- Home
- Create an account
- Advanced searches
- Scorecards
- Links
- About
Public Act 4 of 2009
Comments on this legislation Post new comment Text and Analysis Add to Watch List
Previous Next
- Introduced by Sen. Samuel B. Thomas, III (D) on February 4, 2009, to revise consumer complaint provisions in the new state video service franchise system law that substantially replaced the discretion of local governments in franchising video service providers, including through cable or phone lines. The bill would require a customer to first seek redress through a provider’s own dispute resolution process, and if this does not work out, specifies procedures for complaints filed with the state Public Service Commission, including a mediation process. The bill also specifies PSC procedures for disputes between providers and local governments, and disputes between providers.
- Referred to the Senate Energy Policy & Public Utilities Committee on February 4, 2009.
- Reported in the Senate on March 3, 2009, with the recommendation that the bill pass.
- Referred to the Senate Energy Policy & Public Utilities Committee on February 4, 2009.
- Passed 26 to 9 in the Senate on March 12, 2009.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Received in the House on March 12, 2009.
- Referred to the House Energy and Technology Committee on March 12, 2009.
- Reported in the House on March 17, 2009, with the recommendation that the substitute (H-1) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
- Substitute offered in the House on March 18, 2009, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that caps the attorney fees that can be imposed on a losing party in dispute covered by the bill. The substitute passed by voice vote in the House on March 18, 2009.
- Passed 106 to 3 in the House on March 18, 2009, to revise consumer complaint provisions in the new state video service franchise system law that substantially replaced the discretion of local governments in franchising video service providers, including through cable or phone lines. The bill would require a customer to first seek redress through a provider’s own dispute resolution process, and if this does not work out, specifies procedures for complaints filed with the state Public Service Commission, including a mediation process. The bill also specifies PSC procedures for disputes between providers and local governments, and disputes between providers.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Received in the Senate on March 19, 2009.
- Motion in the Senate on March 19, 2009. The motion passed 30 to 6 in the Senate on March 19, 2009.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
- Motion in the Senate on March 19, 2009. The motion passed 30 to 6 in the Senate on March 19, 2009.
- Signed by Gov. Jennifer Granholm on April 2, 2009.
Most Recent Comments
1) Re: 2009 Senate Bill 190 (Revise new cable and phone line video franchise law ) by Admin003 on March 13, 2009Senator Cassis, under her constitutional right of protest (Art. 4, Sec. 18), protested against the passage of Senate Bill No. 190 and moved that a statement she made during the discussion of the bill be printed as her reasons for voting “no.”
The motion prevailed.
Senator Cassis’ statement is as follows:
This bill is certainly in keeping with the overall telecommunications act and working toward resolution of differences of opinion. It is an approach of mediation, but I am kind of struck this morning because I’ve heard from a couple of my townships and one village, as a matter of fact, that perhaps we have not done enough mediation on this issue with our villages, townships, and our cities.
I think we could be close, but they still have concerns, and as one representative of the communities I serve, when they bring up these issues that cannot be fully resolved before we vote, I need to vote “no.” Hopefully, maybe, some of these issues will be resolved before they reach the Governor’s desk.
Reply
the suggestion was a barb thrown at the lefties. they think that increasing government is that answer to everything.
perhaps inviting another cable company in would increase competition, lower prices, and raise level of service.
Reply
A Consumer Affairs Department? The local Cable Commissions are on the whole volunteers. If they get compensation at all it is a pittance compared to setting up another state bureaucracy.
Reply
View Full Conversation
