Agenda - Council - 07/26/1983 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I I I '1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I WASHINGTON. D.C. 20510 Dear Mayor: On June 14 the Senate gave its overwhelming approval to So 66, the Cable Telecommunications Act of 1983, by a vote of 87-9. As one who voted for S. ~6 as the best feasible program for 'local govern- ments, I am happy to say that significant improvements were made to the bill during its consideration on the Senate floor. " S. 66..g~es the Federal~Communi~ations Commission exclusive jurisdiction over 'cable telecommunications, preempting State and local authority to.l,freely.negotiate 'cable franchise agreements and regulate cable rates~~ The'legi~lation is designed to create a national policy framework for the development of this new medium primarily by removing areas of uncertainty for would-be cable investors. The bill provides for a process of franchise renewal similar to that governing television broadcasters, and in the event renewal is not granted, it requires that the operator be paid the fair market value of the ~ystem. S. 66 also deregulates cable services, a move intended to allow cable operators to compete effectively with other tele- communications media. In one of the more controversial aspects of the bill, franchise authorities will be prohibited from specifying cable programming in franchise agreements or, afterwards, regulating its cost to consumers. However, in another important respect -- the specification of cable facilities and equipment -- S. 66'allows State and local franchising authorities to continue their central role. The right to negotiate such ma~ters in the franchise process will give local governments the power to determine the physical nature and con- figuration of their cable systems. Indeed, to the extent that the bill spurs interest in cable investment, local officials may find greater latitude in negotiating the installation of systems, and greater access to the cable capabilities essential to attracting high-technology growth and development to their'jurisdictions. A number of mayors, in Minnesota and elsewhere, have expressed concern over S. 66. Accordingly, I voted for the legislation only after helping to secure several changes which, as your Senator and as Chairman of the Subcommittee on Intergovernmental Relations, I felt would significantly improve S. 66 from the perspective of local governments. Along with Rudy Boschwitz and other concerned Senators, I worked with Commerce Committee Chairman Bob Packwood to bring about the following changes: