A proposal to make California the first state with a surveillance transparency law cleared the Senate but divided senators Thursday. No member spoke against SB-1186 on the floor, and the vote was 21-15, getting the minimum number of supporters needed in the 40-member body to send the bill to the Assembly. Sheriffs continued to oppose the bill requiring local law enforcement to have public notice and comment before using new surveillance technologies (see 1804030043). Senate passage Wednesday of a net neutrality bill (see 1805300084) picked up more kudos, including from ex-FCC chairman Tom Wheeler and a New York state senator.
Industry supported a proposed Alaska USF revamp that would sunset the revised AUSF after June 30, 2023, with a comprehensive review to begin by June 30, 2021. At a teleconferenced hearing Wednesday, officials for General Communication, Alaska Communications Systems and other providers largely supported the Regulatory Commission of Alaska proposal based on a plan by the Alaska Telephone Association (see 1805090027). Commissioner Robert Pickett doesn’t like parts of the proposal, including its definition of “remote” and capping the revenue-based USF surcharge at 10 percent rather than 9 percent, but “collectively” finds the plan “somewhat workable.” The Alaska Attorney General Regulatory Affairs and Public Advocacy (RAPA) section recommended clarifying some language in Tuesday comments in docket R-18-001. RAPA doesn’t seek a specific rule addressing an “eroding intrastate contribution base,” but said “the possibility of shifting to a connections-based contribution base needs to be studied through future Commission, industry, and RAPA actions including possible workshops and studies.” Rural providers agree contributions reform is a critical state and federal issue and support looking at connections-based reform in a separate docket, said Moss & Barnett attorney Shannon Heim, representing a coalition of rural carriers. Heim is “unconvinced that there are enough connections in Alaska to make that type of methodology actually work here,” she said. Written comments are due June 15.
The California Senate voted 23-12 to pass a net neutrality bill by state Sen. Scott Wiener (D) that was endorsed by former FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler. On the Senate floor Wednesday, one Democratic senator doubted SB-822 would hold up to legal scrutiny, but said he would vote for it anyway on principle. Republicans opposed the bill as harmful and illegal. In the lead-up to the vote, industry clashed with supporters of the FCC’s 2015 open internet rules.
Advocates rallied for California net neutrality legislation Tuesday before a Senate floor vote expected this week on the bill by state Sen. Scott Wiener (D). Opposed by industry and backed by former FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler and other 2015 open internet rule supporters, SB-822 “is more far reaching than the bills put forth in the other states,” emailed Sherry Lichtenberg, National Regulatory Research Institute telecom principal. A June 5 primary for U.S. Senate may affect politics around the California effort, said Tellus Venture Associates President Steve Blum.
CTIA urged the Maine Public Utilities Commission to quickly open a rulemaking on pole attachment rates, once the PUC gets data from pole owners about effects of adopting FCC rate formulas. But Consolidated Communications, recent acquirer of pole owner FairPoint Communications, said it doesn’t want to provide the data. In comments last week in docket 2018-00010, CTIA supported a Maine Fiber proposal to direct large pole owners to say what their rates would be under the FCC rate method (see 1805150016). “The need to remove barriers to wireless deployment and attach new and evolving technologies to utility poles makes it all the more important that the Commission establish regulatory certainty by amending the rates portion of the pole attachment rule,” CTIA said. The Maine Office of the Public Advocate agreed pole owners should provide data on what their rates would be under the FCC method. “The OPA supports a rate formula that requires that attachers be charged for the space they use, plus a reasonable contribution to the common cost of the pole,” it said. But Consolidated said the data sought isn’t relevant and would burden pole owners. The FCC formula “arbitrarily reduces rates by 33% and 66% to put it in line with a favorable cable rate that was adopted in cable’s infancy in order to accelerate cable deployment,” Consolidated said. The actual rate doesn’t matter as long as the policy doesn’t discriminate, it said. The Telecom Association of Maine also took issue with Maine Fiber’s approach, saying it “will simply lead to a morass of conflicting data as different providers utilize differing assumptions when calculating their pole costs as well as their interpretations of how the FCC Rules should be applied which will lead to further arguments among the parties and, ultimately, delay the process.”
The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission won’t preclude broadband comments in a Frontier service quality probe, even with questions about the regulator’s jurisdiction, commissioners decided at a livestreamed Thursday meeting. Commissioners voted unanimously to modify an April 26 order in docket 18-122 so it no longer requires that the notice of public hearings clarify the limits of the commission’s jurisdiction over internet service. The Minnesota Department of Commerce sought clarification because it disagreed with Frontier's assertion that the PUC has no broadband authority (see 1805140015). Frontier customers will tell the commission about all their concerns with service at the hearings, said Commissioner Dan Lipschultz. “Some of what they say will relate to things within our jurisdiction and some of what they say will not,” he said. “That will have to get sorted out through the course of the proceeding.” An administrative law judge can do the sorting, said Lipschultz: “We all know that our jurisdiction is not unlimited.” Frontier declined comment. Minnesota is to argue it has jurisdiction over a cable VoIP service June 12 at the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (see 1805180013).
Possible FCC action to raze state and local barriers to wireless deployment “sets the bookends” for national policy, while letting states write more detailed rules through individual small-cells bills, said Wireless Infrastructure Association CEO Jonathan Adelstein in a Wednesday interview at the WIA show in Charlotte. In keynotes, Chairman Ajit Pai and Commissioner Mike O’Rielly backed aggressive federal action to win a global race to 5G (see 1805230031 and 1805220034). Local governments are cooperative and the federal government need not intervene, NATOA General Counsel Nancy Werner said Thursday: “We’re ready to go.”
CHARLOTTE -- The FCC will vote in July on a proposal for using C-band spectrum, the 500 MHz of spectrum between 3.7 and 4.2 GHz, Chairman Ajit Pai told the Wireless Infrastructure Association Wednesday. Pai urged aggressive action to win the global 5G race but said he wants to find balance between industry and local government interests. Dish Network plans to spend at least $10 billion on 5G, technology that Chairman Charles Ergen predicted would add “a lot more” than $500 billion to the economy. Chasing a 5G network for IoT, “Dish is back to being a startup business,” Ergen said. The company is spending $500 million to $1 billion in the first phase of its plans, and tower executives voiced eagerness to assist.
CHARLOTTE -- Locked in a global race to 5G, the U.S. must be aggressive in lowering state and local barriers to wireless deployment, FCC Commissioner Mike O’Rielly told the Wireless Infrastructure Association Tuesday. The FCC should “exercise its authority” to stop “bad actors” in state and local government from slowing deployment of small cells, he said. O’Rielly said he wants to see a “solid mid-band play” for 5G wireless services available in the next two years. In an interview also Tuesday, O’Rielly also discussed net neutrality, 911 fee diversion and Sinclair.
The Supreme Court won’t hear an Oklahoma mayor’s complaint against AT&T involving alleged bribery at the Oklahoma Corporation Commission and a state court. The Supreme Court denied certiorari Monday on the petition by Nichols Hill Mayor Sody Clements -- a former OCC employee -- and other Oklahomans against Southwestern Bell, now known as AT&T. In 2015, petitioners objected at the OCC to “intrinsic fraud” by AT&T “to obtain ill-begotten orders and judgments from the OCC and the Oklahoma Supreme Court,” the petition said. The OCC dismissed that complaint with prejudice, preventing petitioners from seeking further review. In its application for cert, petitioners said the commission and state court “simply went too far in resolving this grievance -- by abridging the Petitioners’ United States Constitutional right to further petition for redress of grievances by the State’s summary dismissal ‘with prejudice’ of Petitioners’ application to reform a bribed legislative matter.” The petitioners are disappointed, but this request was “one tiny part” of the matter, Clements said in an interview. “We are not going away.” The case has never been heard on the merits but instead “shuttled” from one court to another due to technicalities, and AT&T has yet to deny the bribery charges, she said. AT&T applauded the rejection. “At least seven times over the last 25 years, the Oklahoma Corporation Commission and the Oklahoma Supreme Court have consistently found no compelling basis -- legal or otherwise -- to reopen this case,” a spokeswoman said. “After the truly remarkable amount of consideration and review this issue has received, it’s time to put it to rest.”