The SB 117 hearing
Well, I just dragged my butt into the house after driving back from the “opponents and interested parties” hearing on Senate Bill 117, which lasted from 4 to 8 pm. First thing I saw was Jill’s post thanking me, Matt Zone, LVO et al. for what Openers reported as a “retreat” by the bill’s supporters on some key issues.
Jill, I wouldn’t get too grateful just yet.
It’s true the Energy and Public Utilities Committee got an earful, mostly from the cities. And it’s true that Senator Jacobson, the bill’s principal sponsor, wanted to impress on everyone that lots of the things they were alarmed about are going to get fixed. But I didn’t get the feeling that he’d included many of the real critics (the big cities, NATOA, the Alliance for Community Media, etc.) in that discussion. Let’s wait to see the amendments.
I’ll post my own testimony tomorrow. For now I want to mention my two favorite Things That Should Have Gotten The Committee To Sit Up And Take Notice, But Apparently Didn’t:
1. Gary Cavin, the Chief Information Officer of the City of Columbus, pointed out that his city has three competing cable companies, but Time Warner still charges just as much for basic cable there as it does in places with no competition.
2. A representative of Cleveland Heights reported that in their negotiations with AT&T over a local “video competition agreement”, AT&T frankly acknowledged that it didn’t plan to offer its U-Verse service in the (predominantly Black) part of the city closest to East Cleveland… which is why Cleveland Heights terminated the negotiation.
Added Wednesday morning, 4/25: Here’s my testimony on behalf of the Ohio Community Computing Network. Here’s the memo on potential neighborhood abandonment mentioned at the bottom of page 3. (Both are .doc files.)
Added Wednesday evening: For historical perspective on SB 117 and AT&T’s cable franchise history in Ohio, you can’t do better than this testimony presented by Bill Hanna of Walter and Haverfield.
April 25th, 2007 at 8:55 pm
[...] 2. A representative of Cleveland Heights reported that in their negotiations with AT&T over a local “video competition agreementâ€, AT&T frankly acknowledged that it didn’t plan to offer its U-Verse service in the (predominantly Black) part of the city closest to East Cleveland… which is why Cleveland Heights terminated the negotiation.  —> http://www.callahansclevelanddiary.com/?p=258 ~ [...]
April 27th, 2007 at 7:19 am
Bill, Thanks for taking your time to attend the hearing and for posting your informed viewpoints. More and more the enlightening information comes from committed citizens like you and Ed Hauser, rather than from our paid legislative representatives. We need to turn that picture over…
April 29th, 2007 at 6:30 am
[...] Bill Callahan provides Herean appraisal of the recent Senate hearing in Columbus by opponents of Ohio’s AT&T-sponsored telco legislation SB 117. Included on his post are links to his testimony to the committee, as well as some of the very likely negative ramifications of the bill, if passed. [...]
December 20th, 2007 at 4:40 am
[...] Callahan’s Cleveland Diary » Blog Archive » The SB 117 hearing Posted in Tech, video | [...]