You're over-thinking it. Use the power company as a model and you'll close to the right path.
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 4:05 PM, Eric Brunner-Williams <brun...@nic-naa.net> wrote: > On 7/22/14 11:13 AM, Ray Soucy wrote: >> >> Municipal FTTH needs to be a regulated public utility (ideally at a >> state or regional level). It should have an open access policy at >> published rates and be forbidden from offering lit service on the >> fiber (conflict of interest). > > > Ray, > > Could you offer a case for state (or regional, including a jurisdictional > definition) preemption of local regulation? > > Counties in Maine don't have charters, and, like most states in the North > East, their powers do not extend to incorporated municipalities. Here in > Oregon there are general law counties, and chartered counties, and in the > former, county ordinances to not apply, unless by agreement, with > incorporated municipalities, in the later, the affect of county ordinances > is not specified, though Art. VI, sec. 10 could be read as creating > applicability, where there is a "county concern". In agricultural regions > (the South, the Mid-West, the West), country government powers are > significantly greater than in the North East, and as in the case of Oregon, > nuanced by the exceptions of charter vs non-charter, inferior jurisdictions. > Yet another big issue is Dillon's Rule or Home Rule -- in the former the > inferior jurisdictions of the state only have express granted powers on > specific issues, and in the latter the inferior jurisdictions of the state > have significant powers "enshrined in the State(s) Constitution(s)". > > I mention all this simply to show that one solution is not likely to fit all > uses. > > Now because I've worked on Tribal Bonding, I'm aware that the IRS allows > municipalities to issue tax free bonds for purposes that are wider than the > "government purposes" test the IRS has imposed on Tribal Bonding (up until > last year). Stadiums, golf courses, and {filling a hole in | using pole > space on} public rights-of-way -- forms of long-term revenue Tribes are > barred from funding via tax free bonds by an IRS rule. > > The (two, collided) points being, municipalities are likely sources of > per-build-out funding, via their bonding authority, and you've offered a > claim, shared by others, that municipalities should be preempted from > per-build-out regulation of their infrastructure. > > How should it work, money originates in the municipality of X, but > regulation of the use of that money resides in another jurisdiction? > > Eric > -- Ray Patrick Soucy Network Engineer University of Maine System T: 207-561-3526 F: 207-561-3531 MaineREN, Maine's Research and Education Network www.maineren.net