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

[Matt Drew <matt.drew AT gmail.com>]

"Specifically, how does the "ensure municipalities follow the same
requirements as private vendors" wording really mean "unfairly keep
municipalities from building their own network"?"

One of the ways that Time Warner and other large cable companies
currently suppress competition is a series of mapping and reporting
requirements that are built into the law at the state level (see
N.C.G.S. 66-354, among others).  These requirements are not easy or
cheap, and a cable provider can be subjected to forfeiture of all
revenue (not just profit) from their system during the time they are
not in compliance.

Previous bills have tried to make municipal systems follow these rules
as well, adding a another layer of bureaucracy and cost - and I
presume the current bill again attempts to do this.

I'm opposed to municipal broadband, but I'm even more opposed to TWC
using the state government to tell the cities what they can and can't
do.  These bills are blatant attempts to block potential government
competition, just as previous "regulations" enabled large providers to
strangle private competition.  It is exactly the opposite of what we
need in order to get better, cheaper, and more ubiquitous service.

-- 
Matt Drew
Chair, Durham County Libertarian Party
919-638-4304
matt.drew AT gmail.com