Vermont and ISP groups agreed to extend a freeze on net neutrality litigation until Jan. 3 or when the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals resolves suits on California’s open internet law, whichever happens first. Defendant Vermont and plaintiffs ACA Connects, CTIA, NCTA, USTelecom and the New England Cable & Telecommunications Association filed a stipulation Wednesday at U.S. District Court of Vermont. Case 2:18-cv-167 could resume Monday if the court doesn’t extend terms of a previous order (see 2105030047).

Consumer advocates said to reject changes proposed by Verizon and Tracfone to the California Public Utilities Commission’s conditional draft OK of the companies’ combining. CPUC members plan to vote Nov. 18 on Verizon/Tracfone, showed a Tuesday agenda. The companies disagreed last week with state LifeLine and customer migration conditions in the draft (see 2111050039). The companies' proposed edits are “factually incorrect, legally unsupported, and, if adopted, would make this merger detrimental to the interests of California consumers,” the CPUC’s Public Advocates Office replied Tuesday. The companies seek to “weaken or outright eliminate critical conditions” for low-income customers, PAO said. The Utility Reform Network and the Center for Accessible Technology agreed. Verizon said the proposed decision, with its recommended changes, “accomplishes the goal of ensuring that the Transaction is in the public interest.” Additional conditions proposed by the other three groups are “unnecessary and appropriate,” it said.

Texas urged a state court to again dismiss carrier claims that the Public Utility Commission didn’t adequately fund Texas USF (TUSF). Judge Karin Crump of Travis County District Court in Austin heard livestreamed, virtual oral argument Tuesday on a challenge by AMA TechTel. Crump dismissed a similar challenge by two state telecom associations June 7 (see 2106210048). The Texas Appeals Court for the 3rd Judicial District in Austin will hear the associations’ appeal of that decision Dec. 15, said Texas Assistant Attorney General Carl Myers. “This case is about AMA and AMA only,” and the court should decline relief because “it would take the pot of money ... from the case pending before the 3rd Court of Appeals” and due to lack of jurisdiction, he said. The legislature, not the court, should fix TUSF, he said. The other case’s plaintiffs are ILECs, but AMA is suing from its perspective as a CLEC, said its attorney Kevin Terrazas of Cleveland Terrazas. AMA isn’t asking the court to order the PUC to increase TUSF surcharges, but to follow a law requiring the commission to maintain an adequately funded TUSF. The PUC set the amount AMA should receive, but it isn’t paying that amount, he said: The law gives the PUC discretion on how to fund TUSF but not whether to fund it. Crump believes she made the right decision in the first case but wants to understand the distinctions between cases, the judge said. The hearing continued after our deadline.

A district court was right to block Florida’s social media law, NetChoice and the Computer and Communications Industry Association said in a Monday brief at the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (case 21-12355). “The merits of this case are not close -- Florida may not commandeer private parties’ speech or require them to adopt the state’s preferred editorial choices,” the internet groups said in response to Florida’s appeal of a June 30 preliminary injunction by U.S. District Court in Tallahassee (see 2107130033). “The denial of First Amendment rights is a textbook example of irreparable injury; the state has no legitimate interest in enforcing an unconstitutional law that would require Appellees’ affected members to restructure their operations worldwide; and the public interest favors respect for First Amendment values, rather than novel efforts at state censorship.”

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) signed anti-robocall bills Monday to require telecom companies to block certain numbers (S-6267/A-268) and implement Stir/Shaken protocols to validate calls are actually coming from displayed numbers (S-4281/A-585). “New Yorkers are fed up with annoying, predatory robocalls, and we're taking action to stop them,” said Hochul.

A federal court dismissed landowners’ constitutional claims against Virginia on a state law that makes it easier for electric cooperatives to install broadband facilities on easements where they have power lines. In Grano v. Rappahannock Electric Cooperative (REC) at U.S. District Court in Charlottesville, Virginia (case 3:20-cv-00065), landowners claimed the state violated the 5th and 14th amendments as they sued a co-op trying to use the 2020 state law to expand broadband. The court Friday granted Virginia’s motion to dismiss constitutional claims against the state because it said it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. “It is black letter law that a private citizen may not sue his own State in federal court,” with only two exceptions that don’t apply here, wrote Judge Norman Moon. A Virginia state court could decide, he said: “The Granos have not shown that the Virginia courts are closed to their takings claim.” The court must still decide the landowners’ claim that REC violated the contracts clause. REC declined to comment Monday. The Virginia attorney general’s office and plaintiffs’ attorney didn’t comment.

The FCC’s pause on the phasedown for voice-only Lifeline support won't stop the Oregon Public Utility Commission from seeking to make permanent its increase to the state subsidy next week, a PUC spokesperson told us Monday. The PUC temporarily increased the state’s Lifeline subsidy July 28 to $10 from $7 for Sept. 1-Jan. 31 to offset the reduction in federal support and opened a rulemaking that would make it permanent (see 2109160028). “Staff will petition the Oregon PUC at the” Nov. 16 meeting “to issue a notice of permanent rulemaking in which the Oregon subsidy is permanently set at $10.00, effective” Feb. 1, the spokesperson said. The FCC paused the phasedown Friday for one year (see 2111050058).

The Regulatory Commission of Alaska will keep general regulatory powers over intrastate telecom providers from Alaska laws AS 42.05.141(a) and AS 42.05.151 despite a deregulatory 2019 law, said an RCA order posted Thursday in docket R-19-002. “The legislature has prescribed for us a very limited but important role in overseeing Alaska telecommunications. Our intent is to fulfill that limited prescribed role completely with care not to exceed it,” the RCA said. "After much thought and deliberation, we conclude, though not unanimously, that to effectively exercise the role given us we need the general powers and rulemaking authority contained in AS 42.05.141(a) and AS 42.05.151. We cannot conclude that the legislature intended to strip us of the tools we need to effectively fulfill the role it gave us.” Legislators meant with the 2019 law to revise the RCA's non-inmate telecom jurisdiction to remove rules on ratemaking and tariffing, give more flexibility to facilities-based carriers to make network and managerial decisions, and “proscribe efforts to distinguish between competitive and non-competitive areas ...and designate and assign duties to carriers of last resort,” the commission said. They intended to preserve RCA authority on access charge ratemaking, eligible telecom carrier designation, Alaska USF, interconnections and joint use oversight, telecom relay service and reviewing new services, transfers and discontinuances, it said. The RCA maintains general rulemaking authority and can still compel reports and data and investigate and respond to complaints, it said. Chairman Robert Pickett and Commissioners Janis Wilson, Antony Scott and Keith Kurber voted for the order Oct. 13. Commissioner Dan Sullivan didn’t vote.

West Virginia Public Service Commission staff urged strict action against Altice so the cable operator known there as Suddenlink understands "its current inability or unwillingness to provide adequate, safe and reliable cable television service to West Virginia subscribers is simply unacceptable.” Staff, Altice, localities and the state consumer advocate filed briefs Wednesday on the PSC’s Altice probe in case 21-0515-CTV-SC-GI. Altice doesn’t seem to be taking concerns seriously, said staff. “The old saying that ‘actions speak louder than words’ was affirmed by Suddenlink” when executives left early from last month’s hearing (see 2110060056), showing “they had no interest in what” other hearing participants “had to say about Suddenlink’s performance in West Virginia.” Altice failed to provide knowledgeable witnesses, staff added. The Consumer Advocate Division urged the PSC to impose "statutory penalties to the full extent permitted by West Virginia law" and to remediate current Altice customer service practices. The cabler isn’t taking the inquiry seriously, it agreed. Kanawha County supported PSC staff recommendations: “The Commission has received thousands of complaints, and the Staff has responded accordingly, giving those customers a loud voice.” High rates, poor service, no competition and insufficient local franchise leverage are "the result of abusive monopoly power by a loosely regulated service providers,” said Beckley, Charleston and Elkins. The company acknowledged its “performance challenges ... particularly with respect to its delivery of field services and customer care," saying it acted to address problems, is investing millions of dollars in its West Virginia network and is committed to do more. Don’t penalize or take remedial action because staff recommendations exceed commission authority under state and federal law and Altice is “substantially in compliance” with the Cable Act, it said.

State and federal policymakers should consider infrastructure funding for energy and telecom together rather than in silos, said Mississippi Public Service Commissioner Brandon Presley at a partially virtual Utilities Telecom Council workshop in Spokane, Washington. That could lead to a “multiplier of benefits,” since modernizing the electric grid will require fiber that could be shared for consumer broadband, said Presley. NARUC plans to vote on Presley’s draft resolution on the subject at its meeting next week. The draft focuses on electric cooperatives building middle-mile infrastructure, meaning if a cooperative is pursuing the last mile, “there's perhaps a suggestion that these legislators and commissioners ought not to be approving that kind of stuff,” said Keller Heckman lawyer Tom Magee on a UTC panel Thursday: It might not be well-taken by places like Chattanooga that directly sell service to residents. Five to 10 states passed laws empowering utilities to use electric easements to provide broadband, said Lerman Senter attorney Brett Heather Freedson on the same panel. There may be legal risk for co-ops even in states with utility broadband laws, she cautioned: A Virginia law faces a constitutional challenge after landowners sued an electric cooperative in U.S. District Court in Charlottesville, Virginia (case 3:20-cv-00065). Northwestern utilities stepped in to install fiber when telcos wouldn’t, said another panel Thursday. Douglas Electric Cooperative of Roseburg, Oregon, formed Douglas Fast Net because Lumen had no plans to significantly upgrade service, said DFN Manager Todd Way. “They were never going to really take care of our rural community, and I think we still see that to this day across the nation.” With an open-access fiber network in Kitsap County, Washington, the Kitsap Public Utility District is “not in this for a revenue stream,” stressed Telecom Director Angela Bennink: If the project had been a moneymaker, “the privates would be there.” Now the PUD’s network transports data for Lumen and cable companies, which provide residential services, she said. Addressing UTC virtually over Zoom, Presley faced intermittent audio and video issues as he discussed internet access. About 10 minutes into his remarks, his connection dropped out and UTC couldn’t get him back.