California Assembly Panel Advances Broadband, Wireless Backup Bills
The California Assembly Communications Committee voted 9-3 for increasing the state broadband standard to 25 Mbps up and down. The committee voted 9-2 to clear SB-431 requiring 72 hours backup power like the California Public Utilities Commission required last month…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
(see 2007160065). At a Monday hearing livestreamed from Sacramento, Vice Chair Jay Obernolte raised concerns that SB-1130 would require a “massive additional source of revenue.” The Republican also opposed “putting our thumb on the scale” in favor of fiber and questioned the need for symmetrical speeds because he claimed most consumers need fast downloads only. Sponsor Sen. Lena Gonzalez (D) said the bill would also support hybrid-technology networks, so cable companies could meet the standards. Cable providers claimed no existing provider in California could meet 25/25. Charter offers 940/35 Mbps speeds but its “entire service territory would be considered unserved because we do not offer a service tier package of 25/25,” said Senior Director-Government Affairs West Kara Bush. Gonzalez aide George Soares told us later that statement was false because the bill doesn’t require speeds to be symmetrical, just that each the download and upload components are higher than 25 Mbps. Charter doesn't "believe the language is clear," a spokesperson responded. The CPUC has 52 pending California Advanced Services Fund applications, meaning there won’t be any money left to fund SB-1130, said California Cable and Telecommunication Association President Carolyn McIntyre. She and Bush warned that open-access rules would violate federal law. There was confusion over what speeds the bill actually required when sponsor Gonzalez misstated that her bill defines a served area as having 25/3 Mbps. She later corrected that the bill was changed last week to 25 symmetrical (see 2007280043). Wireless providers are addressing resiliency without rules proposed by SB-431 on backup power and have valid concerns that rules will get in the way, said Assemblymember Jim Patterson (R). Sen. Mike McGuire (D) said the sponsors accommodated industry in several ways, including by making a network-wide requirement rather than applying rules to all cell sites. Industry didn’t get everything it wants but saw “significant movement toward them,” said Chair Miguel Santiago (D). The bills go next to the Appropriations Committee.