12-2023. Video service application, authorization; transferability; termination; franchise; compliance not required with mandatory build-out provisions, specific technology; PEG access; emergency broa
12-2023
12-2023. Video service application, authorization;
transferability; termination; franchise; compliance not required with
mandatory build-out provisions, specific technology; PEG access; emergency
broadcast; franchises in effect prior to July 1, 2006; multiple service
providers within a municipality; customer service requirements; denial of
service based on income; service extension process; state corporation
commission authorized to promulgate regulations governing application
process.
(a) An entity or person seeking to provide cable service or
video service in this state on or after July 1, 2006,
shall file an application for a state-issued video service authorization with
the state corporation commission as required by this
section. The state corporation commission shall promulgate regulations to
govern the
state-issued video service authorization application process. The state,
through the state corporation commission, shall issue a
video service authorization permitting a
video service provider to provide video service in the state, or amend a video
service authorization previously issued, within 30 calendar days after receipt
of a completed affidavit
submitted by the video service applicant and
signed by an officer or general partner of the applicant affirming:
(1) The location of the applicant's principal place of business and the names
of the applicant's principal
executive officers;
(2) that the applicant has filed or will timely file with the federal
communications commission all forms
required by that agency in advance of offering video service in this state;
(3) that the applicant agrees to comply with all applicable federal and state
statutes and regulations;
(4) that the applicant agrees to comply with all lawful and applicable
municipal regulations regarding the
use and occupation of public rights-of-way in the delivery of the video
service, including the police powers of the
municipalities in which the service is delivered;
(5) the description of the service area footprint to be served within the
state of Kansas, including any
municipalities or parts thereof, and which may include certain designations of
unincorporated areas, which
description shall be updated by the applicant prior to the expansion of video
service to a previously undesignated
service area and, upon such expansion, notice to the state corporation
commission of the
service area to be served by the
applicant; including:
(A) The period of time it shall take applicant to become capable of providing
video programming to all
households in the applicant's service area footprint, which may not exceed five
years from the date the authorization,
or amended authorization, is issued; and
(B) a general description of the type or types of technologies the applicant
will use to provide video
programming to all households in its service area footprint, which may include
wireline, wireless, satellite or any
other alternative technology.
(b) The certificate of video service authorization issued by the
state corporation commission shall contain:
(1) A grant of authority to provide video service as requested in the
application;
(2) a statement that the grant of authority is subject to lawful operation of
the video service by the
applicant or its successor in interest.
(c) The certificate of video service authorization issued by the
state corporation commission is fully transferable to
any successor in interest to the applicant to which it is initially granted. A
notice of transfer shall be filed with the
state corporation commission and any relevant municipalities within 30 business
days of
the completion of such transfer.
(d) The certificate of video service authorization issued by the
state corporation commission may be terminated by
the video service provider by submitting notice to the state corporation
commission.
(e) To the extent required by applicable law, any video service
authorization granted by the state through
the state corporation commission shall constitute a "franchise" for purposes of
47 U.S.C.
§ 541(b)(1). To the extent required for purposes of 47 U.S.C.
§§ 521-561, only the state of
Kansas shall constitute the exclusive "franchising authority" for
video service providers in the state of Kansas.
(f) The holder of a state-issued video service authorization shall not be
required to comply with any
mandatory facility build-out provisions nor provide video service to any
customer using any specific technology.
Additionally, no municipality of the state of Kansas may:
(1) Require a video service provider to obtain a separate franchise to
provide
video service;
(2) impose any fee, license or gross receipts tax on video service providers,
other than the fee
specified in subsections (b) through (e) of
K.S.A. 2009 Supp.
12-2024, and
amendments thereto;
(3) impose any provision regulating rates charged by video service providers;
or
(4) impose any other franchise or service requirements or conditions on video
service providers, except
that a video service provider must
submit the agreement specified in subsection (a) of
K.S.A. 2009 Supp.
12-2024,
and amendments
thereto.
(g) K.S.A. 12-2006 through 12-2011, and amendments thereto, shall not apply
to video service providers.
(h) Not later than 120 days after a request by a municipality, the holder of
a
state-issued video service authorization
shall provide the municipality with capacity over its video service to allow
public,
educational and governmental (PEG)
access channels for noncommercial programming, according to the following:
(1) A video service provider shall not be required to provide more than two
PEG access channels;
(2) the operation of any PEG access channel provided pursuant to this section
shall be the responsibility
of the municipality receiving the benefit of such channel, and the holder of a
state-issued video service authorization
bears only the responsibility for the transmission of such channel; and
(3) the municipality must ensure that all transmissions, content, or
programming to be transmitted over
a channel or facility by a holder of a state-issued video service authorization
are provided or submitted to such video
service provider in a manner or form that is capable of being accepted and
transmitted by a provider, without
requirement for additional alteration or change in the content by the provider,
over the particular network of the
video service provider, which is compatible with the technology or protocol
utilized by the video service provider to
deliver video services;
(i) in order to alert customers to any public safety emergencies, a video
service provider shall offer the
concurrent rebroadcast of local television broadcast channels, or utilize
another economically and technically
feasible process for providing an appropriate message through the provider's
video service in the event of a public
safety emergency issued over the emergency broadcast system.
(j) (1) Valid cable franchises in effect prior to July 1, 2006, shall
remain in effect subject to this section. Nothing in this act is intended to
abrogate, nullify or adversely affect in any way any franchise or other
contractual rights, duties and obligations existing and incurred by a cable
operator or competitive video service provider before the enactment of this
act. A cable
operator providing video service over a cable system pursuant to a franchise
issued by a municipality in effect on July 1, 2006, shall comply with the terms
and
conditions of such franchise until such franchise expires, is terminated
pursuant to its terms or until the franchise is modified as provided in this
section.
(2) Whenever two or more video service providers are providing service within
the jurisdiction of a municipality, a cable operator with an existing
municipally issued franchise agreement may request that the municipality
modify the
terms of the existing
franchise agreement to conform to the terms and conditions of a state-issued
video service authorization. The cable operator requesting a modification shall
identify in
writing the terms and conditions of its existing franchise that are materially
different from the state-issued video service authorization, whether such
differences impose
greater or lesser burdens on the cable operator. Upon receipt of such request
from a cable operator, the cable operator and the
municipality shall negotiate the franchise modification terms in good faith for
a
period of 60 days. If within 60 days, the municipality and the franchised cable
operator cannot reach agreeable terms, the cable operator may file a
modification request pursuant to paragraph (3).
(3) Whenever two or more video service providers are providing service within
the jurisdiction of a municipality, a cable operator may seek a modification of
its
existing franchise terms and conditions to conform to the terms and conditions
of a state-issued video service authorization pursuant to 47 U.S.C. §
545; provided,
however, that a municipality's review of such request shall conform to this
section. In
its application for modification, a franchised cable operator shall identify
the terms and conditions of its municipally issued franchise that are
materially
different from the terms and conditions of the state-issued video service
authorization, whether
such differences impose greater or lesser burdens on the cable operator. The
municipality shall grant the modification request within 120 days for any
provisions where there are material differences between the
existing franchise and the state-issued video service authorization. No
provisions shall be
exempt. A cable operator that is denied a modification request pursuant to this
paragraph may appeal the denial to a court of competent jurisdiction which
shall perform a de novo review of the municipality's denial consistent with
this
section.
(4) Nothing in this act shall preclude a cable operator with a valid
municipally issued franchise from seeking enforcement of franchise provisions
that
require the equal treatment of competitive video service providers and cable
operators within a municipality,
but only to the extent such cable franchise provisions may be enforced to
reform or modify such existing cable franchise. For purposes of interpreting
such cable franchise provisions, a state-issued video service authorization
shall be considered equivalent to a municipally issued franchise; provided,
however,
that the enforcement of such cable franchise provisions shall not affect the
state-issued video service authorization in any way.
(k) Upon 90 days notice, a municipality may require a video service provider
to comply with customer service
requirements consistent with 47 C.F.R. § 76.309(c) for its video service
with such requirements to be
applicable to all video services and video service providers on a competitively
neutral
basis.
(l) A video service provider may not deny access to service to any group of
potential residential
subscribers because of the income of the residents in the local area in which
such group resides.
(m) Within 180 days of providing video service in a municipality, the video
service
provider shall implement a
process for receiving requests for the extension of video service to customers
that reside in such municipality, but for which
video service is not yet available from the provider to the residences of the
requesting customers. The video service
provider shall provide information regarding this request process to the
municipality,
who may forward such requests to the
video service provider on behalf of potential customers. Within 30 days of
receipt, a video service provider shall
respond to such requests as it deems appropriate and may provide information to
the requesting customer about its
video products and services and any potential timelines for the extension of
video service to the customers area.
(n) A video service provider shall implement an informal process for handling
municipality or customer inquiries,
billing issues, service issues and other complaints. In the event an issue is
not resolved through this informal
process, a municipality may request a confidential, non-binding mediation with
the
video service provider, with the costs of
such mediation to be shared equally between the municipality and provider.
Should a
video service provider be found by a
court of competent jurisdiction to be in noncompliance with the requirements of
this act, the court shall order the
video service provider, within a specified reasonable period of time, to cure
such noncompliance. Failure to comply
shall subject the holder of the state-issued franchise of franchise authority
to penalties as the court shall reasonably impose, up to and including
revocation of the state-issued video service
authorization. A municipality within which
the video service provider offers video service may be an appropriate party in
any such litigation.
History: L. 2006, ch. 93, § 3; July 1.