FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

QUESTION: Why doesn't AT&T carry my city, school or public access channel? Dennis, Warren

Answer: Historically, the City has required the cable companies to carry the local access channels on their systems. The local franchise agreements with both Comcast and WOW contain language mandating that the channels be provided. In these agreements, both Comcast and WOW voluntarily agreed to pay the costs of connecting the access channels to their systems.

On the other hand, AT&T has chosen not to pay the cost of cost of carrying the channels. Accordingly, if a municipality or school district wants their channels to be carried on U-verse, it must be done at the expense of the city or schools. Each channel requires its own T-1 connection, at a cost of $400 to $500 per month per channel. Also, special hardware is required which costs another several thousand dollars per PEG channel . These costs are unreasonable from our perspective. I understand that AT&T has chosen to charge you a monthly fees for support of access channels. AT&T’s customer base, however, remains a fraction of the other two providers. This small amount of revenue does not support the costs AT&T seeks to impose on the City to carry the channels.

AT&T has also refused to carry access channels like the other cable companies do, where each channel gets its own channel number. Instead, AT&T forces all access channels across southeast Michigan onto channel 99, and they use an internet application that results in a lower quality picture than the broadcast channels. In fact, the picture has only half the pixels of broadcast television channels. This means that when the partial screen picture that AT&T offers to access channels is enlarged to full screen, there is a significant loss of picture quality. There is also an extended load time for the PEG channel to appear on your screen of approximately 19 seconds.

The City wants its PEG channels to be carried on U-verse, but not at these unreasonable terms. The City is working with other local governments in an effort to require AT&T to treat access channels the same way that they treat broadcast channels. These efforts have included meetings with AT&T, as well as meetings and hearings with our Congressional representatives. The City hopes in the future to be able to offer its PEG channels on U-verse. This will likely require action by the FCC or Congress, because AT&T’s treatment of access channels is a national problem. Unfortunately, until that happens, Comcast and WOW are the only options for viewing PEG channels on your television.

QUESTION: I have filed numerous cable complaints with my current provider and have not resolved the issue(s). Who else can I contact? Jane M, West Bloomfield

ANSWER: If a cable customer has a complaint, they should first attempt to resolve the complaint by directly contacting their video/cable company (your local city, township may also be able to help).If customers are not able to resolve the complaint with their company, they may contact the office of the Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC). Cable customers may contact the MPSC by the following means which are dedicated solely for video/cable issues:

Telephone: 866-552-7725

Fax: 517-241-2400

Mail: Michigan Public Service Commission
Attn: Video Franchising
6545 Mercantil Way
Lansing, Michigan

For more information about the MPSC and information on video/cable issues visit www.michigan.gov.mpsc.

QUESTION: I live in Waterford and am unable to get DSL or the new fiber optical service (UVerse) because of AT&T and the way they laid their phone lines in our sub. I am too far from their station for DSL. The city of Waterford gave them the contract for Uverse in 2007. AT&T installed 2 of their VRad boxes in the area (they are about .5 mile apart on Hospital Road just south of Elizabeth Lk Rd. I live north of Elizabeth Lk Road) but too far from me for me or my neighbors for service. I cannot go to another provider because they all use AT&T's phone lines. All AT&T needs to do is install a VRad box closer (near/in our sub). They continue to spend money on mailings ... I get something every couple of weeks. I still have a land line and pay the same fees/taxes as others in the area who have phone service. I don't understand why we are not given the same opportunity as other residents. Is there anything that can be done so that AT&T services those areas in Waterford that are unable to get DSL service first since the city gave them the contract in 2007? Do you have any ideas of where to go/who to contact? I tried the public service commission, but was told they do not get involved in these issues. Darlene, Waterford

ANSWER: Waterford Township does a great job with cable/video issues -- but in this case, their hands are tied. In 2006, the State of Michigan passed a new law that was supposed to increase cable competition. The state law requires communities to issue video franchises. Consequently, when AT&T asked Waterford Township for such a franchise in 2007, the Township was required to issue one.

Unfortunately, the state law also prevents the Township from imposing any obligations on the providers that receive the franchises. Therefore, while the Township would have preferred to require AT&T to serve all residential areas within Waterford, the state law prohibited the Township from imposing that requirement.

You are not alone. Based on relatively recent calculations, only about 40% of the residential areas in Waterford Township have video service available from AT&T, even though nearly two years have passed since AT&T first received approval to offer video service.

As the state law is now written, there is nothing that Waterford Township can do (short of filing a lawsuit and seeking to have the entire state law tossed out, which would be very expensive) to require AT&T to serve your address.

There are two things I could suggest: First, make your state legislators aware of your predicament. Perhaps they will hear from enough folks like yourself who were supposed to benefit from the new law but find themselves without a new competitive choice. Second, go to makeCableBETTER.org to follow developments about this issue. A group of communities and cable customers are attempting to raise awareness about some of the areas where the state video law has failed to meet its original objectives.

I'm sorry to have read about your situation. Unfortunately, the state law prevents the Township from helping you.