Gigi Sohn, who withdrew her nomination to the Federal Communications Commission in March, has been named executive director of the American Association for Public Broadband (AAPB), a nonprofit formed by state and local broadband officials with the mission of advocating for municipal broadband.

Sohn, who fought for confirmation as the FCC’s pivotal third Democrat after she was nominated by President Joe Biden in 2021,  will remain a senior fellow and advocate for the Benton Institute for Broadband and Society. AAPB membership comprises government officials who are either already operating municipal broadband networks or plan to do so.

“Until now, there has not been a membership-based advocacy organization that works to ensure that public broadband can grow unimpeded by anti-competitive barriers," Sohn said in a statement. ”That’s despite the success of public broadband to help places like Chattanooga and the Massachusetts Berkshires transform from sleepy hamlets to vibrant centers of economic opportunity, education, and culture. We have the chance to make a positive case for states to fund and communities to choose public broadband and oppose barriers to local choice.”

Sohn has plenty of experience in the area of municipal broadband. She was a top counselor to Obama-era FCC chair Tom Wheeler, who had asserted the regulator’s power to preempt state laws blocking muni broadband expansion, bills that are backed by broadband providers.

”With more than $45 billion going to the states and tribal lands to build out broadband, I’m excited to work with public broadband providers to educate policymakers, the press and the public on the critical role public broadband plays in providing affordable, robust, and scalable broadband to communities across the country and how barriers to public broadband can hurt efforts to close the digital divide in both rural and urban America,” Sohn said.

Sohn and the AAPB are not the only ones looking hard at that $45 billion.

At almost the same time Sohn’s new job was announced, over on Capitol Hill, House Energy and Commerce Committee chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) was announcing an oversight hearing in the Communications Subcommittee May 10 focusing on how that $45 billion is being spent. ”Americans deserve every assurance these resources are truly going to help the unserved communities that need them most,“ Rodgers said.

Sohn could have a tough time selling Republicans or private broadband providers on the benefits of municipal broadband. Both have been critical of such buildouts, arguing that they wind up being government-funded overbuilds of existing private networks or fail to make it as ongoing operations, leaving taxpayers holding the bag when they fail.

House Energy & Commerce Committee Democrats are trying to revive the Community Broadband Act, long-pushed legislation that would preempt the state laws limiting municipal broadband that service providers have worked hard to put in place.

But given that the House is controlled by Republicans generally opposed to legislation they have suggested “usurps” state authority, the prospects are not great for passage this time around either.

The House bill is backed by Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) and in the Senate by Cory Booker (D-N.J.).

For most of two decades, Democrats in both the House and Senate for most of two decades have tried to pass legislation that would ensure states and public-private partnerships cannot be prevented from offering advanced telecommunications services in competition with private industry, with the caveat that if that the state regulates those competitors, it cannot favor its own service.

“Currently, millions of Americans lack access to high-speed broadband, and this bill will enable local communities to build affordable, reliable broadband networks in areas that have been left without connectivity,” Consumer Reports, an advocate for the bill, said. “Additionally, it will remove barriers for local governments and communities to build and operate broadband networks, promoting healthy competition.”

The bill targets the 21 states that have passed laws restricting or preventing municipal broadband.

ISPs have long argued that municipal networks — which, they say, often wind up being government-subsidized overbuilds of existing private networks — can leave taxpayers holding the bag when initial investments don’t convert to ongoing sustainability. 

Democrats say municipal networks “improve broadband options or build-out to unserved areas that private providers refuse to connect,” as Eshoo put it in announcing the latest of multiple efforts to pass the bill since at least 2007.

Comcast has purchased two municipal broadband systems in Braintree and Russell, Massachusetts after the communities said that necessary network build outs would be too expensive. 

The two Massachusetts communities have long histories in the municipal broadband business, with Braintree Electric Light Department (BELD), the town’s municipal electric utility, launching service in 2003. Russell launched its cable TV system in 1988. According to the town’s website, pricing for Russell Cable TV is $77 per month for expanded basic service and broadband charges range from $65 per month for 10 Mbps service and $120 per month for 50 Mbps service. 

BELD didn’t say how much it sold the system for, which was launched in 2003 and had about 2,500 customers, about 500 less than last year. Comcast has been providing video, voice and data service in Braintree for several years but did not previously offer service in Russell. 

BELD dropped its cable TV offering in 2019, citing the high cost of programming. 

Also: More Muni, More Money 

According to a statement issued on its website, BELD Internet general manager Bill Bottiggi said a study conducted by the utility showed it would need to invest millions of dollars to maintain the quality of the service, which would result in the municipality having to charge significantly higher rates for service. BELD launched a 1 Gigabit per second service in 2019 and charged as low as $39.95 per month for the first year for 100 Megabit per second service.

According to BroadbandNow, BELD charged $99.95 per month for 1Gbps service and $79.95 per month for 400 Mbps service. The town said the transition to Comcast will begin later this month. Promotional pricing for Comcast service in the area ranges from $29.99 for the first two years for 200 Mbps speeds and $79.99 for the first 24 months for 1.2 Gbps service. 

"We are proud of our 20-year history as a top internet Service Provider and are sincerely thankful for our customers' loyalty," Bottiggi said in a statement. "Our top priority has always been our customers, and we continue to think of their best interests while adjusting to market conditions.  After evaluating our options, we are confident the best decision is to connect our business with Comcast's best in-class network, products, services and customer experience."

A Comcast spokesperson said the purchases represent two separate and unique opportunities and that it was coincidental they closed at the same time. Talks to purchase the Russell system began about two years ago, while BELD approached Comcast about a possible transaction beginning in April. 

“We chose Comcast because it is the best operator in the business with the fastest and most reliable network,”  Russell Municipal Cable manager Randy Merritt said in a statement. “They are true innovators who continuously invest in their network to meet customers’ current and future needs and we are confident this sale will ensure our customers have access to Comcast’s best-in-class network, products, services and customer experience.” 

Braintree is about 12 miles from Boston, and at least three other nearby communities -- Quincy, Weymouth and Milton -- have expressed plans to offer their own municipal broadband service. 

Russell is located within Hampden County in western Massachusetts and has a population of 1,640 people, according to the 2020 U.S. Census. 

In a blog post, Comcast said it plans to transition Russell Municipal Cable TV customers to its Xfinity services through the end of the year and in January. 

“The acquisition of Russell Municipal Cable TV gives Comcast an opportunity to provide customers in the Town of Russell with access to our Xfinity and Comcast Business innovative products and services, including our broadband internet experience with the fastest broadband speeds available to residents,” Comcast Western New England Region SVP Carolyne Hannan said in the blog post. “We have a longstanding commitment to serving the communities in the Commonwealth where our customers and employees live and work and are proud to extend that commitment to our newest community in western Massachusetts.”

Cable broadband operators are concerned that localities could start putting a thumb on the scale for Google Fiber when it comes to broadband service — making it a less-free market in which to compete for eyeballs and subscription dollars — and they want the Federal Communications Commission to nip that notion in the bud.

The current battleground over the extent to which municipalities can build out broadband is West Des Moines, Iowa. Incumbent provider Mediacom Communications wants the FCC to require the city to stop construction on Google Fiber‘s network, stop marketing service to residents and reconfigure the network and contract. 

Also Read: NCTA Says Google Fiber Definition of Competition Is Too Narrow

Opponents of the petition — comments were due Oct. 7 — said the FCC does not even have the authority to grant it.

Mediacom earlier this year asked the FCC to declare that the preferential treatment it says the city was extending to Google Fiber violated the Communications Act requirement that providers get nondiscriminatory access.

ACA Connects — the trade group representing Mediacom and other smaller, independent cable providers — filed comments in the proceeding saying preferential rates, terms and conditions obtained by Google Fiber clearly did not fit the competitively neutral directive of the Communications Act’s Section 253.

ACAC suggests the potential problem goes further than West Des Moines, and the commission needs to recognize that.

“[T]he FCC should recognize that the City’s alleged actions are of general concern to all providers regardless of location,” ACAC said in its comments. “Incumbent providers of telecommunications service and new entrants alike, including ACA Connects members, are concerned that actions by state or local governments in providing access to [public rights of way], including those like the City’s, may skew the market, such that they cannot compete in a fair and reasonable legal and regulatory environment as envisioned by Section 253.“

Muni Advocates Weigh In

Not surprisingly, Next Century Cities, which comprises advocates of municipal broadband service, filed in opposition to the Mediacom petition.

Next Century told the commission that Mediacom was trying “to prohibit a local government’s public-private partnership agreement that is designed to increase competition and expand broadband service options for residents.” It said the declaratory ruling would set the “negative precedent” that could discourage cities from forming public-private partnerships to close the digital divide.

Next Century was certainly suggesting ACAC‘s fear that not declaring such muni deals with Google Fiber violated the Act could encourage others was well-founded.

Also Read: More Muni, More Money

“Local officials nationwide are exploring opportunities to bring high-quality, affordable broadband within reach for residents and businesses,“ Next Century said. “These initiatives are often necessary, innovative, and community-driven, yet face numerous obstacles,“ including what it called "federal interference," and what ACAC would call the obstacle that favoring Google Fiber violates FCC rules.

But Next Century said that even if the FCC wanted to invalidate the Google Fiber deal, it gave up that authority when it reclassified broadband as an information service under Title I of the Communications Act. “Mediacom‘s complaint only pertains to the deployment and delivery of broadband Internet access service and does not affect the delivery of telecommunications services,” Next Century argued. “Therefore, the commission lacks authority to rule on this matter.”

Google Claims Mischaracterization

In its comments, Google said Mediacom‘s petition mischaracterizes its agreement with the city, which it says is not a grant of monopoly control of conduits; is not a subsidy to the company; grants it no special permitting or access rights; and is not on more favorable financial terms than other all-fiber ISPs.

Besides, the FCC has never been in the business of rewriting private contracts and should not start now, it said.

Among those filing in support of Google and West Des Moines were INCOMPAS, the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisers (NATOA), the U.S. Conference of Mayors, and National League of Cities, among others.

INCOMPAS, whose members include Google, urged the FCC to deny the petition, saying West Des Moines was just trying to create an open conduit network that will provide fast, competitive fiber to residents throughout the city.

Municipal networks have a friend in the White House. President Joe Biden has signaled that he would favor targeting broadband subsidy money to municipal nets and public-private partnerships, which he has signaled equates to better and cheaper broadband service and cable broadband providers argue often leads to failed efforts and taxpayers holding the bag.

The Free State Foundation has a big issue with the way the House Ways & Means Committee is reconciling President Joe Biden's $3.5 trillion spending plan, which includes big bucks for broadband.

Both houses of Congress have passed a general outline of the budget, but committees in both chambers are now charged with filling in matching details. 

Randolph May, president of the Potomac, Maryland-based free-market think tank, is calling ill-conceived a provision that would provide a tax break to municipal broadband buildouts.

Also Read: More Muni, More Money

The president has favored such municipal broadband in his proposals for billions of dollars in subsidies to promote universal, affordable and competitive high-speed internet service.

But May said Congress should not give a tax break for the maintenance and operation of government-owned broadband systems.

One knock on such systems historically has been that once funded, they can't cover operating expenses and have been known to fold, leaving taxpayers to foot the bill.

Also Read: Biden Broadband Plan Favoring Government-Owned Networks Lacks a Constitutional Foundation

But May said government-owned networks already get preferential treatment when it comes to “accessing public rights of way, avoiding cumbersome permitting processes, and benefitting from taxpayer-funded subsidies.”

He said the tax break would make it harder for private operators who have to invest their own risk capital to upgrade service. “Marketplace competition for broadband services would be dampened and consumers will be the losers” if the tax break for munis is granted, he said.

As the broadband fate of rural communities nationwide remains in limbo in the wake of the apparent compromise concerning President Biden’s $65 billion broadband initiative, one rural telecom company -- GCI -- said it plans to connect 17 remote areas of Alaska this year using funds from the five-year old $1.5 billion Alaska Plan to bring high-speed internet to the frontier.  

Earlier this week, President Biden announced he had reached a compromise with Senate Republicans concerning his overall infrastructure plan, which would pump nearly $600 billion of federal funds to build bridges, roads, and fund environmental remediation and other projects, including earmarking $65 billion to bring broadband service to rural communities. Initially the broadband component was to include  increasing funding for municipal broadband projects, but where the money will go is still somewhat up in the air. Republicans have taken a harsher stance on muni broadband -- some have tried to eliminate it all together  -- and some reports have said it is unlikely that they would have agreed to give municipalities priority over private providers.   

Also Read: Building Out Broadband: Look Before You Leap 

In the meantime, GCI  said 11 communities -- Kodiak, Nome, Valdez, Kotzebue, Tok, Dillingham, Manokotak, Aleknagik, Clark’s Point, Becker Ridge, and Fritz Creek -- will receive faster wireless service via LTE upgrades this year. Another six communities -- Nikolai, Lime Village, Rampart, Central, Lake Minchumina, and Takotna -- will get terrestrial internet service for the first time. 

The news  comes weeks after GCI said it would deploy 2 Gigabit per second service to 77% of residents in the state in 2022 and that it is on track to provide 10 Gbps service in the next five years. . 

Also Read: Broadband Infusion in Biden Plan Faces Challenges 

The Federal  Communications Commission’s Alaska Plan was created in 2016 to allocate $1.5 billion over ten years to carriers to maintain, extend, and upgrade broadband service across certain areas of the state. GCI was one of 15 carriers and their eight wireless affiliates to sign on to the plan back in 2016. 

Also Read: More Muni, More Money 

According to GCI, the federal funding helps make rural investment and maintenance possible in extremely remote, costly and difficult-to-serve communities. GCI, along with other Alaska providers, receives a portion of Alaska Plan funding each year.

“As technology evolves, access to reliable connectivity is more crucial than ever, especially for those who live in remote communities,” GCI senior director of regulatory affairs Juliana Wayman said in a press release. “Through GCI’s Alaska Plan projects, more Alaskans can stay connected in their homes and on-the-go with wireless devices. Increased connectivity also expands entertainment options and enables Alaskans to grow small business opportunities, access online government services, and keep in touch with friends and family.”

So far, GCI said the plan has helped 79,000 rural Alaskans in 105 communities gain access to faster data speeds and improved broadband service. 

Also Read: Cable’s Last Frontier 

“While GCI is a key provider of wireless and wireline services throughout rural Alaska, we can’t do it alone,” Wayman said in the press release. “With the leadership of the Alaska Telecom Association, support from Alaska’s federal delegation and the dedication of 16 other providers across the state, keeping Alaskans connected is a group effort requiring innovative solutions to serve a state unlike any other. Through that collaboration, it’s our goal to be good stewards of Alaska Plan funding and investment so we are able to expand broadband access and better connect rural Alaska and close the digital divide.”

A bill has been introduced in Congress by a trio of Democrats that would remove "roadblocks" to municipal broadband buildouts by preempting state laws limiting or preventing those buildouts.

Also Read: New Bill Would Allow Overbuilding of 1 Gig Service

The Community Broadband Act would "ensure their residents have broadband access by removing roadblocks for public-private partnerships and locally-owned broadband systems," say its co-sponsors, Reps. Anna Eshoo (D-California) and Jared Golden (D-Maine) and Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.).

It "nullifies state laws that inhibit local governments from building their own broadband, preserving the local right to self-determination in connecting communities."

“Our bill will help give local governments the necessary flexibility to meet the needs of their residents by removing onerous barriers to creating more municipal broadband networks and expand access to the internet for every community," said Booker.

Also Read: Public Knowledge Says Congress Should Allow Overbuilding

ISPs are historically concerned that those buildouts will be built out with subsidized capital in competition to existing commercial broadband and leave taxpayers holding the empty bag in the instances where those fail to become ongoing operations.

They have put their lobbying muscle where there interests are, backing a number of bills that rein in what they see as potential municipal broadband overbuilding.

The Democrats cite bills in nineteen states, which they saw are a case of ISPs shielding themselves from competition and tying the hands of local communities that want to built out to areas private companies "refuse to connect."

Also Read: Bill Would Prevent State Efforts to Limit Muni Broadband

The new bill is backed by Public Knowledge, Access Now, the National League of Cities and a number of others.

New America's Open Technology Institute has given the Republican and Democratic National Committees a list of recommendations for their presidential party platforms, including a return to net neutrality rules and more municipal broadband. 

Related: New York to Invest Big in Muni Broadband Buildouts

OTI wants the repeal of laws in 20 states that limit or prohibit municipal broadband "so every community can invest in its own infrastructure." 

Democratic candidate Joe Biden has already said he plans to restore the rules, invest in municipal broadband and fight state laws blocking it, so they were preaching to the choir on that side of the aisle. 

Others, like protecting consumer privacy and "preserving freedom of expression online while holding platforms accountable" are bipartisan goals but the devil is in the definition.  

"The past few months have laid bare many inequities in our society, and the importance of implementing technology policies that mitigate rather than exacerbate those inequities," said OTI director Sarah Morris. 

The main recommendations were:  

1. "Protect Digital Equity During COVID-19 

2. "Restore Net Neutrality

3. "Ensure Universal Access to the Internet

4. "Make Internet Service Affordable

5. "Legalize Municipal Broadband

6. "Strengthen Antitrust Enforcement in Digital Markets

7. "Protect Consumer Privacy and Civil Rights Online

8. "Preserve Strong Encryption

9. "Reform Government Surveillance Laws

10. "End the Unchecked Use of Police Surveillance Technologies

11. "Preserve Freedom of Expression Online While Holding Platforms Accountable."

OTI donor/partners include a long list for foundations and contributors from Google and Microsoft to Walmart and the U.S. State Department.*

* The State Department funding ($2,650,000) was given in 2016 during the Obama Administration but continues through March 2021 according to the OTI Web site. 

Tiny municipal broadband service Cedar Falls Utilities is the fastest internet service provider in the country, trouncing the competition with an average score of 1,350.4, more than three times its closest competitor, according to PC Magazine’s annual list of the fastest ISPs in the nation. Verizon Communications' Fios internet service and Comcast's Xfinity placed first and second among major ISPs, with scores of 174.5 and 136.0, respectively.

PC Magazine ranks providers based on the number of consumers that test the upload and download speeds of their residential service on the PC Magazine website, which then assigns a weighted PC Magazine Speed Index (PSI) number to each provider. The PSI number incorporates download speeds (about 80%) and upload speeds (20%) as well as location and the amount of jitter/latency on the connection. The magazine ranks providers on a national and regional basis.

Cedar Falls Utilities has been offering broadband service to Cedar Falls, Iowa residents and businesses since 1996. An offshoot of the municipal gas, water and electric utility that was formed in the area (population: 39,000) in 1914, the service upgraded to fiber-to-the-home in 2011, giving it the capacity to offer Gigabit speeds. 

According to PC Magazine, Cedar Falls Utilities score was the highest it has ever seen. 

“If you're looking to relocate to work from home and want the best internet you may ever experience, consider becoming an Iowan,” PC Magazine said in its ranking.

Verizon topped the list of major ISPs for the seventh out of the past eight years. And though its score of 174.5 was lower than the prior year, it easily bested the competition. Comcast’s Xfinity had the biggest improvement, increasing its score from 102.3 last year to 136.0 this year. Rounding out the major ISP rankings were RCN (126.1), AT&T Fiber (112.2), Cox Communications (107.1), Optimum (106.9), Suddenlink (104.5), Spectrum (94.6), AT&T Internet (91.5) and Mediacom (85.0).

Regional winners were:

North Central (Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, North Dakota, Nebraska, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin): Cedar Falls Utilities (1,350.4)

North East (Connecticut, Washington, D.C., Delaware, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia, Vermont, and West Virginia): Suddenlink (181.9)

North West (Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming): NextLight (340.6)

South Central (Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Texas): Google Fiber (277.9)

South East (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee): Hotwire (473.8)

South West (Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, and California): Sonic (415.5)

TDS Broadband Service, a subsidiary of Telephone & Data Systems, said it has purchased the cable, broadband and business assets of former municipal broadband operator Continuum for $80 million.

Headquartered in Mooresville, N.C., Continuum passes about 36,500 households and has 70 employees. TDS said Continuum employees were offered positions and will continue to support customers locally as part of TDS.

“We welcome the employees of Continuum to the TDS family. They are now part of an exciting journey to expand and improve broadband availability in North Carolina,” said TDS Telecom president and CEO, Jim Butman in a press release. “TDS is a strong, community-minded company. We believe in investing for the long run and work to provide the absolute best in broadband, TV and phone services for our customers.”

TDS first announced the deal in August. Continuum was owned by the municipalities of Mooresville and Davidson and any sale required that the transaction be approved by voters in the communities. The referendum approving the deal was passed in November, the companies said, adding that all other regulatory requirements have been met.

Continuum, which provides service to the municipalities of Mooresville, Davidson, Cornelius and Huntersville, will continue to operate under that name at least for the time being.

“We are not in a hurry to change the name. We want to get to know the community and grow with the needs of the area,” Butman said in the release.

RBC Capital Markets served as the exclusive M&A advisor to Continuum.

The municipal system was formed in 2007 and operated under the name MI-Connection (it switched to Continuum in 2017), after the towns purchased the cable assets serving the community from bankrupt Adelphia Communications for about $80 million. While the service has been successful -- it had revenue of about $21 million in fiscal 2018 -- according to the Mooresville Tribune, the towns found it an increasing burden to pay the debt associated with the systems. 

The towns began looking for a buyer in March, fielding six offers by April and selecting TDS as the winner in July, the paper said. 

A new study of municipal fiber networks indicates many are not making a go of it and only two of 20 studied are making enough to cover development costs.

ISPs have long argued that muni networks, which they say often wind up being government-subsidized overbuilds of existing private nets, can leave taxpayers holding the bag when initial investments don't convert to ongoing sustainability.

Related > Pew: Democrats, Republicans Divided Over Municipal Broadband

The just-released study is from University of Pennsylvania Law School Professor Christopher Yoo and co-author Timothy Pfenninger. Yoo hit the high points at an event in Washington rolling out the study.

Yoo said they identified 88 municipal broadband projects as of 2014; almost all those were where cities had municipal power and thus access to rights of way.

He said that only 20 of the cities report broadband financials separately from electric power, so the study focused on those 20 for which those data were available. Of those, 11 of 20 fiber networks assessed don't generate enough to cover operating costs (they operate in the red). 90% will not generate enough to cover costs within the period of the bond issued to borrow money for them and only two of them are expected to be able to cover total project costs over an estimated 30-40 years of "useful life."

Five of the nine that do cover operating costs would take a century to recover those project costs, Yoo and Pfenninger said.

The report includes case studies of Chattanooga's Electric Power Board project and the Utah Telecommunication Open Infrastructure Agency (UTOPIA).

Related: Phoenix Center Skewers Chattanooga Mayor's Claims for Muni Broadband

Yoo said that even if the goal is not to make money, the projects need to keep up with the debt service on the bonds, which is how most are supported, or cities could default on the bond or in at least one case already with a build, become insolvent. And defaulting on broadband bonds makes future bond issues for, say, roads and schools more expensive. So he said it was information cities should want to know, then make their own decisions.

He said the idea is to give decisionmakers more information on which to make muni broadband decisions.

There were caveats to the report. It was based on five years of data, not the entire length of the project, so the systems may do better as the technology improves or more people sign up.

And future builds could adopt the Google Fiber model of getting subs signatures on the bottom line before building out—akin to signing up land owners for municipal water before deciding whether there is a case for laying the pipe.

Yoo said cities need to think about the worst-case scenarios as well as the best.

A number of states have laws placing restrictions on municipal broadband, pointed out an audience member at the event, which they said could have affected viability and should be one of Yoo's caveats.

Former Pennsylvania Governor and Philadelphia Mayor Ed Rendell, who was on a panel vetting the study, called the study an "incredibly valuable tool" as localities and their officials face infrastructure spending decisions on "overwhelming needs" with "limited funds."

He called it a "'must read' for any one community considering building broadband networks of their own." But he also called it one side of the dilemma. The other side is, if a city decides not to build a system, how do its citizens get access, and at prices they can afford, he said. Rendell said lack of broadband competition was one "culprit" driving cities to look to their own systems to provide affordable, high-speed broadband.

Google Fiber said it has begun to accept service sign ups in Huntsville, Ala., where it will offer a mix of broadband, pay TV and phone services via a municipal-owned fiber network.

Google Fiber and Huntsville Utilities announced the partnership in February 2016, and represents an agreement that does not tie into Google Fiber’s separate decision to pause expansion in some markets as it pursues less expensive wireless access alternatives.

RELATED: Google Fiber to Ride Muni-Owned Huntsville Network

In “Rocket City,” an area served by incumbent providers such as Comcast and AT&T, Google Fiber is selling 1-Gig broadband for $70 per month, a symmetrical 100 Mbps service for $50 per month, or TV bundles for $140 per month (with 100-meg), or $170 (with 1-Gig) . Google Fiber is also selling a home phone service for an additional $10 per month.

Homes and some businesses in North Huntsville are first in line for Google Fiber service. The first area tagged for service is “bounded on the west by Pulaski Pike and covers all of Huntsville north of Interstate 565 to the eastern city limits,” AL.com reports, adding that the north Huntsville section is one of six, and is one of the smaller ones, representing an area with about 14,000 residents.

Google Fiber is the city’s first tenant for its municipal fiber network, which will also allow other providers to lease access for their services, Caroline de Gantes, Google Fiber’s head of business operations in Huntsville, said in this blog post.

A group of nonprofit municipal broadband providers--all members of the American Cable Association--support FCC Chairman Ajit Pai's proposal to reverse the classification of ISPs as common carriers under Title II, and told him so in a letter dated May 11. The letter drew a swift and lengthy thank you from the chairman.

"By returning to light-touch regulation of broadband service, the Commission will give Muni ISPs incentives to invest in enhancing our networks and our deployment of innovative services at affordable prices while still ensuring consumers have unfettered access to the Internet," they wrote.

They also said the FCC's "overly broad and vague" general conduct standard rule and other parts of the Open Internet order was based on the "unwarranted assumption" that they have the incentive or ability to be anticompetitive.

They said the FCC, in adopting the 2015 Open Internet Order--over the dissent of Pai and fellow Republican Michael O’Rielly--ignored the evidence that they don't block or throttle or engage in paid prioritization and put them in the "straight jacket" of utility regulation and the constant threat of action under the "unknown and unknowable" general conduct standard.

Pai is also no fan of the standard, with which the FCC can look on a case-by-case basis at conduct that might not fall under the no blocking, throttling or paid prioritization "bright line" rules if the commission majority concludes it impedes an open Internet.

But they did not only talk about the negatives of the current regime. They said there will be definite benefits to reversing Title II, including a decrease in compliance costs and an increase in investment without the regulatory overhang of possible arbitrary actions or rate regulation.

The FCC is planning to vote May 18 on Pai's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, which would reclassify ISPs, wired and wireless, as information services not subject to common carrier regs; eliminate the general conduct standard; remove interconnections from net neutrality rules, and reconsider whether the Open Internet order rules and enhanced transparency requirements were necessary.

Pai has the votes to pass the NPRM, though Commissioner Mignon Clyburn could block a vote by not attending the May 18 meeting and denying him a quorum. She has vowed to fight the rule rollback, and called on others to do so, but has not said whether or not that resistance extends to denying the quorum.

The muni ISPs were from all over the map, Massachusetts to Alabama, Iowa to the Eastern shore of Maryland.

Calling it an "exceptionally important contribution to the debate over restoring Internet freedom," Pai's response to the letter was unusually swift, and came in a lengthy statement, reprinted below.

"Nineteen non-profit, government-owned Internet service providers expressed their support for my proposal to end utility-style regulation of ISPs based on Title II. These non-profit ISPs serve small towns across America, from Bagley, Minnesota to Tullahoma, Tennessee.  They told us that the FCC’s heavy-handed rules have led them to ‘often delay or hold off from rolling out a new feature or service.  As a result, [their] customers lose out on having access to innovation and new capabilities.’  They also explained that ‘these rules are so complex and so difficult to fathom [that] we must pay lawyers and consultants to provide advice and direction to minimize any risk that we will be judged after-the-fact to be out of compliance.’

“On the other hand, these non-profit municipal ISPs explain that my proposal to restore Internet freedom ‘will provide real benefits to [their] customer-owners with no downside.’  Among other things, they say that ‘[t]he cost of regulatory compliance will go down’ and they ‘will have greater certainty that [their] investments and development of new services and features will pay off.’  In sum, a return to light-touch regulation will enable them ‘to invest in enhancing [their] networks and [their] deployment of innovative services at affordable prices while still ensuring consumers have unfettered access to the Internet.’

“I thank these non-profit ISPs for sharing their perspective on this important issue.  The fact that ISPs lacking any profit motive agree that eliminating Title II regulation will benefit consumers and promote innovation and investment is a powerful endorsement of reversing the FCC’s 2015 Title II Order.” 

A Federal Court overturned the FCC's attempt to preempt state laws in Tennessee and North Carolina that limited municipal broadband buildouts, so some Democratic Senators (and one independent) are trying to do it themselves.

Sens. Cory Booker (D-NJ), Edward Markey (D-Mass.), Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), Angus King (I-Me.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) have introduced a bill they say is intended to give cities the "flexibility" to meet the broadband needs of their residents when it is not being met otherwise.

The Community Broadband Act would amend the 1996 Telecommunications Act to ban state, local or tribal statutes or regs that prohibit cities from providing high-speed broadband.

Actually, the FCC effort was not aimed at preempting laws preventing buildouts, authority it conceded it did not have, but to preempting laws that limited expansion of already-authorized municipal nets. 

The bill covers that, too, saying that the laws can't inhibit "any public provider from providing telecommunications services or advanced telecommunications capability or services to any person or any public or private entity."

Republicans in Congress have generally opposed preemption, citing, among other things, failed public buildouts leaving taxpayers holding the bag and the overbuild impact on private providers.

The senators have tried to address some of those issues.

The bill says that if any project fails, no federal funds will be provided to a public entity "specifically to assist" it in preserving or reviving the project--unless it was in a "disaster area" as declared by the President.

A public, or public/private broadband project must also first announce its intentions, publish notice of those intentions, describe the service and coverage area, and provide the private sector and the public with an opportunity to weigh in, and give the private sector a chance to bid on providing the service.

The Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals concluded last year that the FCC’s authority to promote advanced telecommunications deployment in a reasonable and timely manner did not extend to deciding whether a state or its municipal subdivision gets to control broadband buildouts, unless Congress has explicitly granted the FCC that power. Markey and company are trying to make that explicit grant.

Still, a Democratic bill in a Republican Congress has a steep climb to the President's desk. Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif. ) introduced a muni broadband bill in the last Congress that did not get traction, patterned after one introduced in 2005 by Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.).

Layer3 TV, the Denver-based next-gen cable TV provider, confirmed that it has forged a marketing and technology agreement with NextLight, a municipal service provider that is building out a city-wide fiber network in Longmont, Colo.

The agreement, first reported by the Daily Camera, enables NextLight to add video service to a service bundle that already offers digital voice and broadband service, including a symmetrical, uncapped 1-Gig Internet tier.

Jeff Binder, CEO of Layer3 TV, said Layer3 TV's managed IPTV service for NextLight customers started to become available over the weekend.

According to a web site dedicated to that offer, Layer3 TV is offering video service to NextLight customers under the promotional price of $74 per month, a discount of $25, plus three months of HBO. NextLight competes in the market against incumbents such as Comcast and CenturyLink.

RELATED: Layer3 TV Goes For The Big Bundle

The public/private partnership represents another potential deployment angle for Layer3 TV, if it were to partner up with other municipal providers that were looking to add an IP-based pay TV service to their bundles.

Binder said Layer3 TV is looking at other opportunities with muni providers that are building their own community networks and looking to create a synthetic services bundle.

UPDATE:For the rollout with NextLight in Longmont, Layer3 TV is using a fleet of Tesla vehicles to perform installs and other customer visits. Layer3 TV has also been using a fleet of electric-powered BMW i3 vehicles. 

RELATED: Layer3 TV's Fleet Goes Green

Layer3 TV has launched service in the Chicago and Washington, D.C., metro areas, and still has plans to debut service in its hometown of Denver. Its trial in two Texas markets served by Suddenlink Communications (now part of Altice USA) and offered under the “Umio TV” brand is no longer active.

Binder confirmed that NextLight approached Layer3 TV about forming the video partnership, noting that Layer3 TV has established a hub that services the Longmont area. Layer3 TV also operates a “super headend” inside a large data center based in the Denver area that serves its current batch of pay TV markets.

RELATED: Layer3 TV: A Different Kind of Animal

Construction of NextLight’s city-wide network started in 2014, and the major construction (including the underground work and technical services that include the pulling, splicing and testing of the fiber) is essentially done, according to Scott Rochat, spokesman with Longmont Power & Communications.

RELATED: Layer 3 TV Opens TV Everywhere Authentication

He estimates that about 80% of the network is built out and growing, and that LPC expects to finish it this year.

NextLight sells a symmetrical 1-Gig residential service for $49.95 per month for “Charter” members who sign up within three months of the service being available to them. The standard rate for the 1-Gig service is $99.95 per month, though, under a loyalty discount, NextLight reduces that price to $59.95 for customers who remain on the standard price level for a year.

NextLight has about 38,000 electric service customers, a figure that includes some customers that are based outside the city limits (and beyond the reach of the city-wide fiber network that's being built).

Telephone & Data Systems said it has signed a non-binding letter of intent to acquire Sun Prairie Utlities, a municipal broadband operator in Wisconsin. Terms were not disclosed.

The deal, which is expected to close by the end of March, is the second in two months for TDS. In January, the telecom company closed its purchase InterLinx Communications, which provides wholesale fiber connections to businesses in in southern Utah. 

Sun Prairie Utilities is an electric service provider in Sun Prairie, Wis., and first built a fiber broadband ring to provide high-speed data service to the community in 1998. TDS has said it will invest in the network over the next two years to extend broadband service to the bulk of the area. TDS is also exploring making fiber service available to future business developments, within the city, to help foster business growth and attract more economic development projects.

“SPU has built a strong fiber broadband network and has worked hard to expand broadband capacity in Sun Prairie for its citizens,” said TDS vice president of External Affairs and Communications Drew Petersen in a statement. “We plan to expand the network to launch 1Gigabit broadband speeds, as well as phone service, and our industry leading IPTV solution, TDS TV, to residents. For businesses, we would look at providing dedicated fiber connections and our hosted VoIP phone solution, TDS managed IP Hosted.” 

The Law & Policy Institute (ACLP) at New York Law School has released two reports it says show that municipal broadband is risky government business that rarely pays off.

ISPs have argued the same thing in pushing for state laws limiting municipal broadband buildouts.

The first report is a case study of a failed government-owned network in Bristol, Va., and the second is a "policy briefing" looking at various efforts.

"These analyses make clear that municipal broadband remains a risky endeavor that rarely generates the benefits touted by proponents," said the Institute.

The case study points out that while the Obama Administration touted the Bristol system as a template for success, it is currently being sold for a loss, adding that early success often proves fleeting, followed by an expensive, time consuming and complicated exit strategy when the effort fails.

Related: States Rights Battle Build ls Over FCC Preemption

ISPs have argued that consumers, as in taxpayers, are one casualty of government efforts since they can be left paying for the mistake.

The study argues that the full cost of unwinding a failed system should be taken into account of any cost-benefit analysis of government broadband.

The policy briefing cites the Bristol system, one in Pitcairn, Pa., what is calls a "questionable" feasibility study related to a build in Madison, Wis., and a cloud of uncertainty over builds Kentucky and Connecticut.

The FCC under chairman Tom Wheeler, on a party line vote, preempted state laws in Tennessee and North Carolina limiting muni builds there, but the decision was overturned last summer on the grounds that the FCC did not have the authority to do so. The move was on authority, rather than whether there was or was not a public interest in preempting the state laws. The FCC chose not to challenge the court ruling.

While a federal court has ruled that Congress did not give the FCC explicit authority to preempt state laws it sees as impeding broadband buildouts, the will of one member of Congress is clear on that point.

Reacting to last week's decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reversing the FCC's preemption of Tennessee and North Carolina municipal broadband expansions, Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), a supporter of FCC preemption, said he was "disappointed with the court's ruling," but suggested the FCC should not treat it as a stop sign on the road to more muni broadband buildouts.

"Congress intended to provide the FCC the tools needed to encourage deployment of advanced telecommunications networks," he said, "and when states impose barriers to that very deployment, the FCC should act." The court say it, instead, as an FCC intrusion into state sovereignty that lacked a clear congressional mandate.

The FCC had said its statutory authority (in sec. 706 of the 1996 Telecommunications Act) to regulate to insure advanced telecom was reaching all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion extended to preempting state laws limiting broadband buildouts.

But the court concluded that absent an express grant of authority by Congress, that did not extend to preempting a state's right to control those buildouts.

The court pointed out that the FCC wanted "to pick the decision maker for the discretionary issues of expansion, rate setting, and timeliness of rollout of services....notwithstanding Tennessee’s and North Carolina’s statutes that have already made these choices." It said that "if Congress has the power to allocate state decisionmaking, it must be very clear that it is doing so," and Sec. 706 lacks such a clear statement."

"Because Sec.706 cannot be read to limit a state’s ability to trump a municipality’s exercise of discretion otherwise permitted by FCC regulations, Sec. 706 cannot be read to authorize such preemption," the court said.

Markey, a member of the powerful Senate Commerce Committee, obviously saw it differently and vowed to "continue to fight to ensure that local communities have the power to decide for themselves how to invest in their own telecommunications infrastructure.”

The court did not weigh in on whether Sec. 706 "provides the FCC any preemptive power at all, (2) whether Congress, if it is clear enough, could give the FCC the power to preempt as it did in this case," and whether a "clear statement" from Congress would be required for preemption in case where "a State required its

municipality to act contrary to otherwise valid FCC regulations."

The FCC does not have a regulation requiring municipalities to expand their buildouts, for example.

GOP presidential candidate and Texas senator Ted Cruz wants the Congress to block the FCC from preempting state laws related to government provision of Internet access services or loosening communications restrictions on Cuba.

That is according to a copy of a raft of proposed amendments to a couple of FCC-related bills being marked up in the Senate Commerce Committee April 27.

On the FCC Process Reform Act, Cruz and Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.) are jointly proposing the amendment to rein in the FCC's preemption of state laws limiting municipal broadband buildouts. FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler says those laws are pushed by incumbents to prevent price and service competition and the FCC has stepped in to preempt state laws in Tennessee and North Carolina. The FCC is currently in a court battle over that decision.

The amendment, according to the amendment list obtained by Multichannel News/B&C, "Prohibits the FCC form preventing states from implementing  laws relating to provision of broadband Internet access service by state and local governments."

Cruz is also looking to bulk up the FCC Reauthorization Act of 2016 (S. 2644) with a couple of amendments targeted at Administration efforts to ease restrictions on Cuba (Cruz's father, Rafael, was tortured and imprisoned in Cuba [during the Batista regime], according to the candidate).

The First would overturn the FCC's order removing Cuba from the "exclusion list."

In January, the FCC removed Cuba from that very short list--Cuba was actually the only country on the list--as part of the larger Administration effort to reestablish diplomatic ties to the island nation.

The FCC action meant that U.S. telecoms can provide Internet and phone service to Cuba without seeking a separate approval from the FCC. Those telecoms will be able to get authority more easily, says the FCC, or those already with authority to deploy won't need an additional sign-on from the commission.

Cruz also wants to block the FCC from launching a Cuba-related rulemaking about "certain nondiscrimination requirements relating to Cuba.

Those are just some of a boatload of amendments being teed up for the two bills. Others include 1) a GAO study on the IP transition, 2) a review of "certain media ownership rules," 3) a report on the incentive auction repack, 4) a small business exemption (fewer than 250,0000 subs) from the enhanced transparency rule in the Open Internet order (a similar waiver has already passed the House); 5) a GAO report on waste and overbuilding in the E-rate program, 6) a requirement that the FCC include a disclaimer when making a public statement about a notice of apparent liability, 7) a requirement that it publish complaints on a publicly available Web site, 8) a requirement that the GAO report on "issues" related to the National Broadband Map, 9) permitting NTIA to authorize Federal agencies to "accept certain payments related to spectrum efficiency and reallocation," an FCC report on "the use of certain proceeds from a competitive bidding process; 10) a requirement that the FCC report on any auctions it expects to conduct in succeeding 12-month periods; 11) a requirement that a member of the FCC sign any "compulsory" process or request for documents, information or testimony "in support of an investigation or inquiry," and 12) a report on "delays in processing broadband license applications."

Conservative policy group, the State Government Leadership Foundation (SGLF), has released an economic analysis that counts the reasons why municipal broadband should be treated with a "heavy dose of caution," though the report comes off more as a big red "stop" sign than a flashing yellow caution light.

SGLF makes it clear it is no fan of efforts by the FCC to preempt state laws limiting muni broadband buildouts. "State laws that oversee and constrain government ownership of broadband networks are under threat," it says. "Such laws are important due to the adverse impacts of government-owned broadband networks on consumer tax bills, competition among private broadband providers and the flow of private investment into digital infrastructure."

While muni broadband buildouts are often justified with the claim that nobody else is building there, SGLF argues that is not the case, asserting that in every instance there were private providers without access to the special advantages of subsidized buildouts.

The study, which was produced by George Ford, chief economist of the Phoenix Center, says it does not unequivocally indict municipal broadband, but it comes pretty close.

While it says municipal broadband buildouts "may" have a role in deployment where there is no private service and private entry is not profitable, in other cases, not so much.

The study concludes that:

1) Muni broadband buildouts are almost always subsidized, and that a government firm with no regard for profit is a legitimate and serious concern" because it threatens privacy investment and "exposes taxpayers and captive municipal electric ratepayers to significant financial risks." (The study cites Chattanooga, one of the two cities where the FCC has preempted state laws limiting muni broadband buildouts).

2) Economics suggests subsidized muni broadband won't increase competition because it will be a "poison pill:" for investment in the sector or drive out unsubsidized private competitors.

3) Subsidized entrants are "prone to be predatory," attempting to capture market share and even possibly exposing cities to antitrust actions.

4) Because there is no profit motive, having deterred private investment, that lack of investment can then be used to justify the municipal entry that caused that lack of competition.

5) Subsidies are more costly than they appear because "every  dollar  of spending by government costs much more than a dollar to gather and distribute." The study asserts that "hundreds of millions in federal, state and local subsidies have been used to support failed municipal networks."

6) Incurring "massive" fixed costs of building broadband nets with subsidy dollars is an inefficient means to the end of broadband deployment, with subsidies to existing firms a more efficient approach. While such subsidies are continuous and can be targeted, subsidizing buildouts are "discrete, untargeted, relatively expensive, risky for taxpayers, and arguably predatory (see above).

The study comes just weeks after the Tennessee legislature voted down a municipal broadband expansion bill  and, elsewhere, the FCC was squaring off with that state and others over the issue of municipal broadband buildouts and the states' ability to limit them.

Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) says that she does not take issue with the fact that the FCC has chosen to tackle some tough issues--those include privacy, and broadband regulation, and set-tops--but that it has "embraced controversial solutions" seemingly at every turn, including potentially allowing theft by third-party navigation device and radical federal overreach via municipal broadband state law preemption.

Blackburn raised those issues at an FCC oversight hearing Tuesday (March 22), then drilled down on them in a keynote speech at a Free State Foundation policy conference in Washington Wednesday (March 23).

Blackburn is no fan of FCC Chairman Tom Wheelers proposed new framework for regulating broadband customer privacy, authority the FCC gave itself when it reclassified ISPs as Title II telecom services, a move Blackburn also did not like.

The Federal Trade Commission had historically overseen broadband privacy, but only through its ability to pursue companies for violating their own stated policies or otherwise deceptive or unfair conduct. The FCC has more muscular rulemaking authority, and Wheeler sees a need to use it. Among other things, he has proposed requiring broadband customers to opt in to third party marketing uses for their data unless it is being used to market IPS or affiliate services, say seeking to add voice to a video customers' service.

Blackburn points out that the regime only applies to ISPs, calling that one-sided and focusing on the "one part of the Internet ecosystem that doesn't have broad visibility into consumers' online information."

Wheeler has made it clear that the new rules would not apply to edge providers like Web sites and search engines, saying they remain covered by the FTC.

Blackburn referenced a study by Peter Swire, a former Clinton Administration official, that "clearly showed that ISPs – the target of Chairman Wheeler’s new privacy rules – do not have the level of visibility into consumers’ online activities that most edge providers have," a point Swire outlined to Multichannel News/B&C earlier this month.

Blackburn is also no fan of the FCC's preemption of Tennessee state laws limiting municipal broadband buildouts.

She says the logic behind the FCC's preemption is "fundamentally flawed."

"Private companies can’t be expected to compete with taxpayer backed entities," she says. Cable operators who have pushed back on those municipal buildouts agree, arguing that they can be a way to cross-subsidize overbuilds, sometimes with taxpayers left holding the bag for efforts that don't pan out.

Blackburn says that Wheeler's decision to preempt laws in her state and North Carolina "is so radical, so overreaching – that even the Department of Justice could not file a brief in support of the FCC’s position – an almost unprecedented move." She made the same point in her opening statement at the oversight hearing.

Blackburn is also concerned about the FCC's proposal to open up MVPD programming data to third parties, which she branded "AllVid" at the hearing, a reference to the 2010 universal set-top proposal that Wheeler says is not analogous to his current effort. 

"I'm concerned by ideas being pushed by some that would let third parties use content for their own services in ways that violate the licensing terms and without consent of the content creator," she told the Free State audience. "In a TV marketplace that is producing more video content that ever before, why would the government support that kind of intervention and theft?"

Wheeler has said before, and did so again at the hearing this week, that copyrights will be protected, that if they are not MVPDs will have the option of not giving those third parties access to their programming data, and that his proposal was meant to generate this kind of feedback, which the commission will take into account before voting on a final order.

Wheeler has also made the point that competitive navigation devices already in the market have not resulted in copyright violations or license term violations.

Just days after the Tennessee legislature voted down a municipal broadband expansion bill, the State was squaring off with the FCC in federal court over the issue of municipal broadband buildouts and state's ability to limit them.

After the FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler signaled the FCC had the power to preempt state laws blocking the expansion of municipal broadband, the Cities of Wilson, N.C., and Chattanooga, Tenn. petitioned the FCC to do just that. A divided commission complied in March 2015, and Tennessee and North Carolina then filed suit.

The FCC majority in that decision said the agency had the power and the duty to step in when states were limiting broadband buildouts. The commission confirmed it did not have the power to overturn state laws preventing municipal broadband buildouts altogether, but if those states allows such networks, the FCC can pre-empt laws that would limit them.

FCC chairman Tom Wheeler has tabbed those laws as the handiwork of incumbent Internet service providers trying to prevent competition.

The Sixth Circuit federal appeals court--in Cincinnati--heard oral argument Thursday (March 17) in that challenge by the states.

According to Berin Szoka of TechFreedom, who was at the argument, the judges asked tough questions of both sides.

The FCC argued that it did not have to meet the heightened preemption standard of a clear statement of congressional intent because it was not trumping a state's rights to govern its subdivisions, but instead with regulation of commerce more generally, which does not have a heightened bar for preemption.

The FCC is justifying the moves under its Sec. 706 authority to regulate if it concludes that advanced telecommunications is not being deployed in a reasonable and timely manner. "We read section 706 to permit the commission to preempt state laws that primarily serve to regulate competition in the broadband market," the FCC March 2015 order states.

Szoka said two out of the three judges on the three-judge panel hearing the arguments probed on the issue of whether states and their cities were unitary (of a piece) sovereign entities. According to Szoka, the third judge only spoke to wish the court a Happy St. Patrick's day and note the green tie on FCC counsel, which matched his own bright green bow tie.

One judge suggested the FCC might be able to preempt a state's decision to require a radio station to use as different frequency, but that that would be the FCC telling it not to interfere with something over which the FCC has jurisdiction. The judge said that seemed to be different from this case.

In this case, the judge suggested, it was not about the FCC saying what should happen, but saying municipalities should be able to decide, which did sound like an issue with how the state gets to govern its municipal subdivision.

The judges also asked if private companies would also be subject to such a decision, perhaps having to be governed by one of their subdivisions, a board of shareholders, for example, just as municipalities rather than states get to make the decision.

The Tennessee and North Carolina laws are slightly different, Szoka pointed out, with Tennessee's law focused more on geographical limitations on expanding municipal broadband and North Carolina including pricing and not being able to cross subsidize buildouts with money from utility ratepayers, something commercial broadband providers have always been concerned about and one of the reasons they frequently lobby against such laws.

Adding a new wrinkle to its service expansion strategy, Google Fiber has inked a deal to offer gigabit and TV services on a fiber network that Huntsville Utilities is building.

Huntsville started down that path in 2014, inviting potential partners to join the effort. Google Fiber said it is on board, and has already set up a site where potential customers in Huntsville can sign up to stay apprised of the progress.

“So what comes next? Pending final approvals, Huntsville Utilities will design and construct its network,” Jill Szuchmacher, director, Google Fiber expansion, announced in this blog post. “Once the network is built, Google Fiber — or any other broadband provider — will be able to bring high speed Internet service to the city. This is just the beginning of the process, so it's too early to share dates or timelines.”

“Google’s entrance into our market bolsters our high-tech legacy, energizes our entrepreneurs, tinkers and engineers, and supports the high quality of life Huntsville is known for delivering,” Huntsville Mayor Tommy Battle said, in a statement. “Fiber to the home is the Internet infrastructure for the 21st century. It is as vital to our quality of life as roads, water, sewer and electricity.  It will become the benchmark for cities vying for talent. “

Google Fiber’s agreement with the city spells more competition for area incumbent providers Comcast and AT&T, which has included Huntsville on its plan for GigaPower, the telco’s fiber-based gigabit network.

Szuchmacher noted that most of Google Fiber’s networks have been built from scratch, but that the company has been taking different approaches in different markets.

In Provo, Utah, Google Fiber is initially offering service on the network it acquired from iProvo, and in Atlanta, Ga., Google Fiber is building its own network while also using existing fiber infrastructure to deliver service to some apartment buildings.

"And now, due to the leadership of the Mayor and Huntsville Utilities CEO Jay Stowe, we’ll be working with a muni-owned network to bring our high speed service to Huntsville," she wrote. 

In addition to Provo and parts of Atlanta, Google Fiber has also launched services in portions of Kansas City and Austin, Texas, and has deployments underway in Salt Lake City, Utah; San  Antonio, Texas; Nashville, Tenn.; and Charlotte and Raleigh-Durham, N.C. Google Fiber is also exploring expansions in Chicago; Portland, Ore.; Los Angeles, San Jose, Irvine and San Diego, Calif.; Phoenix; Oklahoma City; Louisville, Ky.; and Jacksonville and Tampa, Fla.

While President Obama urged the FCC to push back on laws limiting municipal broadband buildouts, the Department of Justice did not have his back when it came to challenges by Tennessee and North Carolina to the FCC's decision earlier this year to do just that by preempting state laws limiting muni buildouts.

The antitrust division at DOJ weighed in at the Sixth Circuit on the challenge Friday (Nov. 6) and it was hardly a ringing endorsement. "Respondent United States of America takes no position in these cases," said DOJ attorney Robert B. Nicholson in a court filing Friday (Nov. 6).

In a 3-2, party-line vote (supported by its Democratic majority), the FCC on Feb. 26 pre-empted state laws in Tennessee and North Carolina that limited cities’ ability to get into the broadband business. The agency cited its authority under Section 706 of the 1996 Telecommunications Act to ensure that advanced telecom services are deployed in a reasonable and timely manner.

The order pre-empts geographic limitations on the expansion of municipal broadband systems in Chattanooga, Tenn., and Wilson, N.C., though it does not compel any action in either case. The decision does not affect laws in other states, but signals how the FCC might act on similar petitions.

The FCC said it can't pre-empt laws preventing municipalities from building broadband networks, but can preempt ones that limit it where it has already been authorized.

In a speech in Cedar Falls, Iowa, Feb. 26, where a community broadband network, with the help of government funding, delivers 1 gigabit speed service at about the same price as the cable bundle, President Obama told a crowd of sometimes cheering Iowans that there was not enough competition to ISPs that continued to "jack up" 

rates, and that the government should try to encourage municipal competitors to fill that breach.

(http://www.multichannel.com/news/technology/president-fcc-should-push-ba...)

He said in many places big companies are "doing everything they can to keep out new competitors" and "stamp out" competition. "Enough is enough," he said, and called on the FCC to do whatever it could to push back on those laws.

But there had been signs that was not the last word from the Administration. In a letter to FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler after that speech, the head of the National Telecommunications & Information Administration, the President's chief telecom adviser, said that muni broadband is not always, or even "typically," the best way to meet a community's broadband needs, "particularly where existing service providers are willing and able to meet a communities evolving needs."

"The Department of Justice's curt statement advising the court that it takes no position in the appeal of the FCC's preemption of state laws restricting local government broadband networks is very curious," said Randolph May, president of the Free State Foundation, who is no fan of the FCC's preemption action. "As someone who served as FCC associate general counsel, I can tell you this is a very rare occurrence. And it is especially curious in this case because President Obama urged the FCC to do exactly what FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler then did. We don't know for sure, but my best guess is that the DOJ, quite rightly, is concerned about the lawfulness of the FCC's preemption action. If so, the concern is justified."

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo issued a Request for Information (RFI) last week (hat tip: DSL Reports) to help finalize the guidelines for the New NY Broadband Program,  which aims to “substantially" expand  high-speed broadband service in the state by the end of 2018.

New York has committed $500 million in capital for the initiative. Responses to the RFI, made available a week ago, are due Friday, Oct. 30.

Among the goals, the program aims to provide access to broadband speeds of at least 100 Mbps “in most places,” and 25 Mbps “in the most remote underserved and unserved parts of the State.” The latter figure lines up with the FCC’s new broadband definition for the downstream.

The plan also calls for public/private sector partnerships and a required private sector co-investment, and the use of state-owned fiber and other assets.

The RFI (PDF) seeks to identify strategies for structuring and/or implementing the program, and to stimulate, how New York can tap into partnerships, utilize existing assets, and coordinate broadband deployment with other infrastructure improvements.

The RFI also acknowledged that access to broadband in New York has improved, but presents data showing that about 500,000 homes in the state lacked access to speeds of at least 25 Mbps as of July 2014, and that 3 million homes and 113,000 businesses can’t get 100  Mbps.

“Many of these coverage gaps exist due to the challenge of deploying broadband to New York State’s rural communities,” the RFI states.

“High speed internet access has become an essential ingredient of any strong economy and New York is leading the nation to close the broadband gap,” Cuomo said, in a statement. “With this action, we are engaging providers, municipal leaders and other stakeholders to help ensure the New NY Broadband Program leverages the State’s investment in the best way and fulfills its goal of providing access to high speed Internet to every New Yorker in every corner of this state."