HomeMy WebLinkAboutLegislative Review - S1349 (Rockefeller) and HR 3146 (Blackburn) Franchise FeeCITY OF PALM DESERT
Community Services Division
Staff Report
REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF LEGISLATIVE REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION
ON S1349 (ROCKEFELLER) AND HR 3146 (BLACKBURN) AT ITS
MEETING OF JULY 26, 2005
SUBMITTED BY: Patricia Scully, CFEE, Senior Management Analyst
DATE: August 25, 2005
CONTENTS: S1349 and HR 3146 Language
RECOMMENDATION:
By Minute Motion, concur with the action taken by the Legislative Review Committee at Its
Meeting of July 26, 2005, and direct staff to prepare a letter of opposition for the Mayor's
signature with regard to S1349 (Rockefeller) and HR 3146 (Blackburn) relative to franchise fees.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
S1349 and HR 3146 are designed to benefit broadband, satellite, and other new
communications technology companies.
BACKGROUND:
Current law allows local agencies to collect franchise fees for rights -of -way encroachments for
cable television services. If passed, S1349 and HR 3146 would restrict or limit local
government's ability to regulate and control other types of video, internet, and
telecommunications services, even when public rights-of-wayn are utilized. In addition, the
language of these bills would prohibit franchise agreements, therefore eliminating the tools cities
use to collect franchise fees and manage their rights -of -way. While franchise fees would not
specifically be prohitibted, no actual mechanism would be enforceable because the bills do not
permit franchise agreements. While both bills recognize local authority over use of rights -of -
way, the language prohibits local franchising authority and prohibits economic redlining by
removing local enforcement.
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
RE: S1349 and HR 3146
AUGUST 25, 2005
Because the language of S1349 and HR 3146 removes local control of franchise fee collection
for rights -of -way use, the Legislative Review Committee recommends that the City Council
oppose both bills and direct staff to prepare a letter stating that position to appropriate
legislators for the Mayor's signature.
PATRICIA SC LY, CFEE
I
ACM/COMMUNITY SE
PS:mpg
CARLOS L. O EGA
CITY MANA ER
2
Pagel of 4
THIS SF-IRCH THIS DOCUMENT GO TO
Next Hit Forward New Bills Search
Prev Hit Back HomePage
Hit List Best Sections Help
Contents Display
GPO's PDF Congressional_Record Bill Summary &
Di_play References Status
Video Choice Act of 2005 (Introduced in Senate)
S 1349 IS
109th CONGRESS
1 st Session
S. 1349
Printer Friendly _DiSplay - 8,706
bytes.[Help]
To promote deployment of competitive video services, eliminate redundant and unnecessary regulation,
and further the development of next generation broadband networks.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
June 30, 2005
Mr. SMITH (for himself and Mr. ROCKEFELLER) introduced the following bill; which was read twice
and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
A BILL
To promote deployment of competitive video services, eliminate redundant and unnecessary regulation,
and further the development of next generation broadband networks.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States ofAmerica in
Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the 'Video Choice Act of 2005'.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds the following:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?cl 09:S.1349: 7/26/2005
Page 2 of 4
(1) Cable rates continue to rise substantially faster than the overall rate of inflation.
(2) Wire -based competition in video services is limited to very few markets. According to
the Federal Communications Commission, only 2 percent of all cable subscribers have the
opportunity to choose between 2 or more wire -based video service providers.
(3) It is only through wire -based video competition that price competition exists. The
Government Accountability Office has confirmed that where wire -based competition exists,
cable rates are 15 percent lower than in markets without competition.
(4) It is in the public interest to further wire -based competition in the video services market
in order to provide greater consumer choice and lower prices for video services.
(5) To spur competition in the communications industry, Congress has decreased the
regulatory burden on new entrants, thereby increasing entry into the market and creating
competition.
(6) The United States continues to fall behind in broadband deployment rates. According to
a recent study by the International Telecommunications Union, the United States is now
ranked 16th in the world in broadband deployment.
(7) The deployment of advanced high capacity networks would greatly spur economic
development in rural America.
(8) The deployment of advanced networks that can offer substantially higher capacity are
critical to the long-term competitiveness of the United States.
SEC. 3. AMENDMENT TO COMMUNICATIONS ACT.
Title VI of the Communication Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 521 et seq.) is amended by adding at the
end the following:
'PART VI --VIDEO CHOICE
'SEC. 661. DEFINITION.
'In this part, the term 'competitive video services provider' means any provider of video
programming, interactive on -demand services, other programming services, or any other video
services who has any right, permission, or authority to access public rights -of -way independent of
any cable franchise obtained pursuant to section 621 or pursuant to any other Federal, State, or
local law.
'SEC. 662. REGULATORY FRAMEWORK.
'(a) Redundant Franchises Prohibited- Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, no
competitive video services provider may be required, whether pursuant to section 621 or to any
other provision of Federal, State, or local law, to obtain a franchise in order to provide any video
programming, interactive on -demand services, other programming services, or any other video
services in any area where such provider has any right, permission, or authority to access public
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/querv/z?c 109:S.1349: 7/26/2005
Page 3 of 4
rights -of -way independent of any cable franchise obtained pursuant to section 621 or pursuant to
any other Federal, State, or local law.
(b) Fees-
'(1) IN GENERAL- Any competitive video services provider who provides a service that
otherwise would qualify as a cable service provided over a cable system shall be subject to
the payment of fees to a local franchise authority based on the gross revenues of such
provider that are attributable to the provision of such service within such provider's service
area.
'(2) CONSIDERATIONS- In determining the fees required by this subsection--
'(A)(i) the rate at which fees are imposed shall not exceed the rate at which franchise
fees are imposed on any cable operator providing cable service in the franchise area,
as determined in accordance with section 622 and any related regulations; or
'(ii) in any jurisdiction in which no cable operator provides service, the rate at which
franchise fees are imposed shall not exceed the statewide average; and
' (B) the only revenues that shall be considered are those attributable to services that
would be considered in calculating franchise fees if such provider were deemed a
cable operator for purposes of section 622 and any related regulations.
'(3) BILLING- A competitive video services provider shall designate that portion of the bill
of a subscriber attributable to the fee under paragraph (2) as a separate item on the bill.
(c) Terms of Service- A competitive video services provider shall--
'(1) be subject to the retransmission consent provisions of section 325(b);
' (2)(A) carry, within each local franchise area, any public, educational, or governmental use
channels that are carried by cable operators within such franchise area pursuant to section
611; or
'(B) provide, in any jurisdiction in which no cable operator provides service, reasonable
public, educational and government access facilities pursuant to section 611;
'(3) be subject to the must -carry provisions of section 614;
(4) carry noncommercial, educational channels as required by section 615;
'(5) be considered a multichannel video programming distributor for purposes of section
628 and be entitled to the benefits and protection of that section;
'(6) protect the personally identifiable information of its subscribers as required in section
631;
' (7) comply with any consumer protection and customer service requirements promulgated
by the Commission pursuant to section 632;
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c 109:5.1349: 7/26/2005
Page 4 of 4
'(8) not be subject to any other provisions of this title; and
' (9) not deny services to any group of potential residential subscribers because of the
income of the residents of the local area in which such group resides.
'(d) Regulatory Treatment- Except to the extent expressly provided in this part, neither the
Commission nor any State or political subdivision thereof may regulate the rates, charges, terms,
conditions for, entry into, exit from, deployment of, provision of; or any other aspect of the
services provided by a competitive video services provider.
' (e) State and Local Government Authority- Except as provided in subsection (a), nothing in this
section affects the authority of a State or local government to manage the public rights -of -way or
to enact or enforce any consumer protection law.'.
SEC. 4. REGULATION OF COMMON CARRIERS.
Section 651(a)(3) of the Federal Communications Act (47 U.S.C. 571(a)(3)) is amended —
(I) in subparagraph (A), by striking 'or' after the semicolon;
(2) in subparagraph (B), by striking the period and inserting '; or'; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
'(C) if such carrier is a competitive video services provider providing video
programming pursuant to part VI of this title, such carrier shall not be subject to the
requirements of this title but instead shall be subject only to the provisions of part VI
of this title.'.
SEC. 5. EXISTING FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS.
Any franchise agreement entered into by a franchising authority and a competitive video service
provider for the provision of video service prior to the date of enactment of this Act shall be
exempt from the provisions of this Act for the term of such agreement.
THIS SEARCH
Next Hit
Prev Hit
Hit List
THIS DOCUMENT
Forward
Back
Best Sections
Contents Display
GO TO
New Bills Search
HomePage
Help
http://thomas.toe.gov/cgi-bin/querv/z?c 109:S.1349: 7/26/2005
Pagel of 4
THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT GO TO
Next Hit Forward New Bills Search
Prev Hit Back H_omePage
Hit List Best Sections Help
Contents Display
GPO's PDF Congressional Record Bill Summary & Printer Frien_Display_, - XML
Display References Status 7,855 bytes.[Help] Display_
f Helpj
Video Choice Act of 2005 (Introduced in House)
HR 3146 IH
109th CONGRESS
1 st Session
H. R. 3146
To promote deployment of competitive video services and eliminate redundant and unnecessary
regulation.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
June 30, 2005
Mrs. BLACKBURN (for herself and Mr. WYNN) introduced the following bill; which was referred to
the Committee on Energy and Commerce
A BILL
To promote deployment of competitive video services and eliminate redundant and unnecessary
regulation.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States ofAmerica in
Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the 'Video Choice Act of 2005'.
SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF VIDEO CHOICE REGULATORY RELIEF.
The Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 151 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?cI09:H.R.3146: 7/26/2005
Page 2 of 4
following new title:
'TITLE VIII--VIDEO CHOICE REGULATORY RELIEF
'SEC. 801. DEFINITIONS.
'(a) Competitive Video Services Provider- For purposes of this title, the term 'competitive video
services provider' means any provider of video programming, interactive on -demand services,
other programming services, or any other video services, who has, pursuant to any Federal, State,
or local law, any right, permission, or authority to establish or use lines in or across public rights -
of -way, which right, permission or authority does not rely on, and is independent of, any cable
franchise obtained pursuant to section 621.
'(b) Other Terms- For the purposes of this title, any term used in this title that is defined by
section 602 has the meaning provided by that section.
'SEC. 802. REGULATORY RELIEF.
'(a) Redundant Franchises Prohibited- Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, no
competitive video services provider may be required, whether pursuant to section 621 or to any
other provision of Federal, State, or local law, to obtain a franchise, in order to provide any video
programming, interactive on -demand services, other programming services, or any other video
services in any geographic area if the provider has, pursuant to any Federal, State, or local law,
any right, permission, or authority to establish lines in or across public rights -of -way in such
geographic area, which right, permission or authority does not rely on, and is independent of, any
cable franchise obtained pursuant to section 621.
' (b) Fees-
' (1) FEES PERMITTED- Any competitive video services provider may be subject to the
payment of fees to a local franchising authority, based on the gross revenues of the provider
within the jurisdiction of such franchising authority, subject to the limitations of paragraph
(2)•
(2) LIMITS ON FEES- In determining the fees that may be required under paragraph (I) --
'(A) the rate at which fees are imposed shall not exceed--
'(i) the rate at which franchise fees are imposed on any cable operator
providing cable service in the jurisdiction of the franchising authority, as
determined in accordance with section 622 and any related regulations; or
'(ii) in any jurisdiction in which no cable operator provides service, no more
than the rate at which franchise fees could be imposed rate on a cable operator
in accordance with section 622 and any related regulations; and
' (B) the only revenues that shall be considered are those attributable to services that
would be considered in calculating franchise fees if the provider were deemed a cable
operator for purposes of section 622 and any related regulations.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c 109:H.R.3146: 7/26/2005
Page 3 of 4
'(3) ITEMIZED BILLING PERMITTED- The competitive video services provider may
designate that portion of the end user's bill attributable to the fee under this subsection as a
separate item on the bill.
' (c) Regulatory Treatment-
(1) OBLIGATIONS AND DUTIES- Any competitive video services provider shall --
'(A) be subject to the retransmission consent provisions of section 325(b);
'(B) carry, within each local franchise area, any public, educational, or governmental
use channels that are carried by cable operators within such franchise area, and, in
any franchise area not served by a cable operator, provide reasonable public,
educational or governmental access facilities pursuant to section 611;
'(C) carry the signals of local commercial television stations as required by section
614;
'(D) carry the signals of local noncommercial educational television stations as
required by section 615;
' (E) not deny services to any group of potential residential subscribers because of the
income of the residents of the local area in which such group resides;
' (F) be entitled to the benefits and protection of section 628;
' (G) protect the personally identifiable information of its subscribers in the same
manner as is required of cable operators with respect to subscribers to cable services
under section 631;
'(H) comply with any consumer protection and customer service requirements
promulgated by the Commission pursuant to section 632;
'(I) be entitled to the benefits and protection of section 633;
' (J) be subject to the requirements of section 641;
'(K) be subject to the prohibition on buy outs of or by the incumbent cable operator
under section 652, and
(L) not be subject to any other provisions of title VI of this Act.
'(2) DETERMINATIONS OF LOCAL SIGNALS- For purposes of complying with
paragraphs (1) (C) and (D), a competitive video service provider shall treat as local
television stations with respect to a customer located within the jurisdiction of any
franchising authority the same stations that are treated as local television stations for a cable
system located within such jurisdiction.
' (d) Other Regulation Prohibited- Except to the extent expressly provided in this title, neither the
Commission nor any State or political subdivision thereof may regulate the rates, charges, terms,
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c 109:H.R.3146: 7/26/2005