My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
INFORMATION #4 12-03-2007
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2000 - 2010
>
2007
>
12/03/2007
>
INFORMATION #4 12-03-2007
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/13/2008 2:59:27 PM
Creation date
11/30/2007 9:37:17 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
12/3/2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
"level playing field" provision which generally requires parity between an incumbent and new <br />entrant regarding franchise fees, build-out/service area, and PEG obligations. <br />The Second Order may have more significant impacts. In the Second Order, the FCC found that: <br />^ its findings that certain compensation required by local authorities must be counted <br />toward the federal 5% franchise fee cap should be extended to incumbents; <br />^ many of its determinations relating to PEG and institutional networks ("I-Nets") <br />should be extended to incumbents; and <br />^ its findings regarding mixed-use networks also apply equally to incumbents. <br />The FCC also found that: <br />^ its conclusions regarding build-out and time limits for processing a franchise <br />application only apply to new entrants, not incumbents; and <br />^ local or state cable customer service requirements cannot be preempted, and local <br />franchising authorities and cable operators cannot be prevented from agreeing to <br />customer service standards that are more stringent than the FCC's rules. <br />The Second Order will be effective 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. The most <br />serious concerns are addressed below. <br />PEG Support <br />Since 1984, federal cable law has distinguished PEG capital support from operational support. <br />The term "franchise fee" excludes any "capital costs which are required by the franchise to be <br />incurred by the cable operator for public, educational, or governmental access facilities." 47 <br />U.S.C. § 542(g)(2)(C). Thus, PEG capital support is not subject to the 5% franchise fee cap, <br />while support for PEG operations is subject to the cap. <br />The First Order addressed this distinction between PEG capital and operating support, stating: <br />Accordingly, payments of this type, if collected only for the cost of building PEG <br />facilities, are not subject to the 5 percent limit. Capital costs refer to those costs incurred <br />in or associated with the construction of PEG access facilities. These costs are distinct <br />from payments in support of the use of PEG access facilities. PEG support payments <br />may include, but are not limited to, salaries and training. <br />First Order, ¶ 109. This language appeared to suggest that PEG capital support is limited to only <br />the cost to build or construct facilities. Many parties filed comments with the FCC noting that <br />this interpretation of "capital costs" is too narrow. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.