Municipal Wi-Fi Battle Moves to Texas

Cryofan writes "The fight in Texas is heating up over municipal wireless. Texas House Bill 789, under consideration in Texas, would impose one of the most extreme bans on municipal involvement in any form of communications--free or otherwise (the bill could ban free library access)."

Comments

PDF of the Bill

[OverlordQ]

Before you jump to conclusions why not try reading it first?

relevant section: 54.202

[j1m 5n0w]

The relevant section is 54.202, on page 87 of the pdf:

A municipality or munincipally owned utility may not, directly or indirectly, on its own or with another entity, offer to the public:

1. A service for which a certificate is required;
2. A service as a network provider; or
3. Any telecomunications or network service, without regard to the technology platform used to provide the service.

Re:relevant section: 54.202

[mattspammail]

Tough one to give a straight answer on. Most of the school districts in Texas are independently operated. There are dozens in the Houston area alone. There also exist other types of school districts. One in the area is a municipal school district (Stafford, near Houston). The overseers, or school board, members in an independent school district are voted in. They are not run by a municipality. However in the case of Stafford MSD, the policy makers of the school district are, in fact, the local government. It's not the norm, but it will definitely need to be addressed before a law like this is passed. They'll need a small print area.

Re:State-run telco services have failed everywhere

[91degrees]

In Hull, England, the telephone service was run by the local Authority. They had free local calls since 1904, broadband ADSL before anyone else had heard of it, and they've had ADSL based TV for several years now.

States are large and tend to get overly beurocratic, but smaller governmental organisations often run things rather well.

Re:Insane.

[cmarkn]

No, it is not. Fire, ambulance and police are services similar to 911, but none of them is a telecommunications service. Since you clearly haven't looked at the bill, here's the relevant part:

Sec. 51.002. DEFINITIONS.
(2) "Basic local telecommunications service" means:

(A) residential and business local exchange telephone service, including primary directory listings;
(B) tone dialing service;
(C) access to operator services;
(D) access to directory assistance services;
(E) access to 911 service provided by a local authority or dual party relay service;
(F) the ability to report service problems seven days a week;
(G) lifeline and tel-assistance services; and
(H) any other service the commission determines after a hearing is a basic local telecommunications service.

Notice item (E) in the list. A telecom provider provides access to 911 service, among several other things. Notice the word "and" before item (H). It is important. A telecom provider connects you to 911, but 911 is not a telecom provider any more than a firetruck is.