Assembly committee backs AB 470 to modernize carrier-of-last-resort rules after contested hearing

The California State Assembly Communications Conveyance Committee on Tuesday voted to give AB 470 a due-pass recommendation after a two-hour hearing that pitted industry and public-safety supporters against labor and digital-equity advocates.

Assemblymember McKenner, author of AB 470, told the committee the bill would ‘‘create a framework to transition all regions of the state to ensure that all California households will continue to be able to make affordable, reliable telephone calls and connect with emergency services when they need it.’’

The bill would allow telephone carriers of last resort (COLR) to seek relinquishment of that obligation in well‑served areas, subject to a new rulemaking and mapping process run by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). Key amendments adopted before the hearing and discussed during it place the mapping and challenge process under CPUC authority, require a public challenge window, and increase a build‑out investment requirement tied to each relinquishment.

Why this matters: AB 470 would change long-standing regulation that requires certain telephone companies to serve and repair landline service wherever requested. Proponents say the law is outdated and that a transition to modern networks (including fiber) can protect public safety and reflect current consumer choices. Opponents say the bill risks leaving vulnerable households without reliable voice service, creates workforce uncertainty for unionized employees, and relies on flawed broadband and wireless coverage maps unless stronger on‑the‑ground verification and consumer safeguards are added.

What the committee heard Supporters: Mark Ghilarducci, former director of the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES), said the modernization must preserve 911 access and be ‘‘oversen by [the CPUC] in consultation with Cal OES’’ so public‑safety needs are reflected. Terry Nicole Baca, vice president of legislative affairs for AT&T California, described AB 470 as ‘‘a thoughtful and comprehensive path toward modernizing California’s outdated voice communications policy’’ and said over 95 percent of AT&T’s California customers have moved to modern networks; she urged the committee to approve the bill with the current consumer protections.

Industry and civic groups including the California Chamber of Commerce and the Broadband Association registered support in the hearing record.

Opponents: TURN (The Utility Reform Network) and Communications Workers of America (CWA) District 9 led opposition testimony. Regina Costa of TURN told the committee the bill lacks mandatory on‑the‑ground verification that wireless or other services marked on coverage maps actually provide reliable 911 calling. Ignacio Hernandez of CWA said the COLR mandate also guarantees repair obligations and jobs, and he warned the current draft does not require alternative providers to maintain a universal‑service mandate or to use union labor.

Key provisions and clarifications discussed - CPUC authority and timing: Under the amendments discussed, the CPUC would adopt its well‑served map and rules for relinquishment; the bill sets a statutory deadline for the CPUC to establish rules and maps (participants cited December 15, 2026, in committee discussion). The CPUC would run the challenge process and may use third‑party verification; carriers would reimburse challenge costs. - Challenge window and consumer recourse: The amendments create an eligibility window for individual challenges (committee discussion described a 180‑day period) after notice of an intended COLR relinquishment; relinquishment cannot be granted until outstanding challenges are resolved. - Investment requirement: The bill as amended requires a higher reinvestment obligation tied to each relinquished residential line—committee discussion described this as roughly a ‘‘three to one’’ build requirement (i.e., additional fiber investment tied to each relinquished line), intended to expand modern network deployment in places that need it most. - Safety net: Committee members and the author described a backstop such that if an area becomes unserved after relinquishment, the relinquishing carrier would be required to restore voice service for a stated period (committee discussion described a ten‑year fallback obligation in the bill text). - Lifeline and affordability: TURN and other opponents said the bill’s definition of ‘‘well‑served’’ could permit loss of lifeline subsidy eligibility because the bill allows classification based on available options; opponents argued broadband lifeline is not equivalent to wireline voice lifeline and could leave some low‑income customers worse off. - Mapping data concerns: Multiple witnesses raised concerns about relying on federal and state broadband maps (referred to in the hearing as BEAD and FCC-derived maps), noting recent federal reports that industry‑reported wireless coverage can overstate actual service. Opponents pushed for on‑the‑ground verification rather than exclusive reliance on self‑reported coverage data. - Workforce and contracting: CWA witnesses urged statutory language to guarantee that build‑out work would employ local or union labor; the author said she is willing to work with labor to draft protections or language that helps secure jobs during transition.

Committee action and vote After floor debate and questions, the committee voted to recommend AB 470 be given a due‑pass recommendation. The roll call listed berner (aye), hoover (aye), arons (aye), bonta (not voting), colosa (not voting), castillo (aye), lowenthal (aye), rogers (aye) and rubio (aye). The clerk announced the bill was reported out of committee 7 to 0 (two members not voting).

What remains unsettled Opponents and several committee members said they will continue to press for stronger on‑the‑ground verification, clearer lifeline protections, and workforce protections tied to any build‑out. The author and supporters told the committee they will continue negotiations with labor, local governments and digital‑equity advocates as the bill moves to the next house.

Votes at a glance AB 470 — Due‑pass recommendation (Assembly Communications Conveyance Committee) Motion: Due‑pass recommendation on AB 470 (relating to carriers of last resort) Mover: Assemblymember Arons; Second: Assemblymember Rubio Tally: Aye 7; No 0; Abstain 0; Not voting 2