HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 13-06 Franchise Cable Service
RESOLUTION NO. 13 - 06
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
*********
SUPPORTING THE CONTINUED AUTHORITY OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO
FRANCHISE CABLE SERVICE PROVIDERS AND OPPOSING LEGISLATION AND
REGULATORY EFFORTS TO DIVEST LOCAL GOVERNMENT OF THAT AUTHORITY
WHEREAS, the City's streets are public property, obtained and maintained by the City at great
expense; and
WHEREAS, cable television companies use the streets and highways for their lines which
provide service to customers, but only after obtaining permission to use this property for their lines; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to provisions in the federal Cable Act, such permission is typically granted
in a franchise obtained from local units of government by the cable companies, such as the Cable
Franchise Agreement that the City currently has with Comcast; and
WHEREAS, franchise agreements include important provisions to protect the community and its
residents such as provisions:
. Managing the lines in the streets so that there is minimal disruption, safety codes are followed,
and all types of users (cars, pedestrians, utilities) can use the streets with the least interference
from others;
. Requiring providers to repair the streets they harm and relocate lines at their expense, if streets
are straightened, widened, or otherwise worked on;
. Prohibiting redlining either directly or by delays in serving minority and low-income areas,
which is especially offensive when public property is being used to provide service;
· Ensuring nondiscriminatory service, such as by requiring lines to be extended to all areas with
a certain population density;
. Requiring bonds, insurance, and other security so municipalities and their residents are
protected if the provider causes damage or goes bankrupt, as some have;
. Requiring local cable channels for local units of government, schools and the public, and
requiring funding from the cable company to support such charmels;
. Providing cash compensation in the form of franchise fees to the local unit of government in
return for the providers' use of valuable public property for their lines;
. Obtaining in kind compensation for such use, such as free provision of some channels to city
and school buildings and the provision oflines for municipal use;
. Setting customer service standards, protections, and enforcement mechanisms appropriate to
the municipality in question, including having the municipality assist in resolving customer
disputes when problems arise; and
. Requiring the carriage of local emergency alerts, which because they relate to local
emergencies are typically not carried on the federal emergency alert system;
WHEREAS, the preceding franchise provisions ensure cable service and use of the rights of way
are tailored to the local needs of each municipality, and such localism has been Federal law and policy
since 1984 and the policy of municipalities for 30 years before that;
Reso No. 13-06, Adopted 2/7/06
Page I of3
WHEREAS, for over 50 years, cable companies have been required to obtain local franchises
before providing service, and such a requirement has served the nation and the public well;
WHEREAS, Congress is now considering legislation on the provision of video, voice, and data
services using Internet Protocol technology that may limit or abolish cable and telephone franchises, such
as by proposals to replace them with a national franchise;
WHEREAS, the use ofInternet Protocol technology to deliver cable service is only the latest in a
series of technical improvements over the past 50 years in cable television, such as the replacement of
vacuum tubes with integrated circuits, and the shift from black and white to color, and does not change
the basic nature of cable service;
WHEREAS, limiting or abolishing cable franchises would violate property rights and principles
of Federalism by taking portions of the streets and rights of way for providers' lines without the
agreement of the municipality in question, without adequate provision to tailor the franchise and services
to meet local needs, and without the provisions in cable franchises necessary to protect the municipality,
the public, and customers; and
WHEREAS, franchises and the protections they provide can only be effectively enforced locally,
as no Federal agency has the staff, budget or expertise to know the local conditions regarding service,
rights of way or problems in each of this country's many municipalities, and this nation's municipalities
have demonstrated over the past fifty years that cable franchises can be effectively enforced at the local
level;
WHEREAS, municipalities have franchised second cable companies in recent years, especially
where the second provider requested a cable franchise closely based on the existing cable company's
franchise, so that the local needs addressed by the municipality in the original franchise were met, and
both companies were treated similarly;
WHEREAS, telephone companies can promptly obtain cable franchises if they, too, request
franchises closely based on the franchise of the existing cable provider;
WHEREAS, cable franchises serve an important function, must be continued, and telephone
companies can obtain such franchises without hindering their provision ofInternet Protocol services;
WHEREAS, telephone companies in many states currently obtain franchises or other approval to
use the public streets, and provide compensation to municipalities for their use of public streets and rights
of way for their lines;
WHEREAS, providers of broadband data services, such as cable modem and DSL service,
similarly use the public streets and rights of way for the lines by which they provide service, and should
similarly provide compensation to municipalities;
WHEREAS, the main reason broadband services are made generally available throughout many
municipalities is because the main provider is the cable operator, and that company's cable franchise
requires it to provide service throughout the community;
Reso No. 13-06, Adopted 2/7/06
Page 2 of3
WHEREAS, legislation removing the sums municipalities currently receive from the preceding
types of providers for usage of the public streets would cost this nation's municipalities over $2 billion
per year, and would have a severe financial impact on municipalities at the time both state and Federal
funds for municipalities are being cut.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that City of Dublin affirms the prime importance of
local cable franchising in granting permission for cable companies to use valuable public property for
their lines; in providing needed protections for municipalities, the public, and cable customers; and in
tailoring franchise requirements and services to meet local needs; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Dublin supports the continued requirement for
providers of video services using the public rights of way to obtain cable franchises, whether that provider
is a cable company, a telephone company, or some other entity; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that City of Dublin opposes federal and state legislation and
federal regulatory efforts aimed at preventing municipalities from requiring broadband or telephone
providers who use the rights of way to obtain a local franchise or other local permission to use the public
streets; from being fairly compensated for such use; from maintaining local control and management of
the rights of way; from preventing redlining or other discriminatory practices; and from ensuring
appropriate consumer protections; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Dublin opposes legislation that would limit or
restrict the need for providers offering Internet protocol based video services to obtain cable franchises, or
which would impose other restrictions relating to such providers on the rights oflocal government to
manage their rights of way, be fairly compensated for same, provide needed protections for the
municipality, the public, and customers, and ensure that local needs are met.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of February, 2006, by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Hildenbrand, McCormick, Oravetz and Zika, and Mayor Lockhart
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
ATTES3, ~
. nl}.l\A .~
City lerk
Reso No. 13-06, Adopted 217106
Page 3 on