Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

[Phillip Rhodes <mindcrime AT cpphacker.co.uk>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Mark Turner wrote:
> What we REALLY need is to get together and create our own wireless networks!
> 
> Oh, wait. Our state government is working to make that illegal:
> http://www.markturner.net/2007/06/25/how-fair-is-the-local-government-fair-competiton-act/

But that's just not true.  First of all, that bill applies to municipal
and local governments, not to individuals, or groups of individuals.

Secondly, from my reading of it (disclaimer, IANAL), it doesn't even
make it illegal for local / municipal governments to operate
communications networks. It just imposes some requirements on
them before they do so, such as requiring public hearings on
the matter before doing it, and requiring a written business plan.

I personally consider these to be good things (to the extent
that I believe it's a good idea for governments to do this stuff
in the first place, which is nearly nil) since if they're going
to collect my tax money to spend on this, I'd like a chance to
comment on it.


- From the bill:


4 "§ 160A-329.1. Authority of local governments unaffected.
5 Nothing in this Part shall be interpreted as granting authority to a
local government
6 to own, lease, or operate a communications network or to provide
communications
7 service over a communications network. However, any authority of a
local government
8 to own, lease, or operate a communications network or to provide
communications
9 service over a communications network shall be as otherwise provided
by law and is not
10 restricted or altered by this Part. Nothing in this Part shall apply
to the purchasing,
11 leasing, constructing, or equipping of facilities by a local
government that is designed to
12 provide communications services within the local government's
boundaries and is used
13 by the local government for its own internal purposes.

14 "§ 160A-329.2. Public hearing.
15 (a) A local government that proposes to provide communications
services to the
16 public through a local government-owned communications service
provider shall hold
17 not less than two public hearings, which shall be held not less than
30 days apart, for the
18 purpose of gathering information and comment on the need for and the
cost of the
19 communications service. At least 30 days prior to each public hearing
held under this
20 section, the local government shall cause notice to be published in
the predominant
21 newspaper of general circulation in the area considered for service
and shall provide
22 notice to the North Carolina Utilities Commission (Utilities
Commission), which shall
23 post the notice on its Web site.
24 (b) At a public hearing held under this section, a local government
shall, at a
25 minimum, consider all of the following:
26 (1) Whether the proposed communications service is currently being
27 offered in the area considered for service and, if that is the case,
28 whether the communications service is generally available throughout
29 the area considered for service.
30 (2) If the same or similar communications service is not currently being
31 offered, whether any other service provider proposes to offer the same
32 or similar communications service.
33 (3) The capital investment required by the local government to
provide the
34 communications service through a local government-owned
35 communications service provider, the cost associated with the
36 proposed method of financing and the estimated revenues and
37 expenses of providing and operating the communications service and
38 network. In allocating the expenses of providing and operating the
39 communications service and network, expenses associated with
40 buildings, equipment, vehicles, personnel, and other assets that are
41 jointly used by the local government-owned communications service
42 provider and other local government departments shall be allocated to
43 the local government-owned communications service provider using a
44 fully allocated cost accounting method.
General Assembly of North Carolina Session 2007
House Bill 1587-Second Edition Page 3
1 (4) The private and public costs and the benefits of providing the
2 communications service through a private communications service
3 provider compared to a local government-owned communications
4 service provider, including the effect on existing and future jobs,
5 actual economic development prospects, tax-base growth, education,
6 and public health.
7 (c) At the public hearings held under this section, the local
government shall
8 make available to the public a written business plan for the proposed
local government9
owned communications service provider that, at a minimum, contains all
of the
10 following:
11 (1) The projected number of users to be served by the local government12
owned communications service provider.
13 (2) The geographical area to be served by the local government-owned
14 communications service provider.
15 (3) The types of communications service to be provided.
16 (4) A plan to ensure that revenues exceed operating expenses within a
17 specified period of time after the communications service is first
18 provided, such time to be consistent with commercial practices for
19 similar projects.
20 (5) The estimated capital and operational costs and revenues for the
first
21 four years that communications service is provided.
22 (6) The projected network modernization and technological upgrade plans,
23 including estimated costs.
24 (7) The projected schedule for offering the communications service.


And actually this version of the bill omits something from the
originally filed version, which is a requirement to hold a special
election where the public gets to vote specifically on the issue
of implementing such a network or not.  So if this passes as currently
written, it actually gives MORE power to the government in that
it takes away one avenue for the public to oppose these kinds of
plans.  So if your local municipality decides to implement a "new"
communications network based around thickwire ethernet or token-ring,
you can't even go vote against it. :-(


TTYL,


Phil
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGmRc8dkzqYMZbBuwRArnkAJ4u24LQnyOwYf87UQS6ydabbiiR2gCgrPhK
s9SThnwZrvqvzegUHeq6Zqc=
=YqTd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
begin:vcard
fn:Phillip Rhodes
n:Rhodes;Phillip
adr:;;P.O. Box 16905;Chapel Hill;NC;27516;USA
email;internet:mindcrime AT cpphacker.co.uk
tel;home:919-928-0236
url:http://www.linkedin.com/in/philliprhodes
version:2.1
end:vcard