Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Broadband Preemption topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill to clarify FCC preemption draws wide stakeholder pushback over rights‑of‑way and 911
Summary
LB 311, intended to clarify that certain broadband regulation is federal (FCC) authority, drew support from major providers but strong opposition from counties, the PSC and utilities who warned the draft is overbroad and could limit local rights‑of‑way control and PSC emergency oversight.
Sen. Wendy DeBoer introduced LB 311 to clarify in state statute that FCC jurisdiction over broadband access service preempts local regulation of rates, terms and entry conditions — while expressly preserving state or federal grant program administration. Sponsors said the intent was to prevent local governments from imposing inconsistent requirements on broadband providers that would impede deployment; providers including Charter and trade groups supported the intent.
Dayton Murty of Charter argued LB 311 would reduce uncertainty for multi‑state providers and avoid a patchwork of local rules. “The intent of this bill was to clarify that rates and service, or contract terms, conditions, and requirements for entry for broadband Internet is not regulated by state or local governments,” he said.
But testimony opposing the bill came from a broad coalition. Candace Meredith of the Nebraska Association of County Officials (NACO) said language on page 2, lines 24–27 could be read to limit a political subdivision’s authority to manage and protect public rights‑of‑way; counties said they need clear authority to set permitting standards and protect infrastructure when providers bury fiber or install pedestals. Omaha Public Power District counsel and city/county representatives echoed concerns about the potential chilling effect on normal right‑of‑way rules, permitting and coordination.
Nebraska Public Service Commission representatives also opposed the current draft. Commissioner Dan Wattermeier said the statute change could prevent state agencies and the PSC from stepping in if federal authority over broadband changed — a material concern while federal policy is in flux. He emphasized that 911 and next‑generation 911 (NG911) services run over IP networks and that overly broad preemption could limit the PSC’s ability to investigate outages or preserve state‑funded networks.
Sponsor DeBoer acknowledged the bill drew substantial suggested amendments and said she intended to convene stakeholders after the hearing to produce a narrower draft that addresses the specific problem the bill was meant to solve: making clear that local entities cannot condition permitting on broadband service levels in ways that conflict with federal law, while preserving local right‑of‑way management and PSC oversight of public safety and state grant requirements.
No vote was taken; the sponsor said she will work with stakeholders on revisions.
