Mayors Oppose a GOP Bill to Speed Up Broadband Permitting
Jan Hakan Dahlstrom/ Getty Images
The proposal would put a “shot clock” on permit approvals in an effort to streamline the process to build broadband around the country. But mayors say it preempts their ability to make crucial construction decisions.
As the federal government prepares to allocate the nearly $42.5 billion in the infrastructure act to build broadband around the country, House Republicans have proposed limiting how long state and local governments have to approve or reject permits for these projects.
Under a bill approved recently by the Republican-controlled House Energy and Commerce Committee, states and localities will have either 60 or 90 days to process permits by broadband companies. If the “shot clock” runs out, the permits will be considered approved.
Backers of the bill argue that the requirement will ensure that broadband projects funded under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act won’t get slowed down by bureaucratic red tape. A shot clock “would streamline the process” and create “clear rules of the road for when these timeframes begin and end,” the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Buddy Carter, a Georgia Republican, said as the committee sent the proposal to the full House on May 24.
Over the weekend, though, the U.S. Conference of Mayors released a resolution opposing the measure, saying that by going over their heads to approve permits based on an arbitrary timeline, the federal government would be preempting local governments ability to control night work or if and when roads are closed, among other issues.
The mayors, who were in Columbus for their annual conference, also argued that the bill would weaken cities’ leverage to push companies to provide service in poor communities. It “would bestow on broadband providers an unprecedented federal grant of access to state and local public property, but impose no obligations on those providers to serve ‘unserved’ and ‘underserved’ Americans,” the resolution said.
Under the proposal, state and local governments would have 90 days to reject applications by cable companies to do fiber projects that are underground or on a public right of way. The deadline is tighter for wireless projects, giving governments only 60 days if it involves using an existing structure. In both cases, some projects are given more time depending on circumstances.
But Gerard Lederer, a telecommunications consultant who works with the U.S. Conference of Mayors, notes that the federal government has 270 days to approve broadband permits.
“Local governments would have as short as 60 days,” he told Route Fifty. “Think there's a fundamental equity issue there?”
In addition, the proposal would limit the permit fees governments can charge, and it would exempt broadband projects from having to undergo federal environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act and the National Historic Preservation Act.
The changes would help smaller companies build broadband in rural areas, according to Michael Romano, executive vice president of NTCA – The Rural Broadband Association.
“Where we really run into the biggest issues are federal lands and across state highways,” he said. “Having a degree of uniformity to the calculation of fees and the processes for applications is going to be huge, especially for a small company.”
If the full House passes the bill, it faces an uncertain future in the Senate. A spokesperson for the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation said the House bill was still being reviewed.
Romano remains hopeful, however, noting that the Biden administration has acknowledged that permitting could slow the bipartisan infrastructure act’s broadband projects.
And Alan Davidson, the head of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, the agency that will be distributing the money for broadband projects, said at a conference in March that in order to receive the funds all states will have to submit a plan to speed up permitting. “I think there's a strong bipartisan interest in this,” he said.
The bill was opposed by Democrats on the committee, who last month argued that a better way to speed up permitting was to send state and local governments more money to hire the workers necessary to process the applications in a timely manner.
Rep. Frank Pallone of New Jersey, the committee’s top Democrat, argued that a lack of staff “particularly in smaller towns and counties” could have a hard time meeting the bill’s “arbitrary” and “tight” deadlines.
“There is a lot more to these decisions than a simple yes or no,” said Pallone. “No one thinks about who's responsible for ensuring there is ample public safety personnel for traffic duty … during construction or the complexity of scheduling certain construction projects.”
Kery Murakami is a senior reporter for Route Fifty, covering Congress and federal policy. He can be reached at kmurakami@govexec.com
NEXT STORY: How Building More 'Granny Flats' Can Help Alleviate the Housing Crisis