Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

San Jose Mayor Quits FCC Advisory Committee, Says It is Dealing ISPs a 'Very Favorable Hand' (axios.com)

Posted by msmash on from the major-claims dept.

San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo resigned today from a panel that advises the Federal Communications Commission on broadband deployment, alleging that the committee is dealing internet service providers "a very favorable hand" of policy recommendations, Axios reports. From the report: The Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee is a key element of Republican FCC Chairman Ajit Pai's priority of making sure broadband internet reaches all Americans. "It has become abundantly clear that despite the good intentions of several participants, the industry-heavy makeup of BDAC will simply relegate the body to being a vehicle for advancing the interests of the telecommunications industry over those of the public," said Liccardo, a Democrat, in his resignation letter. He told Axios that he thought that the committee's draft recommendations were trying to "steamroll cities" in favor of industry access to infrastructure. He pointed to a draft model law that would give states power over permitting for wireless broadband infrastructure at the expense, Liccardo says, of cities' interests.

4 of 99 comments (clear)

  1. Quelle Surprise! by Green+Mountain+Bot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A Trump administration committee is advancing the interests of industry over the public. Who would ever have guessed?

    1. Re:Quelle Surprise! by Green+Mountain+Bot · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Nice straw man you've knocked down there. How about we look at the actual issues cited by the Mayor?

      1) "Over the holiday break, despite nine months of deliberations, a single industry representative completely rewrote a draft municipal code at the 11th hour, leaving municipal representatives scrambling with insufficient time to vet the hundreds of changes. That rewritten version closely resembled legislation that the industry pushed in 20 states across the country."
      2) "The BDAC has focused on reducing municipal fees, and eliminating local control and discretion over where and how broadband infrastructure is deployed in the public right-of-way.
      3) "The industry’s claim that reducing municipal lease rates on public infrastructure will help it better serve the 34 million Americans without broadband access bears little resemblance to patterns of industry investment in low-income neighborhoods and rural areas."
      4) "[the industry] has sought to create a set of rules that will provide it with easy access to publicly-funded infrastructure at taxpayer-subsidized rates, without any obligation to provide broadband access to underserved residents."
      5) "Below market rates and by-right access to public infrastructure also strip cities of the ability to hold companies accountable for building out networks to serve all areas of a city."

      From where I sit, it sure looks like Liccardo has some valid points - points that are highly unlikely to be addressed at the state level.

  2. Re:Quitting to Advance the Cause by ClickOnThis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've never understood this move. So he gets his 15 minutes of "fame" and then is quickly forgotten. Meanwhile, the board/committee now has one less voice to advance the cause he represented. How is this effective?

    Apparently he felt his presence was giving the advisory committee an air of legitimacy that it did not deserve. So he quit. Makes sense to me.

    --
    If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
  3. Re:How does this solve anything? by Rakarra · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you were really trying to help the public you would have stayed any fought your hardest at anything that comes though the committee.

    Unless you can't actually do anything. I spoke with a CEO once who was on one of Trump's committees and he had some interesting things to say about when you should stay on these committees and when you should leave.

    When you should stay: You feel like your voice is heard. You feel like your opinions have real influence. You feel like you're representing an interest and that you can prevent harm to that interest. You aren't going to get everything you want, but you still are able to make a difference.

    When you should leave: You feel like you can't make a difference because the deck is stacked against you. You feel like the one liberal on a Fox News opinion panel (you were put there basically to rally everyone else against you). You're only there so they can claim a false "balance" of interests. You're there only so they can claim they listened to both sides when their intention was to ram through their original plan regardless of what comes up. You feel like your name is being appropriated for acts that you're strongly against, that your personal reputation is being tarnished by this association. You feel like you can do more with a protest quitting than you can by being sidelined on the inside.

    Said CEO had clearly been thinking about this, because he left the committee shortly after.