The MN Seante Committee on Agriculture, Veterans, Broadband and Rural Development heard SF2045: Equal Access to Broadband Act establishment provision. It was held over.

The discussion on SF2045 begins at 2:20. Click to start

Senator Rest on Equal Access to Broadband Act

• Trying to get sustain able funding for quality community TV
• Looking to remove “telecommunication” and replace with broadband
• Wanting to coordination of funds for municipalities
• Local franchising authority could comply broadband companies to get a franchise agreement
• Broadband provides must act within rights-of-way regulations
• MN has been a leader in cable acts
• We need to refresh cable franchising bill. The idea is simple but technical – testifiers can answer tech questions.

Testifiers

Michael Bradley (reps local governments)

• Time to refresh the cable laws
• Broadband is the future of communication
• The public rights of way is a scare resources we must be good stewards – we need to get paid for access
• Looking to get everyone equal access
• The state is getting $650M, and broadband providers are asking for tax cuts – we need to balance those perks
• We want to work to make broadband affordable to all
• Franchising should not slow down broadband deployment

Dave Callister (city of Plymouth)

• This bill will help prevent broadband discrimination
• Cable franchising should bring cable to all with consumer protections
• Fiber is underway in Plymouth – only one company provides broadband to everyone
• Use public right or way is scarce – the value is not declining
• Local media informs and educates – such as city council meetings and high school sports

Melissa Wolf (MN Cable)

• This bill would stop progress of broadband
• Means an 8 percent tax on broadband – and none of those funds would make broadband more affordable. Funding goes to the municipalities general fund and PEG.
• ACP ceased last year.
• Cable companies already pay cable franchising fees.
• This bill violates federal law
• The House removed this bill last year

Brent Christensen (MTA)

• Opposing the bill
• Sad to see PEG funding go – but people are cutting the cable cord, much like cutting landlines
• This fee will help cities but hurt the state goal of ubiquitous broadband
• Maybe PEG could work on getting ads
• We don’t need cable franchising because we have the Office of Broadband Development

Questions

Q: Will this impact BEAD?
No

Q: Will $650M impact franchising?
No