The Florida House unanimously supported extending a $1 promotion for broadband attachments through 2028. Members voted 119-0 Thursday to approve HB-1147, which would let ISPs continue to pay $1 a year per wireline attachment per pole to bring broadband to unserved or underserved areas in municipal electric utility service territories (see 2402080006). Florida began offering the rate in 2021; it will expire July 1 unless extended. The Florida Senate plans to vote on the similar SB-1218 on Thursday.

The Maine Public Utilities Commission will soon seek more data and schedule additional meetings and workshops as part of a pole-attachments proceeding (docket 2023-00300), the PUC informed Maine lawmakers last week. The commission sent legislators an interim report Thursday, as a 2023 state law required. The PUC is required to study pole-attachment requirements’ effect on broadband expansion. The interim report describes the history of pole attachments in Maine, commission efforts over the past decade to update rules and comments received in the current proceeding. The Maine PUC said it lacks "specific recommendations or suggested legislation at this time.” In comments last month, cable companies urged the PUC to quickly align the state’s Chapter 880 pole-attachment rules with the FCC’s December order (see 2401160035). A final report is due Dec. 1.

Verizon said it reached and executed a settlement agreement with consumer advocates Center for Accessible Technology (CforAT) and The Utility Reform Network on migrating Tracfone customers still using non-Verizon networks in California, the carrier said last week. Within seven business days, CforAT will attach the agreement to a motion to withdraw its Oct. 6 petition to modify the CPUC’s 2021 decision approving the Verizon/Tracfone deal, Verizon said in a Thursday email to California Public Utilities Commission Administrative Law Judge Thomas Glegola. The email was shared with the service list for docket A.20-11-001.

AT&T’s California application for relief of carrier of last resort (COLR) obligations attracted interest from Congress last week. Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., raised concerns about the request in a Wednesday letter to California Public Utilities Commission President Alice Reynolds. Schiff wrote "the withdrawal of AT&T landlines will not only harm consumer choice but also pose safety issues in California.” In fires, earthquakes and other natural disasters, “our landlines become the most dependable form of communication,” he added. “While wireless connection is unreliable and cell phones can run out of battery, copper landlines have stronger receptions during power outages.” Schiff cited Rural County Representatives of California (RCRC) data that more than 580,000 affected AT&T customers would be left with few options. “AT&T’s proposed withdrawal would harm rural residents disproportionately and the CPUC should weigh this factor heavily in its review of their application to end their COLR obligation,” Schiff wrote. Others from Capitol Hill could weigh in on the CPUC proceeding (docket A.23-03-003). RCRC saw “a lot of interest in this subject” when its delegation visited congressional offices earlier this month, Senior Legislative Advocate Tracy Rhine told us Thursday. Yet an AT&T spokesperson said Friday it will not leave customers behind, though millions have already moved to wireless and high-speed internet services. “We’re working with the remaining consumers who use traditional copper-based phone service to upgrade to newer technologies from us or other providers, so everyone will still be able to make their most important life connections.”

The South Dakota Senate will vote again on a 911 bill that failed to pass the chamber Wednesday. Senators voted 28-3 on Thursday to reconsider Wednesday's vote, which HB-1092 lost. Then the Senate voted by voice for a motion to reconsider the bill Feb. 26. The House-approved bill would increase South Dakota’s 911 fee on monthly phone bills to $2, from $1.25 (see 2402090055). But on the floor Wednesday, the bill failed to get a two-thirds majority necessary to pass the Senate, with 21 senators voting yes and 11 voting no. Sen. Jean Hunhoff (R) raised a procedural concern that the state’s 911 coordination board didn’t recommend the increase. Sen. Ryan Maher (R) objected to rewarding problems at the board with a $7.5 million tax increase for South Dakotans. The proposed fee increase won’t cover 911 centers' shortfall, said Sen. Brent Hoffman (R). He questioned why prepaid wireless wouldn’t face an increase under the bill. Sen. Jim Mehlhaff (R), carrying the bill in the Senate, said the surcharge hasn’t kept up with rising 911 costs. Don’t punish local public safety answering points for problems at the state 911 board, he said. In addition, Mehlhaff argued that prepaid wireless appropriately pays 2% of the point-of-sale cost. On the floor Thursday, Sen. Casey Crabtree (R) said the extension will give legislators time to work through the concerns raised in Wednesday's debate.

NTIA accepted Maine's digital equity plan, making it the first state gaining approval, the federal agency said Thursday. Maine received $542,222 for its plan that addresses disparities in digital access, skills and affordability.

A Florida Senate committee combined House bills requiring age verification for those accessing social media (HB-1) and pornography (HB-3). At a Thursday hearing, the Fiscal Policy Committee on a voice vote approved an amendment that inserts the text of HB-3 into HB-1 and makes other changes. Then the panel cleared the amended bill. The Senate could vote on the bill Wednesday. Opposing the bill in committee, Sen. Geri Thompson (D) said legislators’ role is education, not censorship. Sen. Shev Johnson (D) said it’s not lawmakers’ role to parent the parents, and the bill doesn’t pass legal muster. Added Sen. Lori Berman (D), HB-1 has many practical problems, including that it would force adults to verify their age on many websites and its breadth could bar children from accessing educational sites. Yet Sen. Erin Grall (R), who is shepherding HB-1 in the Senate, said Florida isn’t suggesting it knows better than parents. The state is narrowly responding to an identified harm, she said. "This is a bill about not targeting our children in order to manipulate them." The new version of HB-1 continues to propose prohibiting children younger than 16 from having social media accounts regardless of parental consent but no longer would require social websites to disclose social media's possible mental health problems to those 16-18. The amended bill allows enforcement by the attorney general and through a private right of action. Other changes to bill definitions could mean that young people will also be banned from Amazon, LinkedIn and news websites, said Maxx Fenning, executive director of PRISM, an LGBTQ rights group in Florida. In addition, the American Civil Liberties Union opposed the bill. Banning kids younger than 16 even with their parents' consent "shows that the claim of parental rights of the last two legislative sessions had nothing to do with parental rights and everything to do with government censorship of viewpoints and information that government doesn't like,” ACLU-Florida Legislative Director Kara Gross said.

Nebraska legislators were skeptical during a livestreamed hearing Monday about a bill transferring state broadband grant duties to the Nebraska Broadband Office from the Public Service Commission (see 2401180020). The legislature’s Telecom Committee heard testimony on LB-1336. “I do not expect this bill to go anywhere," conceded sponsor Sen. Barry DeKay (R). But he said he wanted to start a discussion about whether there could be efficiencies moving the Nebraska Broadband Bridge Program to the office that is handling the broadband, equity, access and deployment (BEAD) program, he said. Legislators last year required the PSC to transfer BEAD authority to the broadband office, which was created in January 2023. Sen. Michaela Cavanaugh (D) is concerned that LB-1336 would erode the PSC, an agency that is far more transparent than the broadband office, she said. Sen. Tom Brandt (R) asked, "What do we as a state gain by moving this over to the broadband office?" While officially neutral on the bill, Nebraska PSC Commissioner Tim Schram (R) said his agency has “a proven record of three grant cycles” administering the broadband bridge program transparently and at a low cost. The bill isn’t clear on how the transition would occur, added Schram. The Nebraska Telecommunications Association opposed the bill since it is “generally pleased” with PSC administration of the bridge program, said President Tip O’Neill: And the broadband office is busy getting BEAD off the ground. The Nebraska Association of County Officials thinks it’s a good idea to eliminate redundancies, said Elaine Menzel, Nebraska Association of County Officials legal counsel. Also at the hearing, county and municipal officials opposed a bill that would expand state preemption of local government authority. The state already has a law limiting local fees and timelines for small-cell wireless deployments; LB-1112 would cover other broadband equipment on poles and towers. A single state policy isn’t appropriate for circumstances that vary locality by locality, said Lash Chaffin, League of Nebraska Municipalities utilities section director. The bill would restrict cities’ ability to ensure equipment and installations don’t harm health and safety, said Valerie Grimes, planning and development director for Norfolk, Nebraska. LB-1112 sponsor Sen. Robert Clements (R) said his bill would speed broadband deployment by lowering fees and delays.

Virginia senators voted 40-0 to pass a children’s privacy bill Friday. SB-361 would add children-specific protections to the state’s comprehensive consumer privacy law. In addition, it would prohibit data controllers from selling a child’s information or using it for targeted advertising or profiling. The Senate amended the bill to match the text of HB-707, which passed the House last week (see 2402070063).

The California Chamber of Commerce “is considering its options,” said a CalChamber spokesperson after a state appeals court on Friday reversed a lower court’s decision to delay a state agency’s enforcement of California Privacy Rights Act regulations (see 2402090078). In June, the California Superior Court in Sacramento had granted a CalChamber petition and stayed any California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA) rules for 12 months after they become final (see 2307030025). The privacy agency could have started enforcing CPRA rules July 1, but the lower court’s decision meant rules adopted March 29, wouldn’t take effect for one year. “Because there is no ‘explicit and forceful language’ mandating that the Agency is prohibited from enforcing the Act until (at least) one year after the Agency approves final regulations, the trial court erred in concluding otherwise,” wrote 3rd District Justice Elena Duarte wrote. CalChamber praised the court for noting that the agency “failed to comply with the express terms of the statutory provision regarding the adoption of final regulations,” said the business group’s spokesperson: But CalChamber is disappointed that the appeals court didn’t “agree on a remedy for the Agency’s failure to comply.” The CPPA applauded the decision. “The California voters didn’t intend for businesses to pick and choose which privacy rights to honor,” said CPPA Enforcement Deputy Director Michael Macko: Agency enforcers stand “ready to take it from here.”