deal before the franchise is automatically approved. Ultimately, if a city wants any chance at all of negotiating they are going to have to hire a telcom lawyer onto city staff or keep a franchising consult on contract.
--
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
telnet://bbs.iscabbs.com
Professional Geographer
Geographic Information Science researcher | |
| | | 
jslik
That just happened
Premium
join:2006-03-17
clubs:
| Re: The FCC is trying to shove it down states throats All excellent points!
Plus, there is no incentive for any provider to work fast with a city to make that 90 day time frame. In fact, the slower the provider can go in this process, the better for them....
--
If they told you wolverines would make good house pets, would you believe them?
-"Planes, Trains & Automobiles" | |
| Time4aNAP
Premium
join:2007-04-09
Des Plaines, IL
 ·Speakeasy
 ·Comcast
| Reform? Although the dictionary definition of reform is rather broad, in political terms it has always connoted a change for the better. For the last quarter-century however, "reform" has become synonymous with unchecked deregulation and giant steps backwards when it comes to serving The People.
This latest "reform" is no different. We've already lost all that was good about 'standards and practices' for terrestrial broadcast TV. Let's not repeat the same mistake one more time.
Just say "no" to voodoo economics. | |
| 
gwion
wild colonial boy
Premium,ExMod 2001-08
join:2000-12-28
Pittsburgh, PA
| Reform might not be a bad idea... The fact remains, numerous local governments are still in bed with their franchised monopoly CTV providers. They're not issuing new franchises, as a matter of policy. The old days of de jure monopoly are over, granted, but de facto monopolies are still almost the normative case, among CTV providers and their municipalities.
This goes beyond the cash streams of franchise fees. Those would come, from all providers. It goes to lobbying, at the grass roots level...
Reform's not indicated, it's shouted for. Perhaps not in the precise form that the telcoms would like to see it, granted, but in some form.
In real fact, the reform that's shouted for is in lobbying regulation. Where is the line... the one between "lobbying" and "bribery and blackmail"?
My favorite suggestion for reform? Make organized, professional lobbying, on any side, a felony. That's real reform. 
--
Semper Eadem
--
... For Fergus rules the brazen cars,
And rules the shadows of the wood,
And the white breast of the dim sea
And all dishevelled wandering stars. | |
| | 
kruser
Premium
join:2002-06-01
Chesterfield, MO
clubs:
edit:
June 24th, @02:59AM
| Re: Reform might not be a bad idea... . | |
| | | | | |
|
|
Fighting The FCC on Video Franchise Reform
·
