AT&T gets mixed reception from Franklin officials
By TOM CHEREDAR, Staff Writer
tched@williamsonherald.com
The city of Franklin is pursuing negotiations with AT&T to provide broadband video services to its residents, which would end Comcast’s reign as the sole cable television choice.
City officials voted unanimously for the resolution at the Board of Mayor and Aldermen meeting March 13, despite the AT&T’s vocal disinterest of speaking to local governments.
“As a compliment to Comcast, we do not get that many complaints,” said City Administrator Jay Johnson. “But what complaints we do [get] usually have to do with how they arrange service and, to an extent, price.”
“An additional franchise would create competition,” which would also allow customers to choose the cable provider with the best service, said Community Relations Manager Monique McCullough—although she is unsure if a drop in monthly rates would occur.
AT&T would have to agree to the city’s terms in order to gain a franchise—an agreement with local government that would force the company to provide video services to the entire city
Johnson said he thinks Franklin has a better chance at negotiating a franchise because of its economy.
Such an agreement would also require AT&T to pay an annual percentage of profit, according to McCullough.
McCullough said in the past, the city has signed franchise agreements with two other cable companies, including Knowlogy who went bankrupt and Digital Access, who went out of business.
A franchise agreement with AT&T would be the first time Comcast had competition since it began providing to Franklin.
City says no to state-wide franchise
However, Franklin officials were also unanimous in their opposition to the Competitive Cable and Video Services Act, a piece of legislation that is currently being considered by the Tennessee General Assembly.
The legislation, which was originally authored by AT&T, would allow the company to surpass any discussion with local governments and choose the areas they wanted to provide service to with constraints.
Franklin’s resolution stated: “Such legislation would…allow cable and video producers to ‘cherry pick’ the most profitable neighborhoods and customers and impede local governments’ ability to protect their citizens.”
Spring Hill’s officials voted 7-2 in a similar resolution against the piece of state legislation, which would include writing a formal letter to the General Assembly.
“What I’m hearing from my local elected is that they have some grave concerns, if not altogether opposed to it like Franklin is,” said state Sen. Jack Johnson, who is getting a mixed reaction from residents in his district.
“I will say that the bulk of the constituent feedback I’ve received is in favor of it,” Johnson said. “They want more alternatives or options in terms of their cable access.”
However, the senator said he would not take a position on the issue until after the legislation goes through the Senate Commerce Committee, who has the power to alter such legislation from its originally submitted form.
“I certainly support competition and I think that’s a good thing for consumers, [but] we want to make sure that we protect public educational or government channels that Comcast now offers, which are very valuable,” Johnson said.
Posted on: 3/29/2007
|
