charles county board of commissioners · 2/27/2019 · charles county board of commissioners cable...

CHARLES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

CABLE FRANCHISE RENEWAL AND

NEGOTIATIONS FEBRUARY 27, 2019 PRESENTED BY:

COHEN LAW GROUP

DAN COHEN, PRINCIPAL

CBG COMMUNICATIONS, INC.

THOMAS G. ROBINSON, PRESIDENT

CABLE FRANCHISE RENEWAL AND NEGOTIATIONS

Cable franchise negotiations between a cable company and a “local

franchising authority” (i.e. the County) are governed by the federal

Cable Communications Policy Act (the “Cable Act”) of 1984 (amended

in 1992 and 1996), which is part of the federal Communications Act.

Negotiations are also regulated by the Federal Communications

Commission (“FCC”), which is the agency charged with interpreting the

Cable Act.


Pursuant to federal law, cable franchise agreements may cover the

following issues, subject to negotiation:

• Technical requirements of the cable system

• Build-out of the system for cable services subject to a certain number

of homes per mile (density and line extension policy)

• Right-of-way protections

• Customer service standards

• Franchise fees

• Institutional network (I-Net)


Cable franchise agreements may cover the following issues subject to

negotiation (continued):

• Public, Educational and Governmental (PEG) Channels and PEG Channel

enhancements

• Financial support for PEG Channels

• Complimentary cable services to community facilities

• Reporting requirements

• Enforcement of cable operator obligations

• Length of franchise term


Cable franchise agreements may not cover the following issues:

• Broadband internet service, which is Title I of the Communications Act,

rather than Title VI, which applies to cable service.

• Cable programming packages and types of channels on the channel

line-up

• Cable rates and prices (except for very limited authority over Basic Tier

rates, service fees and equipment charges)


• Because the Cable Act doesn’t cover broadband internet service, the

County has limited leverage in cable franchise negotiations in

requiring build-out of unserved or underserved areas for broadband

service.

• Pursuant to Section 626 of the Cable Act, the County may deny a

franchise renewal only for the following reasons:

1. The cable company has failed to substantially comply with the current

franchise.


Legal reasons for denial of renewal of a franchise (cont.):

2. The quality of the company’s cable service, including signal quality and

customer service, has been poor.

3. The company does not have the financial, legal or technical ability to

operate a cable system.

4. The company’s proposed terms are not reasonable to meet the County’s

future cable-related needs, taking into account the cost of meeting those

needs.

Inadequate deployment of broadband internet service does not fall under any

of these categories.

OPPORTUNITIES TO EXPAND BROADBAND AVAILABILITY

• Potential for Federal Grants/Loans

• USDA Rural Development Authority administers Telecommunications Loans

and Community Connect Grants

• Declaration Networks Group, in cooperation with Garrett County, MD during

the 2018 funding cycle, received $2,374,598 in grants to develop and

operate a wireless broadband system that will cover 1,319 residents and 96

businesses currently unserved by broadband. It will also provide free Wi-Fi

to a community center in that area.

• USDA requires the area to be “rural” under its guidelines to receive grants

• Maryland’s Congressional delegation continues to push the federal

government to expand broadband funding programs


• Potential for State Grants/Loans

• Maryland and the Rural Maryland Council’s Broadband Task Force are

continuing to explore funding opportunities

• A program like the Virginia Telecommunications Initiative (VATI) would be

beneficial to have in Maryland

• VATI provides last mile funding to provide broadband to unserved areas

throughout the state

• The State approved $4 Million in 2019 for this purpose


• Potential for State Grants/Loans (cont.)

• Clarke County, VA, partnering with Comcast, has applied for $209,513 in

funding (Comcast provides additional funding of $119,463). If approved,

Comcast will extend its broadband service to 97 unserved homes and

businesses in the White Post Road area of Clarke County.


• Potential for Public/Private Partnerships

• A Tale of Two Counties

• Kent County, MD originally partnered with FTS Fiber to develop a fiber

optic network to provide broadband throughout the County.

• FTS Fiber went out of business and the infrastructure that they built was

taken over by Kent FOS (Fiber Optic Systems), which continued to

develop the network. It then needed to partner with Cambio, a rural Wi-

Fi operator, to light up portions of the network. This network continues to

evolve in Kent County.


• Potential for Public/Private Partnerships

• A Tale of Two Counties (cont.)

• Cecil County, MD has worked through a number of options to continue to

expand broadband. It has done a detailed study of unserved areas. It

has reached out to 5 different providers of broadband services in Cecil

County, including Comcast, and is now working to develop partnerships

to provide services to the unserved areas.

DISCUSSION

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY!

charles county board of commissioners · 2/27/2019 · charles county board of commissioners cable...

Documents