I wrote about The American Broadband Deployment Act pause button  last week, the League of Minnesota Cities has a more detailed follow up this week…

The measure was removed from the U.S. House Rules Committee agenda after strong opposition from local government groups, including the League and national partners.

The U.S. House Rules Committee was scheduled to consider the American Broadband Deployment Act (H.R. 2289) on April 20, a necessary step before the bill could advance to the full House floor for a vote. After significant advocacy efforts by the League of Minnesota Cities and its national partners, the bill was pulled from the agenda when it became clear it lacked the votes to pass.

In addition to the League, the coordinated efforts included the National League of Cities, National Association of Counties, U.S. Conference of Mayors, and the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors.

They detailed…

Specifically, the bill as written would:

• Force taxpayer subsidies. It would replace the current “fair and reasonable” compensation standard with a strict limit based on “actual and direct costs.” This creates a new unfunded mandate that could force Minnesota residents to subsidize the infrastructure costs of private corporations.

• Allow automatic permit approvals. The bill would codify federal “shot clocks” and add a “deemed granted” penalty. This means that if a city misses a deadline, broadband companies could start construction without local approval. This would take away a city’s ability to protect public safety and manage its streets and public rights-of-way.

• Weaken cable franchising authority. The legislation would permanently exempt bundled broadband services from local franchise agreements and allow providers to unilaterally modify existing agreement terms. This could significantly weaken a city’s ability to enforce local standards and services.

• Shift dispute resolution. The proposal would move legal disputes from local courts to the Federal Communications Commission in Washington, D.C. This would increase costs and complexity for Minnesota cities when defending local interests.