Laserfiche WebLink
NINS11111 <br /> 111171,111 <br /> MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL UTILITIES ASSOCIATION <br /> 12905 Highway 55 • Suite 212 • Plymouth, MN 55441-3859 • 763.551.1230 • 800 422 0119(MN( • Fax 763.551.0459 <br /> Municipal Telecommunications <br /> Few would argue that a modem telecommunications infrastructure is key to economic <br /> growth in the 21St century. Yet, many areas of our state are without this infrastructure, <br /> which is necessary to keep a community economically viable. <br /> The state's municipal electric utilities and small and rural telecom providers share much <br /> the same perspective on broadband deployment in Minnesota, a fact that emerged during <br /> testimony before the House Regulated Industries Committee on Jan. 29, 2003. <br /> One member of the Minnesota Association of Rural Telecos testified that his company <br /> began offering DSL three years ago because a local Polaris dealer needed it to remain in <br /> business. The company didn't do a business plan. It made the investment because <br /> broadband access was vital for the community. <br /> But small, local telecos are not present in all parts of the state. And they have only have <br /> so much money to invest in broadband deployment. Another small telephone company <br /> manager told the Regulated Industries Committee in an Oct. 30, 2001 hearing that <br /> broadband deployment in Greater Minnesota was cost prohibitive without subsidization. <br /> Minnesota's dominant local exchange carrier—Qwest—reported a preliminary net loss of <br /> $35.9 billion in 2002 and a net loss of$4.8 billion in 2001. The company testified before <br /> the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission Feb. 4 that it did not view DSL deployment in <br /> Greater Minnesota as a good business decision. <br /> Cities without broadband access should not be relegated to the economic backwaters. The <br /> Legislature can allow cities to better control their own economic destiny by: <br /> • Removing barriers to entry for municipal telecommunications efforts. <br /> • Giving municipals specific authority to enter into joint telecommunications <br /> ventures with other entities. <br /> • Giving cities an opportunity to bid on local exchanges, if they are to be sold. <br /> Remove barriers to entry. Like many local phone companies, municipals view <br /> broadband access as a service necessary to ensure economic viability. To foster <br /> broadband access, we must be allowed a reasonable opportunity to provide <br /> telecommunications services ourselves. That means reducing the 65 percent super- <br /> majority referendum requirement to provide phone service contained in current state law <br /> with municipal authority upon a vote of the city council. Removing the super-majority to <br /> provide phone service requirement will give cities leverage with incumbent telephone <br /> (and cable) companies, because the companies will realize that if they don't move to <br />