California net neutrality legislation may not survive the courts even if Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signs it, Tellus Venture Associates President Steve Blum blogged Thursday. “The FCC explicitly preempted any state level action that would go against last month’s decision and even if it hadn’t, it blew away the legal basis for net neutrality rules -- state or federal -- when it declared that broadband is not a common carrier service,” said Blum, a telecom consultant for California local governments. California state senators proposed two net neutrality bills this week, SB-460 and SB-822, and other Democratic state lawmakers are doing similarly (see 1801030023 and 1712210034). SB-822 is more targeted, and its “state purchasing power and consumer protection provisions would probably survive a court challenge,” Blum told us. “But getting it passed will be as difficult. Aiming it at cable franchises and pole attachments is a suicide ride -- lobbyists will kill it long before it sees the light of day.”

The Wyoming Public Service Commission suspended a CenturyLink service-quality probe to allow settlement talks, granting a request by the company and the Wyoming Office of Consumer Advocate in docket 14475 (see 1712080068). The PSC directed parties to update commissioners at their Jan. 30 meeting.

The FCC may pre-empt state and local laws that ban broadband deployment, but the agency may not stop rules that “might inhibit” deployment, the National League of Cities wrote the agency's Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee. “Congress did not intend the Commission to preempt state and local laws that make the provision of service more difficult -- just those that ban, or have the effect of banning, service provision,” said NLC's letter released Tuesday in docket 17-83. Section 253(c) and (d) stop FCC pre-empting local management of the right of way “beyond a limited scope,” the city group said. The commission can’t use Section 253 to pre-empt local authority over wireless facilities that are governed by Section 332(c)(7), it said. Market-based rent is fair and reasonable compensation, NLC said.

Union workers challenged AT&T Southwest layoffs. AT&T violated Section 301 of the 1947 Labor-Management Relations Act by laying off union employees while subcontracting their work "for the bad faith purpose of diminishing the employee bargaining unit" and in breach of their collective bargaining agreement, CWA District 6 complained (in Pacer) at U.S. District Court in Austin. The CWA district, covering workers in Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma and Texas, sought an injunction to reinstate jobs of laid-off employees and a jury trial. Both sides announced Dec. 12 that 152 premises technicians who install TV and internet services would lose their jobs Jan. 4 due to reduced workload, and 561 others with various titles would be laid off Feb. 17 for the same reason or due to work consolidation. "There is no reduction in workload,” CWA said. “The Company's business is booming.” CWA sought an injunction at the National Labor Relations Board in case 16-CA-212398, saying the telecom provider violated sections 8(a)(5) and 8(a)(3) of the National Labor Relations Act. “We expected AT&T to invest in our communities and customers, and to create more jobs, as the Republican tax plan promised,” District 6 Vice President Claude Cummings said. The company complied with terms of the collective bargaining agreement and “the allegations in the lawsuit are baseless,” a spokesman said. AT&T is adding people in parts of the business with higher customer demand, as technology-driven efficiencies and declining demand for older services led to cuts, the spokesman said. “We’ll work to find other AT&T jobs for as many affected employees as possible,” including location transfers of some technicians, he said.

Frontier is ahead of schedule deploying rural broadband in California, the carrier said in a Tuesday news release. It said it exceeded the FCC Connect America Fund requirement to deploy to 40 percent of eligible locations by year-end 2017, as it also has done in 17 other states (see 1712180069). The Frontier internet service is available to 275,000 California households, including 39,000 CAF households, it said.

The California Public Utilities Commission will hear testimony on an interconnection dispute between AT&T and VoIP provider Vaya, the CPUC said in a Thursday scoping memo. In a Sept. 29 complaint, AT&T asked the CPUC to order Vaya to compensate AT&T for unpaid charges from allegedly misrouting interLATA traffic over local interconnection trunks. AT&T said Vaya violated a 2014 CPUC decision requiring the VoIP provider to pay AT&T for all interLATA calls delivered to AT&T and prohibiting Vaya from delivering the traffic over local interconnection trunks. The CPUC assigned Commissioner Liane Randolph and Administrative Law Judge Zita Kline to the case. Opening testimony is due Feb. 2, replies Feb. 23. A hearing will be April 12-13, then closing briefs are due May 4 and replies June 11.

Democratic Wisconsin Assembly members introduced ISP privacy legislation that would counter this year’s congressional repeal of the FCC privacy rules for ISPs. AB-788 would prohibit broadband internet access service providers from “using, disclosing, or permitting access to a customer's proprietary information” without consent. The bill would require opt-in consent for sensitive information and opt-out consent for nonsensitive data. Wisconsin’s 2018 session starts Jan. 16. Vermont Senate Democrats introduced an ISP privacy bill earlier this week (see 1712270026) and Democratic lawmakers in several states also plan bills in 2018 to protect net neutrality in response to the FCC vote to rescind Title II protections (see 1712210034).

Texas cities urged the Public Utility Commission to reject ExteNet’s motion to rehear last month’s case that ended with a ruling that the PUC has no authority over wireless network nodes under the state’s 2017 small-cells law. In a Wednesday joint reply in docket 47530, Austin, Houston and Dallas disagreed that the PUC misstated the new law’s scope so it could be improperly applied to installation of fiber facilities not associated with node installations. Texas PUC staff, Verizon and AT&T also urged rejection (see 1712270023).

The Texas Public Utility Commission should deny ExteNet’s motion to rehear last month’s ruling that the PUC has no authority over wireless network nodes under the state’s 2017 small-cells law, commission staff responded Wednesday. ExteNet said the PUC misstated the new law’s scope so it could be improperly applied to installation of fiber facilities not associated with node installations, but carriers and cities disagree with the wireless infrastructure company (see 1712220037). “ExteNet's motion should be denied because it raises issues that have already been addressed by the Commission's declaratory order,” staff said. “ExteNet's concerns that the Commission's order may be misapplied in the future are unfounded.”

Vermont state Senate Democrats proposed a broadband privacy bill that would counter this year’s congressional repeal of the FCC privacy rules for ISPs. Reviving the FCC rules for Vermont, S-289 would “give consumers greater control over their personal information when accessing the Internet through a broadband Internet access service provider and thereby better protect their privacy and autonomy,” said bill text posted this week. Democratic Vermont state Sens. Ginny Lyons, Michael Sirotkin and Tim Ashe sponsored the bill. Vermont's 2018 session starts Jan. 3. Several state legislatures tried but failed to pass ISP privacy bills in 2017. The fight is expected to continue in 2018 sessions (see 1709200053). Democratic state lawmakers also are planning bills in 2018 to protect net neutrality in response to this month’s FCC vote to rescind Title II protections (see 1712210034).