FCC broadband proposal preempts local authority

Public comments are due Sept. 21

By Damon Conklin, legislative advocate (communications)

Cal Cities sent a letter today to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) pushing back against a proposal that could significantly limit how cities manage fiber optic cables and other wireline telecommunications infrastructure in public rights-of-way. The proposal addresses what the FCC characterizes as excessive permitting delays, fees, and other permit conditions.

For cities, the proposal goes well beyond routine permitting streamlining. The new rules could affect public works, engineering, transportation work, and other basic city functions. If adopted, it could establish federal standards that preempt longstanding local practices for managing public rights-of-way.

A new 120-day permitting clock

One of the proposal’s most consequential changes is a 120-day presumptive deadline for state and local governments to act on wireline deployment applications. Failure to act could create a presumption that a city has effectively prohibited telecommunications service, a violation of Section 253 of the Communications Act.

The FCC is considering starting the clock when a provider submits its first application or completes the first required pre-application step, rather than when an application is complete. The deadline could also apply to batched applications and related facilities outside public rights-of-way, such as back-up power facilities.

The deadline would not result in automatic approval. Instead, it could create a rebuttable presumption against a city that a provider could use in an FCC proceeding or court challenge.

National limits on local fees

The FCC wants to limit fees to a reasonable approximation of a government's actual and direct costs of managing its public rights-of-way in connection with a particular wireline telecommunications authorization. Under the proposal, costs must be objectively reasonable, competitively neutral, and nondiscriminatory.

The commission is also considering national fee levels, similar to those established for small wireless facilities. Exceeding those levels would result in a legal presumption that the city has violated Section 253, which would allow providers to challenge the fees in an FCC proceeding or in court.

These changes raise concerns about shifting private deployment costs to local taxpayers. Cities incur real expenses when reviewing plans, coordinating utilities, inspecting construction, managing traffic, and restoring public infrastructure. Restricting cost recovery to below market value could force taxpayers to subsidize private deployment costs and further strain cities struggling to keep pace with basic pavement preservation, rehabilitation, and safety needs.

Restoration requirements could face scrutiny

The FCC is examining non-monetary permit conditions as well. The proposal preempts those conditions unless they qualify as objectively reasonable compensation under the proposed cost-based fee standard and are imposed in a competitively neutral and nondiscriminatory manner. Those conditions could be assigned a monetary value and count toward federal fee limits.

Notably, the commission is asking when road, curb, sidewalk, and accessibility improvements constitute actual restoration or mitigation and when they should be considered compensation.

Cities routinely impose restoration requirements to protect pavement, maintain accessibility, and ensure construction does not leave public infrastructure in worse condition. Treating restoration requirements as compensation could restrict cities' ability to protect and maintain public assets.

Broader protections for multi-use networks

The FCC wants to prohibit additional state or local requirements merely because wireline infrastructure carries services in addition to telecommunications. Because modern fiber networks often support multiple services through the same facilities, this could broaden the range of infrastructure covered by the proposed standards.

Cities should weigh in with success stories

The FCC is specifically seeking data and real-world examples, as well as comments on the practical effects of adopting the proposed rule. Examples of expedited processes or partnerships that have accelerated deployment while protecting public infrastructure can demonstrate that federal preemption is not the only path to faster deployment. 

Comments are due Sept. 21, 2026, and reply comments are due Nov. 5, 2026. Cities can file through the FCC's Electronic Comment Filing System under WC Docket No. 25-253. A template letter for cities is available for download.

The FCC's final rules will be shaped by the record before it. City-specific evidence will be critical to showing the real-world consequences of imposing a uniform framework on communities with different infrastructure, staffing, and operational needs.

The League’s federal partner, the National League of Cities, is also weighing in. If you choose to send comments to the FCC, please send a copy to your regional public affairs manager. 

For additional information, please review the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) and Build America: Eliminating Barriers to Wireline Deployments (WC Docket No. 25-253).