AT&T Says Broadband Deployment Suffers Without Franchise Reform
Broadband deployment will wither without reform of local video franchising, AT&T and a telecom trade group said in answer to an FCC inquiry. USTelecom, speaking for Verizon and other Bells that sell video service, urged standardization of the process for awarding local pay TV permits, but cable firms and cities across the country said local franchise authorities fairly award video licensees to new entrants.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
Commenters largely echoed previous remarks to lawmakers and the FCC, in their filings to the FCC: Bells want regulatory relief. Cable generally pushes the status quo. The FCC inquiry was seen as a win for Bells (CD Nov 4 p1).
AT&T doesn’t need local nods to sell its fledgling IPTV product, since it “will not be providing ‘cable service’ over ‘cable systems’ as those terms are defined by the Communications Act,” the firm said. Verizon griped that “the process is often marked by inordinate delay” -- in many cities talks have lasted more than 6 months.
But NCTA presented data it claimed show Verizon hasn’t had trouble getting franchises. Verizon, selling FiOS fiber TV, got 12 franchises in less than 6 months, NCTA said: “The process has not and will not be an impediment to deployment of competitive video service.” NCTA said AT&T had acquired 100 franchises, which “speaks volumes about how serious this complaint really is.”
USTelecom’s filing more deeply linked video and broadband deployment than others. “Video services are essential to broadband deployment,” the telecom group said: “The cable franchise process, as implemented today, is inconsistent with national broadband policy.” It said the FCC should decide: (1) Bells needn’t build out TV service to entire franchise areas. (2) Bells can get franchise deals with better terms than cable operators’ pacts. (3) Franchises must be granted to telecom firms with existing wireline rights of way. (4) There must be minimum and maximum periods for franchise application reviews. (5) Cities should be barred from requiring payment beyond a 5% federally mandated franchise fee. AT&T asked the Commission to require “a streamlined, 30-day franchising process for established wireline network operators.”
Cities should keep the right to refuse to award licenses given good reason, the Tex. Coalition of Cities for Utility Issues said: “TCCFUI urges the Commission to not further restrict, beyond what is in current federal law, the processes by which local governments, and now in Texas the PUCT, awards a cable franchise.” The group represents Corpus Christi, Dallas, Ft. Worth and other cities. San Diego and many other cities said municipalities are quick to issue franchises. AT&T warned broadband and advanced video deployment will lag if it must build out every system completely: “Make no mistake about it: unless the Commission acts now to remove build-out barriers to entry, entire communities will be denied the robust facilities-based video and broadband competition that would otherwise occur.”