Laserfiche WebLink
6 <br />24. The FCC also found that “competition for delivery of bundled services will <br />benefit consumers by driving down prices and improving the quality of service <br />offerings.” See Staff Report, § 2. <br />25. The FCC has concluded in the 621 Order that “broadband deployment and video <br />entry are ‘inextricably linked’ and that broadband deployment is not profitable <br />without the ability to compete with the bundled services that cable companies <br />provide.” See 621 Order at ¶ 51; see also, Staff Report, §§ 2 and 7. <br />26. The City must, pursuant to the Federal Cable Act, “allow the applicant’s cable <br />system a reasonable period of time to become capable of providing service to all <br />households in the franchise area.” See Staff Report, § 7(A). <br />27. Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 238, among other things, requires a level playing <br />field with the incumbent relating to area served (Minn. Stat. § 238.08, Subd. 1(b)) <br />and a mandatory build out requirement within five years in initial cable franchises <br />(Minn. Stat. § 238.084 Subd. 1(m)(3)). See Staff Report, § 8(A)-(B), and 11(c). <br />CenturyLink has demonstrated a good faith basis for its position that applicable <br />federal law preempts these provisions of Chapter 238 because they constitute an <br />unreasonable barrier to entry. See Staff Report, § 11(c), and Exhibit 3 at ¶¶ 19- <br />23. <br />28. CenturyLink claims the fact that these two provisions of the Minnesota Statutes <br />constitute an unreasonable barrier to entry in the City is evidenced in part by the <br />fact that there has been no facilities-based competitor since the initial cable <br />communications franchise was granted. See Staff Report, Exhibit 3 at ¶¶ 19-23. <br />CenturyLink has agreed to fully defend, indemnify and hold the City and the