Bells, Cable Lobby FCC Before Expected TV Franchise Vote
Bells and cable were lobbying FCC 8th floor officials on fiber and cable franchising rules before a coming vote on an order addressing municipal mandates that some telecom companies call onerous. FCC Chmn. Martin has said he wants a vote this year (CD Oct 13 p5). Cable, Bell and city officials have met at least 8 times this month with commissioners or aides on franchising, including twice with Martin, ex parte filings show.
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.
The FCC could vote on the Sec. 621 franchising inquiry as soon as the Dec. 20 agenda meeting, a Commission official said. An order wasn’t circulating last week on the 8th floor, but there’s time for that before the meeting, said the official. A cable executive said the vote probably won’t take place until early 2007.
Martin is believed to be weighing whether to limit city buildout requirements in an order his office would circulate to other commissioners, the FCC staffer said. Another provision probably under consideration would set a “shot- clock” limit on how long towns have to review a video provider’s franchise submission, the person said. The official wasn’t privy to Martin’s thinking.
The FCC lacks power to block towns from making new pay TV entrants extend service to all residents within a set time, said groups representing municipalities. And the franchising process works, the National Assn. of Telecom Officers & Advisors, National League of Cities, U.S. Conference of Mayors and other groups said in a joint filing. “Even if there was a problem, which there was not, the Commission has no legal authority to act as suggested in the NPRM or by industry commenters,” they said. A Feb. FCC notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) said franchising seems to be a roadblock to new video entrants. The municipal groups’ representatives met Nov. 2 with Martin, Comrs. Adelstein, Copps and Tate, and a McDowell aide.
Time Warner Cable’s arguments resembled the cities’. The company’s filing said: “Congress created a clear mechanism for the courts, not the Commission, to review local franchising decisions and gave the Commission no authority to abrogate state and local level-playing field provisions and build-out requirements.” Company officials met Nov. 9 with aides to McDowell, Copps and Martin to discuss franchising.
Buildout rules aren’t needed to ensure poor residents’ access to video service, BellSouth said last month. Internet access was made widely available without such regulation, the company said: “With this rulemaking proceeding, the Commission would be acting in its well recognized administrative capacity, by interpreting the meaning of a statutory section that is within its general grant of authority.” The company will sell AT&T’s U-verse IPTV service if the FCC approves the 2 companies’ merger, an official said last month.
Verizon officials told Martin in a Nov. 6 meeting that franchising should be revamped. The company asked the FCC to “expeditiously… address key problem areas with the current local franchising process,” such as cable operators’ exclusive deals to sell TV to apartment buildings. Cities shouldn’t regulate VoIP and broadband products sold by companies also providing wireline phone service, Verizon said. Those “services remain interstate in nature and subject to federal jurisdiction,” it said, asking Martin to “ensure that these services are not subjected to the economic regulations that apply to traditional telephone services, regardless of the entity that provides them.”