California’s net neutrality bill is headed to the governor’s desk, as expected (see 1808310042), after the Senate voted 27-12 Friday to concur with Assembly amendments to SB-822. The dozen nays came from the GOP, though one Republican voted yes and one didn’t vote. Companion SB-460 to restrict state procurement with ISPs that don’t follow open-internet rules died in the Assembly 28-37. Democrats recorded all the yes votes, but 13 said no and 14 didn’t vote. There were 24 GOP no votes; one Republican didn’t vote. Former FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler cheered SB-822 passage in a tweet. In a livestreamed news conference, Sen. Scott Wiener (D) said he worked with Attorney General Xavier Becerra (D) to ensure his bill is defensible. The AG was “very conscious of the fact that we are going to get sued,” since ISPs said from beginning they would challenge such law, Wiener said. “When you're in government, you get sued.” USTelecom CEO Jonathan Spalter, who earlier threatened to challenge state open-internet efforts (see 1803260024), Friday evening urged Gov. Jerry Brown (D) to veto the bill and Congress to make national rules. A trade association or small ISP is likely to be the primary challenger, with the FCC likely to weigh in once the suit is filed, said American Legislative Exchange Council Communications and Technology Task Force Director Jonathon Hauenschild. Challengers may want to take on several different state laws at about the same time, and the California bill taking effect -- this January if Brown signs -- could be the “tipping point” for action, he emailed Tuesday. “This way, the courts hear both the similarities in the bills and the differences and render a more complete verdict.” SB-460 failing wasn’t a big deal, said Electronic Frontier Foundation Legislative Counsel Ernesto Falcon. “The problem had nothing to do with telecom policy and more with internal political issues within the Democratic caucus,” he emailed. “They made their mark with 822." Also Friday, a privacy bill passed (see 1809040053).
An FCC wireless infrastructure draft order would set “high-level guardrails” for rates and shot clocks (see 1809040005) but wouldn’t stop states from setting them lower, Commissioner Brendan Carr said in a Tuesday interview. The proposed order is to be released Wednesday along with other items (see 1809040058) and set for a vote at the Sept. 26 commissioners’ meeting, as expected (see 1808300028). It takes a “balanced approach” by allowing local governments to retain some autonomy over their reviews of small-cell deployments in rights of way while also streamlining the process, Carr said in a livestreamed speech at the Indiana State House.
California lawmakers advancing net neutrality legislation sends a message to Washington that Americans want an open internet, supporters said after Thursday’s vote (see 1808300056). FCC Commissioner Mike O’Rielly condemned the action, which Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel welcomed. National industry groups called for a federal law, saying state-specific rules threaten broadband investment. Lawsuits could come, said observers, although three other states earlier enacted net neutrality bills without legal challenge.
California net neutrality bills seeking comprehensive open-internet rules (SB-822) and restricting some government contracts with ISPs that violate rules (SB-460) were advancing Thursday afternoon local time. SB-822 had been waiting on the floor all week; bills must pass the legislature by Friday. It cleared a key milestone Thursday as California Assembly members voted 58-17 for SB-822 by Sen. Scott Wiener (D), overcoming Republicans who in debate lined up against the bill that’s endorsed by ex-FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler. A separate bill to restrict some government contracts with ISPs that violate rules SB-460 was awaiting an Assembly floor vote. The bills require Senate concurrence with Assembly amendments by Friday. "The moment you've all been waiting for," said Assembly Communications Committee Chairman Miguel Santiago (D) as SB-822 came up for debate. The Democrat said it’s the “strongest” state bill in the country, while GOP Assemblymember Jay Obernolte called it the “harshest.” Other Republicans predicted lawsuits. U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D) supported the bills that are co-sponsored by her rival in November’s election, state Sen. Kevin de Leon (D). “California once again has the opportunity to lead the country, this time by protecting #NetNeutrality,” Feinstein tweeted Wednesday regarding state legislators. “Take action so that users, not their internet service providers, control their online experience.” The legislature Wednesday passed AB-1999, a municipal broadband bill by Assemblymember Ed Chau (D) that would require local agencies to follow net neutrality principles. The Institute for Local Self-Reliance urged Gov. Jerry Brown (D) to sign the bill so community service districts may fund, build and operate broadband networks in rural areas without first having to determine that no private entity will do so.
PHILADELPHIA -- NATOA is mobilizing members for an autumn battle expected at the FCC over wireless infrastructure deployment in the right of way, while the Wireless Infrastructure Association is hearing from local government concerns about small cells, said the groups’ officials in interviews this week. Local representatives asked hard questions of industry officials -- and tensions sometimes flared -- at NATOA’s annual conference (see 1808290044 and 1808280032). “Not always an easy conversation, but it is an appropriate conversation,” said WIA Director-Government Affairs Zac Champ.
PHILADELPHIA -- Verizon throttling of Santa Clara County firefighters shows “one of the reasons FirstNet is here,” said AT&T Director-FirstNet Strategy and Policy Ryan Burchnell Wednesday at the NATOA conference. Burchnell pitched FirstNet to attendees as AT&T works to sign up local agencies. Meanwhile, local officials and attorneys continued to sound the alarm about imminent federal and state actions to ease 5G small-cells deployments by pre-empting local authority in the right of way (ROW).
PHILADELPHIA -- Local governments should make deals with the wireless industry on their own terms before they are pre-empted by states or the FCC, panelists warned Tuesday at a NATOA conference. They cited a San Jose deal with carriers as one that could be a model, though cautioning carriers are reluctant to apply the same terms elsewhere.
PHILADELPHIA -- Municipalities released an alternative model ordinance for 5G small cells, as local officials sought industry collaboration and resisted pre-emption at NATOA’s annual conference Monday. The National League of Cities and NATOA wrote the model local code, which follows a similar framework to the FCC Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee code but is pitched as an alternative. Municipalities should plan for and develop policy on wireless small-cells deployment or risk pre-emption, NLC said in an accompanying guide.
Verizon is revising its service plan for first responders and removed all speed cap restrictions for West Coast and Hawaii responders dealing with wildfires and Hurricane Lane, the carrier said Friday amid increasing criticism of the carrier for throttling traffic to Santa Clara County firefighters battling California’s largest-ever wildfire (see 1808230034). Verizon and the county firefighters testified Friday before California state lawmakers, who are weighing state net neutrality legislation and may introduce another bill on disaster throttling. Both sides of the net neutrality debate said the controversy is bad news for Verizon as it tries to fight the California bill and compete with FirstNet for public safety customers.
California state lawmakers plan to probe Verizon slowing Santa Clara County firefighters’ service, at a hearing Friday, State Capitol offices said Thursday. At a Wednesday hearing, Assembly Communications Committee members advanced two net neutrality bills after discussing the throttling of public-safety service during the state's largest wildfire (see 1808220059). A lobbyist repeated the carrier’s defense that it was a customer service mistake that has nothing to do with net neutrality.