Save Access

from: MultiChannel News

Help In an 'Ugly Box'
Cities Go Guerilla To Fight Pro-AT&T Franchising Bill
By Linda Haugsted
3/19/2007

The competition between cable and telephone companies for customers has been marked by guerilla stunts such as advertisements in pizza boxes and come-ons on dry cleaning bags. But now two Illinois municipalities have gotten into the guerrilla game to protest a bill they believe will strip them of needed local authority over video providers.

Hot-pink and highway-yellow boxes have cropped up in the DuPage County, Ill., towns of Naperville and Itasca to protest HB1500, which officials in those suburban Chicago communities believe will give AT&T total control of the placement of huge powering vaults it needs to operate its planned video service.

The pink Itasca boxes — 63 inches high, 43 inches wide and 25 inches deep — were in place beginning Feb. 21 and were deployed for just one week. Naperville's are in place now, bearing the message “This big ugly box brought to you by AT&T Project Lightspeed in the name of competition.”

On closer inspection, posted letters to residents explain the boxes and urge constituents to contact their state legislators to oppose HB 1500, an AT&T-supported bill that will move video franchising authority to the state Corporations Commission.

“This was the best way we could think of to raise awareness. It's tough to get the attention of the media,” said Dan Di Santo, assistant to the Naperville city manager.

Brad Mays of public-relations firm Fleishman-Hillard, speaking on AT&T's behalf, said the San Antonio-based telco is working closely with municipalities to meet local ordinances regarding placement of the vaults, adding the telephone company chooses locations that are as conducive as possible to neighborhood aesthetics. AT&T uses public rights-of-way and easements where the company has existing legal rights to placement.

AT&T's placement of the power vaults, referred to as 52Bs by the telephone company, is not the only gripe that cities have with the bill.

Municipal officials believe that the bill:

Lacks provisions to ensure access to services by low-income residents;
Has weak build-out compliance language;
Gives AT&T eminent domain and condemnation powers and gives the telephone company access to all property, including residential parcels.

They also believe they'll lose revenue, as the bill does not require a new entrant to include revenue from home-shopping commissions, late fees or advertising compensation in calculating the gross revenue on which a 5% franchise fee must be paid. Incumbent operators pay fees on the latter.

The fake box demonstration was inspired by Itasca, which in the past had used a similar tactic to gain concessions from the Illinois Department of Transportation. That agency considered widening a thoroughfare through the village, and officials placed stakes adjacent to the road to show locals just how wide the road would be, said village administrator David C. Williams.

The protest resulted in a “satisfactory compromise” on the widening project, Williams said.

The box placement last month in Itasca resulted in 84 letters from residents to legislators opposing the bill, added Williams.

Last year, Naperville tried to reach an agreement to bring AT&T's Project Lightspeed infrastructure project to town. Itasca put a moratorium on infrastructure permits, while it studied issues such as power box placement in advance of a proposal by the phone company.