Connecticut’s Public Utilities Regulatory Authority wasn’t “nullifying a statute” when it ruled 2-0 in May that “municipal gain” space on utility poles or underground ducts -- reserved by a 2013 law “for any purpose” -- may not be used to provide muni broadband, the state said. PURA was “searching for a reasoned construction of the statute that comports with state and federal law,” Attorney General George Jepsen (D) said in a Friday brief at the Connecticut Superior Court. The court should dismiss appeals by the Connecticut Consumer Counsel and municipalities (see 1811010036), he said. PURA holds broad jurisdiction over utility poles and attachments; the agency issued its interpretation after all parties had a chance to submit comments and have oral argument, the AG said. "Applying the language of the amended statute, PURA appropriately concluded that the statute should be read in concert with procompetitive frameworks established in state and federal law," and PURA’s construction is consistent with the state’s policy of promoting competition, Jepsen said. “The 2013 amendment to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 16-233 modified the first sentence by replacing the words ‘for municipal and state signal wires’ with the words ‘for any purpose.’ It notably, however, left the last sentence intact, namely the requirement that the gain described in the first two sentences ‘shall be reserved for use by the town, city, borough, fire district or the Department of Transportation.’ Offering broadband services to the public is not ‘use by the town.’” Reclassification of broadband from U.S. Telecom Act Title II to an information service isn't relevant because Connecticut has pole-attachment authority and PURA based its decision on those rules, the AG said.
Getting fast broadband for residents is worth the fight against incumbent industry over municipal broadband, said Connecticut mayors and state legislators Thursday. Officials at a Connecticut State Broadband Office and Next Century Cities forum livestreamed from Hartford dared incoming Gov. Ned Lamont (D) to focus on future gain instead of preserving the status quo. Tuesday’s election brought the state a Democratic trifecta (see 1811070043). Local governments and the state consumer counsel are suing the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority for agreeing with ISPs “municipal gain” space on poles may not be used for muni broadband (see 1811010036).
Getting fast broadband for residents is worth the fight against incumbent industry over municipal broadband, said Connecticut mayors and state legislators Thursday. Officials at a Connecticut State Broadband Office and Next Century Cities forum livestreamed from Hartford dared incoming Gov. Ned Lamont (D) to focus on future gain instead of preserving the status quo. Tuesday’s election brought the state a Democratic trifecta (see 1811070043). Local governments and the state consumer counsel are suing the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority for agreeing with ISPs “municipal gain” space on poles may not be used for muni broadband (see 1811010036).
Connecticut’s Public Utilities Regulatory Authority ignored plain language of a 2013 state law when it ruled 2-0 in May "municipal gain" space on utility poles or underground ducts may not be used to provide muni broadband, said local governments and the Connecticut Office of Consumer Counsel (OCC) in briefs filed Wednesday at Connecticut Superior Court in docket HHB-CV-18-6045442-S. PURA’s ruling paused some muni broadband projects and is holding back access in underserved areas, OCC officials said in interviews.
Connecticut’s Public Utilities Regulatory Authority ignored plain language of a 2013 state law when it ruled 2-0 in May "municipal gain" space on utility poles or underground ducts may not be used to provide muni broadband, said local governments and the Connecticut Office of Consumer Counsel (OCC) in briefs filed Wednesday at Connecticut Superior Court in docket HHB-CV-18-6045442-S. PURA’s ruling paused some muni broadband projects and is holding back access in underserved areas, OCC officials said in interviews.
Monday’s sell-off of SiriusXM stock sent the shares plunging 10.3 percent, and that had Wedbush Securities analyst Michael Pachter forecasting in a Tuesday research note that Pandora shareholders will reject as “inadequate” the Sirius proposal to buy the streaming-media company for $3.5 billion in an all-stock deal (see 1809240030). Sirius and Pandora executives said Monday they expect the transaction to close in Q1.
Bowers & Wilkins unveiled its sixth generation of 600 Series loudspeakers Monday, pushing price point and performance in a line starting at $600 a pair for compact bookshelf speakers and topping out at $1,800 a pair for the flagship 603 floor standing model. List prices are 10-15 percent higher than the line it replaces, said Chief Revenue Officer Rich Campbell, but the speakers use higher-end technologies, including neodymium tweeter magnets and the company’s Continuum cone midrange driver, a replacement for the Kevlar cone used in B&W speakers since 1974. Continuum, in development for eight years, was commercialized in B&W’s flagship 800 Series speakers in 2015.
The Connecticut Office of Consumer Counsel (OCC) sued the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority over a May 9 ruling that the "municipal gain" space on utility poles or underground ducts -- reserved by a 2013 state law for municipalities to use “for any purpose” without charge -- may not be used to provide muni broadband. The state consumer advocate, which earlier slammed the PURA decision (see 1805090049), filed an administrative appeal Wednesday at the Connecticut Superior Court in New Britain. It followed a similar challenge at the court last week by the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities, and the suits may be consolidated into a single proceeding, said Consumer Counsel Elin Swanson Katz. A ruling is unlikely until late 2018 or 2019, she said. PURA’s decision that the state’s 2013 muni gain law is ambiguous about whether a municipality may provide broadband is “legally incorrect,” OCC said. The act to nullify the law “is illegal and beyond the statutory powers of PURA as an administrative agency,” said OCC, saying it violated the state constitution. In its separate appeal, municipalities said PURA made “numerous procedural errors” and exceeded its authority as it reached legal conclusions “without any factual basis, any evidentiary record, any hearing, any due process, or a single finding of fact.” Connecticut is “one of the most digitally connected states” but has “tens of thousands of citizens who are unserved or underserved by the existing broadband market,” Swanson Katz said. Incumbent ISPs oppose municipal efforts and PURA relied on their arguments, she said: “They would rather keep their monopolistic grip on the internet” and “charge exorbitant prices for what is often inadequate speed and poor service.” PURA didn’t comment.
The Connecticut Office of Consumer Counsel (OCC) sued the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority over a May 9 ruling that the "municipal gain" space on utility poles or underground ducts -- reserved by a 2013 state law for municipalities to use “for any purpose” without charge -- may not be used to provide muni broadband. The state consumer advocate, which earlier slammed the PURA decision (see 1805090049), filed an administrative appeal Wednesday at the Connecticut Superior Court in New Britain. It followed a similar challenge at the court last week by the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities, and the suits may be consolidated into a single proceeding, said Consumer Counsel Elin Swanson Katz. A ruling is unlikely until late 2018 or 2019, she said. PURA’s decision that the state’s 2013 muni gain law is ambiguous about whether a municipality may provide broadband is “legally incorrect,” OCC said. The act to nullify the law “is illegal and beyond the statutory powers of PURA as an administrative agency,” said OCC, saying it violated the state constitution. In its separate appeal, municipalities said PURA made “numerous procedural errors” and exceeded its authority as it reached legal conclusions “without any factual basis, any evidentiary record, any hearing, any due process, or a single finding of fact.” Connecticut is “one of the most digitally connected states” but has “tens of thousands of citizens who are unserved or underserved by the existing broadband market,” Swanson Katz said. Incumbent ISPs oppose municipal efforts and PURA relied on their arguments, she said: “They would rather keep their monopolistic grip on the internet” and “charge exorbitant prices for what is often inadequate speed and poor service.” PURA didn’t comment.
The Connecticut Consumer Counsel is seeking to avoid a possible state commission ruling that could discourage municipal fiber networks, said Office of Consumer Counsel officials in an interview. But telecom companies and workers said it’s about keeping the playing field level. The matter, involving use of a space on utility poles reserved for municipal use, could go to court or the Legislature, the OCC officials said. The FCC is mulling pole attachment issues in broadband infrastructure rulemakings.