Policy & Legal Committee Accomplishments

Below is a brief summary of issues tracked – and actions taken-- by NATOA on behalf of members through the Policy & Legal Committee, as well as events impacting our issues, advocacy and concerns. 

The past year proved to be both a very active & very disruptive year in the broadband, cable and telecom realm for local governments, consumers and advocates.  The lame duck Biden Administration didn't fully execute funding through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) & Digital Equity Act.  The incoming Trump Administration move extraordinarily quickly to freeze and; in some cases, rescind funds; shutdown agencies; lay off federal workers via DOGE; and, generate early disruptive actions under Presidential executive orders and a unified government. 

When we last filed this report, we were: 

• Excited and enthusiastic about NATOA’s application with member partners in the NTIA’s Digital Equity Competitive Grant Program (DEGCP); 

• Tracking the flood of Digital Equity funding and broadband activities flowing from the Infrastructure Law & Digital Equity Act to the Broadband Equity Access and Deployment (BEAD) Program 

• Looking for Congressional action on the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) which ended on June 1, 2024, due to a lack of further funding from Congress. 

In the last 7 months, we’ve witnessed the Commerce Dept.’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration’s (NTIA) DECGP funding cancelled in an ongoing effort to banish the word “Equity” from all federal funding.  Now, BEAD funding under a new NTIA Policy Notice eliminates any distinctions between fiber, fiber-coaxial, DSL and terrestrial fixed wireless technology and alternative technologies such as Low-Earth Orbit Satellite (LEO).  NTIA is now instructing states to pick the cheapest technologies to deliver internet access and forcing every state and territory to redo their subgrant programs in 90 days. 

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has a new chair, Brendan Carr, and two empty seats, plus a new Cmmr. Olivia Trusty, leaving Cmmr. Anna Gomez as the sole voice of opposition to an agenda outlined in Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 chapter on Telecommunications and the FCC.  Early priorities include eliminating some cable regs; launching initiatives to "delete" Commission rules the chair deems unnecessary; and, in some cases, doing so with a new “Direct Final Rule” process that could eliminate judicial review for these decisions. 

Industry filings in the ‘Delete, Delete, Delete” docket target PEG channels and a multitude of cable franchising obligations, as well as preemptive access to public rights-of-way (PROW), faster permitting; and lower costs at our expense.  A June NATOA webinar looked at how this docket and other Commission actions in 2025 may impact local governments and PEG facilities.  See NATOA’s filing at:  https://www.natoa.org/news/natoa-files-reply-comments-in-delete-delete-delete-gn-docket-no-25-133 . 

NATOA recently wrote the FCC to push back on broadband industry associations' anonymous tales of local permitting struggles. We pointed out that the FCC’s very own Local and State Government Advisory Committee recommended back in 1997 “that ‘the Commission amend its procedural rules to require that any petition citing the actions of a particular local or state government as a basis for federal preemption be served on each cited jurisdiction.’”   (Thank you, Nancy Werner, Gerry Lederer, Lani Williams and Ken Fellman for working with NATOA on this ex parte letter.) https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/search-filings/filing/107102916727573 .  We encourage all members to join in similar ex parte efforts in Accelerating Wireline Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment, WC Docket No. 17-84. 

Please reach out to your attorney or reach out to us here at NATOA for assistance and support. 

NATOA, NLC, USCM and NACo are working on a letter to express the concerns of local government and opposition to three bills: 

• H.R. 278, the BROADBAND Leadership Act – (Barriers and Regulatory Obstacles Avoids Deployment of Broadband Access and Needs Deregulatory Leadership Act) a bill that “limits the authority of a state or locality to regulate the placement, construction, or modification of telecommunications service facilities.   See https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/278  

• H.R.339 - Broadband Resiliency and Flexible Investment Act – a bill “To amend the Middle-Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012.”   see https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/339  

• H.R. 1975 - BEAD FEE Act - (Broadband Expansion and Deployment Equity and Efficiency Act of 2025) a bill: “To amend the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to require States and political subdivisions of States to streamline certain fees relating to broadband infrastructure in order to receive grant funds under the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment Program, and for other purposes.”  See https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/1975/  

• Please Note re H.R. 3557, the American Broadband Deployment Act of 2023 (118th Congress) is no longer being tracked by the CBO.  A Joint Letter of NATOA, NLC, USCM and NACo to House Leadership reiterating opposition to H.R. 3557 was last filed in September, 2024. 

NATOA welcomes the Supreme Court June affirmation of the Universal Service Fund’s (USF) funding scheme to provide affordable access and reliable communications services to schools, libraries, rural health care centers and millions of low-income households and seniors in need.   

NATOA also looks forward to Congress addressing the very real need to modernize the USF to meet the future needs of both households and communities in need.  The re-launch earlier this month of the bipartisan Congressional Universal Service Fund Working Group underscores Congress’ “continued commitment to close the digital divide with solutions that support sustained access to universal connectivity while improving interagency coordination and eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse.”   

The only problem is.... that USF fee on phone service is nearly 40% of every telecom bill yet the revenue goes mostly to provide broadband support.  Congress will need to act soon!  Expect the Congressional USF Working Group to open a Request for Comment portal to invite submission of updated comments regarding the future outlook of the USF in the near and long terms. See https://www.fischer.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news?ID=D8ACC418-4EDB-46BB-AA04-50692166BD2B. 

Last September, U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit decides in League of California Cities v. FCC, the long-pending appeal of the FCC’s  2020 Declaratory Ruling concerning Section 6409 by local governments’ challenge to a wireless siting declaratory ruling approved in June 2020 under former Chairman Ajit Pai.  (The court addressed local governments’ challenge to the FCC’s interpretation of rules implementing Section 6409’s mandating that local governments approve certain “eligible” modifications to wireless installations that do not “substantially change” those facilities.).   The League of California Cities, the League of Oregon Cities and others challenged the 2020 ruling at the Ninth Circuit under the Administrative Procedure Act, saying the FCC had exceeded its authority.  NATOA intervened in the case as well as a good number of cities and municipal leagues across the country.   In the summer of 2023, Robert (Tripp) May, Esq. of Telecom Law Firm (TLF) and Cheryl A. Leanza of Best Best & Krieger (BBK) argued the case before the Court.  NATOA is very appreciative of the hard work of many attorneys and their firms, all of whom worked diligently on this case. In addition to the good work of Tripp May, Esq. And TLF and Cheryl Leanza and BBK, we thank Ken Fellman, formerly of Kissinger & Fellman and now a founding partner in Wilson Williams Fellman Dittman (WWFD), and Nancy Werner, formerly General Counsel at NATOA and now a partner at Bradley Werner. 

Permitting Success: Closing the Digital Divide through Local Broadband Permitting was released last September by Gigi Sohn and Drew Garner and published by the Benton Institute for Broadband Society following a 'convening' May of 2024 by the Georgetown University Law Center's Institute for Technology Law & Policy.  Permitting stakeholders participating included federal, state and local governments and ISPs both large and small working together to identify areas of consensus and collaboration.   

A key take-away of the Permitting Success Report is that: 

“There is no single local permitting process, and thus there can be no one-size-fits-all solution to permitting challenges.”  

• Each local government has a unique permitting process.  

• Each community has unique characteristics (e.g., different water tables, surface components, population densities.)  

• And, each ISP has unique methods for deploying infrastructure. 

“ISPs should ensure municipal officials understand the project’s scope, its construction methods, the service that will be offered, and the steps that will be taken to mitigate disruption and restore construction sites. Government officials, in turn, should explain municipal capacity to approve projects, unique characteristics of the right-of-way, the technical steps for submitting and adjusting permit applications, and any expectations for aesthetics, resilience, and other community priorities.”  See https://www.benton.org/publications/permitting-success  

Active Telecommunications Litigation Update by Lani L. Williams   

This summary (distributed periodically to P&L members) reviews active federal dockets available through pacer.gov. It should not be considered all-encompassing as active cases may be missed. 

Lani Williams is a longtime member of NATOA and the P&L committee who, a few years back, contributed amicus briefs on behalf of NATOA on a number of wireless siting cases.   She's been engaged through 2025 reviewing the current status of various cases out there and exploring what cases might warrant an amicus brief from NATOA pro bono for NATOA.