|
,F,,. , ;,,.,n..,,,n. , ,,.
<br />~1} t 11. . v ~x.•' .
<br />a1.,atU\ \l U~u • r. •. n.: • ~
<br />illlllilLit;4ll:ri Sl'r"`.~..• 'd\ iv ,
<br />U! S}..alulldiFnl!St h.1i1111\CW13, . '. Pp, ~-i~~• ~~c ~ , r:: ~ ~ .,i~
<br />setileP\1;}~4..aSk<~lP.~i1~3`.\e.~~t1SaF.lS1l1\,lltilfiil':L\~i.61~\.~.\lyti`i`~' , 1':~;' ~ i ~'~¢••• : ~~~ . ~ iCi~~~F~ t rl'~ ~..~ ~,ri;n~s :•.q•e~ ..~~.. •.~~~.~ a.~.,,
<br />I i i~".;itFl`:\1Si~3tut~.llt,l'tsi1.+1S,3,\i4a,aut~iZk"':iiu11\,Sa„l,a1G,~3Si.a1~l~nt.sll:1~,'~~tgL1~F•SlV1~E1,a.,?SSs,~i.t.l3i~l~i.a@`~~Ns~.~;i'ltil'Ul3`Nl:t:~.~~".l~~l~a1i~~`m~1~~~;1~N:iiitii0l;
<br />~ ~ a
<br />TFT.F.f'[1MMi1NiC'.ATTCINC~ PT.~NNiN(,' T~(li2 TXYTi". Ti'Yi'1'Tmr~
<br />Exce~pt from: International City/County ICMA Management Association
<br />Local governments aze praviders, users, and regulators of telecommunication service. Many
<br />local governrn~nts have already jumped to the fore with strategic plans to seek out partnerships
<br />with the public and industry to assure that local infrastructure is developed to assure economic
<br />vitality, right-of-way ma.nagement, and public benefits. We've seen strategic alliances and -
<br />cxeadve regulatory schemes being develbped by local governments all over the counlr~: in .
<br />Blacksburg, Virg~in~ia; Milpitas, Califortua; Seattle, Washingtan, Austin, Texas; Kansas City,
<br />Missouri Braomfield, Colarado; Clark County, Nevada; and many other places.
<br />In response to the Telecommunications Act of 1996, all communities would be wise to
<br />reevaluate their ongoing plans, or get started on developing new ones, because the rules have
<br />changed, the business motivations aze changing, and our consuming public wants more and
<br />better information services at affordable rates. ~
<br />A good plan appraaches telecammunications as a means to reach a goa1: a goal of achieving
<br />economie prosperity, consumer protection, and satisfying the public and civic interest. Looal
<br />government's seIf interest ~n planning for an ef~'ective telecommunications infrastructure is to
<br />protect its property, the public right-of-way, while maintaining a balance between the varied
<br />needs and interests af the public, the uidustry, and the government. The basic pwposes of any
<br />telecomrnunications plan aze to
<br />• Maintain lacal contxol of the rights-of-way
<br />• Establish appro~riate quid pro quos for the use of public property
<br />• Satisfy the needs of consumers and the public interest, by retaining rate stability (when
<br />not satisfied via a competitive marketplace), offexing constuner educati.on and protecdon,
<br />pmviding for effective carapetition in a developing mazketplace, and applyi.ng
<br />appropriate and necessary regulations in a uniform fashion.
<br />The new Telecommunications Act preserves the rights of Iocal gaveinments to protect
<br />public safety and welfare, preserve universal sernice, ensure service quality, prote~t cansumer
<br />rights, manage the public right-of-way, and receive compensation for its use. All of this must
<br />be dome in a competitively neutral fashion. And wlule the concept of competitive neutrality, a
<br />basic sense of equity, is not new to local govemments, what is new under the new federal law, is
<br />how "telecommunications" campetitors are defined.. ~
<br />
|