JACKSON – Township officials recently filed a second complaint with the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities citing poor service by Altice/Optimum for its internet and cable TV services. The first was filed in October.
Township officials said they were awaiting word from Altice, the parent company of Optimum in response to the first complaint that Jackson filed but a representative from Altice said that a meeting had taken place.
Jackson’s first complaint was filed on October 12 and the township filed the second complaint on November 24 titled “Request for Investigation (of) Internet, Telephone and Cable Television Service provided by Optimum/Altice USA.”
Officials sent the latest complaint directly to BPU President Joseph L. Fiordaliso who was informed that the township heard nothing after their initial complaint.
Earlier in the year residents voiced their concerns regarding Optimum/Altice services to the council. Jackson officials also noted what they said was inferior cable television and internet service under its current franchise which the BPU issues.
The governing body referenced resident feedback which stated that they continue to suffer from inferior cable and internet access during a public health emergency, requiring many of our residents, and nearly all of our students, to work and attend school in a virtual format.
Fiordaliso was told by the officials that they could not “stress enough the feeling of despair and anxiety which grips our residents when their children cannot properly attend their classes online, or when our residents’ employers wonder where their employees are and how are they working remotely when they have inadequate internet access.”
Some residents have told council members that their service from Optimum has actually worsened since the time the first complaint was made.
Janet Meahan, the vice president of Communications, for Altice/Optimum told The Jackson Times that, “my understanding is that we met with the township on November 10 to discuss their concerns.” A few days later on December 1 she added, “a meeting with both Jackson’s business administrator and council president (was held) in early November.”
“We have added capacity to the network that is resulting in improved performance, and we continue to be in touch with the township as well as individual customers related to any outstanding issues that could be impacting service,” Meahan said.
Jackson Township Business Administrator Terence Wall disagreed with Meahan’s description of that contact being a meeting. “There was no meeting – there was a phone call from one of their attorneys to try to ascertain the key elements of their failure to properly serve the residents of Jackson Township. They mischaracterize the word ‘meeting’.”
Council President Alex Sauickie added, “the only conversation with a representative from Altice/Optimum since filing the first complaint was an unscheduled call with a gentleman who described himself as from their ‘Government Affairs’. It was a nice call in that he seemed genuinely wanting to know what the governing body was hearing from the residents.”
“However, on that call, nor at any time, have I seen Altice acknowledge that a systemic problem even exists, despite the fact that this was a Town (governing body on behalf of all residents) complaint about the overall service,” Sauickie said.
Sauickie added, “in addition, other towns (Howell, Robbinsville, etc.) have also filed similar complaints, yet I have yet to hear from representatives of Altice, nor see in their press releases that there is even more than isolated or one-off issues versus a system wide problem.”
Responding to Altice’s comments regarding adding capacity to its network, Sauickie said, “as far as I know no performance metrics have been shared with the town, first showing the performance before the complaint, second what specific steps were taken to make improvements, and lastly what metrics they have, and more importantly what resident feedback they have, confirming ‘improved performance’.”
Sauickie noted that as Wall had said, “to date we’ve had one conversation with a representative from Altice, so I am unclear about with whom they ‘continue to be in touch with the township’.”
He added, “the second complaint was filed with the BPU and escalated to the head of it, because there has not been to date, to my knowledge, a formal acknowledgement nor response to the first complaint.”
Sauickie also noted that more than six weeks had passed before the Township filed the second complaint. “It’s only been a little more than a week with a holiday in between since filing the second/escalated complaint, however to my knowledge we have not heard back on that one as well.”
The Council President said the Township Council wants to “ensure that the residents know that the governing body and administration sees this as a critical quality of life issue, and this will not be a ‘one and done’ effort with one complaint and forgotten about.”
“This is especially important now with Jackson’s school system announcing they are immediately going fully remote for at least the next two weeks, along with most of those students’ parents who are also working from home,” Sauickie said.
He added, “now more than ever the residents need their Wifi service to work without degradation in service and without complete interruptions. We will keep on this until the service is at a level the residents expect, deserve, and pay for, or look for the Township’s alternatives to Altice’s subpar service.”
Council President Alex Sauickie described the initial complaint saying, “the town has in my opinion worked in good faith before filing this complaint. We did reach out to the management of Altice months ago in attempts to try to alert them to the concerns.”
Sauickie said, “they aren’t new concerns. They didn’t start with the pandemic. They were in existence before that. We did want to do right by Altice and see if we could work through their management. We also put a link on the Jackson Township website to allow residents to file their complaints directly with Altice which they in fact did.”
The first complaint charges that Optimum “is providing inferior cable television and internet service to its customers. Service is slow, poor network connections exist and there is an inability to use ‘DropBoxes’ and Altice has not offered to reduce its fee for this service.”
Also noted by customers was their inability to speak to a customer service representative following long waiting periods and to get a concise answer as what the problem was and when it might be corrected.
Some customers said that when they did get to speak with a representative, they were told their problem was “temporary” but that it persisted afterwards.
Sauickie said in October that “we are also taking it one step further with resolution 337R-20. That resolution is requesting a 50% reduction in the fees that are paid to Altice for the residents going forward.”
“Hopefully, they (the BPU) will take action regarding it. We do that in conjunction with other towns that have done it so hopefully we will see some action on that going forward,” Sauickie said.
