Supporters of H.R. 530

National Organizations State and Regional Groups

1. National League of Cities 1. League of California Cities 2. National Association of Counties 2. Florida League of Cities 3. Conference of 3. California State Association of Counties 4. American Public Power Association 4. Virginia Municipal League 5. National Association of 5. League of Nebraska Municipalities Telecommunications Officers and Advisors

Municipalities Joint letter in italics

1. City, NY 32. Eugene, OR 65. Tigard, OR 2. , CA 33. McAllen, TX 66. Newark, CA (resolution as well) 34. Roseville, CA 67. Oakley, CA 3. , IL 35. Visalia, CA 68. Morgan Hill, CA 4. , PA 36. Kent, WA 69. Danville, CA 5. , TX 37. Santa Clara, CA 70. State College, PA 6. Montgomery County, 38. Murrieta, CA 71. Bremerton, WA MD 39. Everett, WA 72. La Quinta, CA 7. San Jose, CA 40. Santa Monica, CA 73. Moorpark, CA 8. , CA 41. Hillsboro, OR 74. Burlingame, CA 9. Columbus, OH 42. Renton, WA 75. Goleta, CA 10. Snohomish County, WA 43. Federal Way, WA 76. Benicia, CA 11. , WA 44. South Gate, CA 77. Norco, CA 12. , CO 45. Chico, CA 78. Oak Harbor, WA 13. Davidson County, TN 46. Carmel, IN 79. Griffin, GA 14. , TX 47. San Leandro, CA 80. Albany, CA 15. Portland, OR 48. Bloomington, MN 81. West University Place, 16. Portland, ME 49. Kennewick, WA TX 17. , NV 50. Auburn, WA 82. Pacific Grove, CA 18. Fresno, CA 51. Mountain View, CA 83. Auburn, CA 19. Sacramento, CA 52. Manteca, CA 84. Poulsbo, WA 20. Oakland, CA 53. Rancho Cordova, CA 85. Hillsborough, CA 21. Santa Ana, CA 54. Pasco, WA 86. Piedmont, CA 22. St. Louis, MO 55. Palo Alto, CA 87. Sonoma, CA 23. Anchorage, AK 56. Santa Cruz, CA 88. Live Oak, CA 24. Madison, WI 57. Redmond, WA 89. Cloverdale, CA 25. Tacoma, WA 58. Eastvale, CA 90. Fairfax, CA 26. Santa Clarita, CA 59. Petaluma, CA 91. Pismo Beach, CA 27. Salt Lake City, UT 60. San Rafael, CA 92. Cotati, CA 28. Akron, OH 61. New Brunswick City, 93. Normandy Park, WA 29. Knoxville, TN NJ 94. Big Bear Lake, CA 30. Rancho Cucamonga, 62. Diamond Bar, CA 95. Yarrow Point, WA CA 63. Novato, CA 96. County, CA 31. Ontario, CA 64. Colton, CA (letter) 1

Supporters of H.R. 530

97. Contra Costa County, 107. Pleasanton, CA (letter) 117. Laguna Beach, CA CA (letter) 108. San Ramon, CA (letter) (letter) 98. Nashville, TN (letter) 109. Laguna Niguel, CA 118. Pinole, CA (letter) 99. Santa Cruz County, CA (letter) 119. Alexander, AL (letter) (resolution) 110. Dublin, CA (letter) 120. Emeryville, CA (letter) 100. Marin County, CA 111. Placentia, CA (letter) 121. Placerville, CA (letter) (letter) 112. Bloomfield Township, 122. Orange Beach, AL 101. Huntington Beach, CA MI (letter) (resolution) (letter) 113. Beverly Hills, CA 123. Tarrant, AL (resolution) 102. Hayward, CA (letter) (letter) 124. Satsuma, AL 103. Vista, CA (letter) 114. San Pablo, CA (letter) (resolution) 104. Tuscaloosa, AL 115. La Verne, CA (letter) 125. Magnolia Springs, AL (resolution) 116. Daphne, AL (resolution) 105. Roswell, GA (letter) (resolution) 126. Bromley, KY 106. Livermore, CA (letter) (resolution)

Public Power Utilities Joint Letter

1. City of Palo Alto Utilities Department, CA 27. Redwood Falls Public Utilities, MN 2. California Municipal Utilities Association, CA 28. Spring Valley Public Utilities, MN 3. Northern California Power Agency, CA 29. Minnesota Municipal Utilities Association, 4. Southern California Public Power Authority, MN CA 30. Southern Minnesota Municipal Power 5. Sacramento Municipal Utility District, CA Agency, MN 6. Lakeland Electric, FL 31. Crisp County Power Commission, GA 7. Public Utility Districts 32. Tennessee Municipal Electric Power Association, WA 33. Association, TN 8. JEA (Jacksonville), FL 34. City of Ellinwood, KS 9. Kansas Power Pool, KS 35. Shawano Municipal Utilities, WI 10. San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, 36. Rochester Public Utilities, MN CA 37. Oregon Municipal Electric Utilities 11. City of Wauchula, FL Association, OR 12. Idaho Falls Power, ID 38. Austin Utilities, MN 13. Greenville Utilities Commission, NC 39. Vernon Public Utilities, CA 14. Princeton Public Utilities, MN 40. Chelan PUD, WA 15. Turlock Irrigation District, CA 41. Zeeland Board of Public Works, MI 16. Electric Cities of Georgia, Inc. (ECG), GA 42. Sioux Center Municipal Utilities, IA 17. Keys Energy Services, FL 43. Bristol Tennessee Essential Services (BTES), 18. Mason County PUD #3, WA TN 19. Beaches Energy Services, FL 44. Arizona Municipal Power Users’ Association, 20. Fort Pierce Utilities Authority, FL AZ 21. Seattle City Light, WA 45. City of Acworth, GA 22. Roseville Electric Utility, CA 46. City of Adel, GA 23. Muscatine Power & Water, IA 47. City of Albany, GA 24. Athens Utilities Board, TN 48. City of Blakely, GA 25. Florida Municipal Electric Association, FL 49. City of Cairo, GA 26. Florida Municipal Power Agency, FL 50. City of Camilla, GA 2

Supporters of H.R. 530

51. City of Cartersville, GA 92. City of Perry, OK 52. City of College Park, GA 93. Ponca City Utility Authority, OK 53. City of Commerce, GA 94. Arkansas River Power Authority, CO 54. City of Covington, GA 95. Oklahoma Municipal Power Authority, OK 55. City of Grantville, GA 96. City of Pryor Municipal Utility Board, OK 56. City of Jackson, GA 97. Laverne Public Works Authority, OK 57. City of Monroe, GA 98. Missouri River Energy Services, SD, IA, MN, 58. City of Sylvania, GA ND 59. City of Thomasville, GA 99. Grant County PUD, WA 60. City of West Point, GA 100. City of Mulvane, KS 61. City of Calhoun, GA 101. Municipal Electric Utilities of Wisconsin, WI 62. City of Tallahassee, FL 102. Lincoln Electric System, NE 63. City Utilities of Springfield, MO 103. WPPI Energy, WI, MI, IA 64. Kissimmee Utility Authority, FL 104. City of Yale, OK 65. CPS Energy, TX 105. Blooming Prairie Public Utilities, MN 66. Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems, 106. City of Weiser, ID UT, CA, ID, NV, NM, WY 107. Blue Ridge Power Agency, VA 67. Salt River Project, AZ 108. Town of Bedford Electric Department, VA 68. Omaha Public Power District, NE 109. Danville Utilities, VA 69. Los Angeles Department of Water & Power, 110. City of Martinsville Electric Department, VA CA 111. City of Salem Electric Department, VA 70. New York Association of Public Power, NY 112. City of Radford Electric Department, VA 71. Jamestown Board of Public Utilities, NY 113. Town of Richlands Electric Department, VA 72. Massena Electric Department, NY 114. Virginia Tech Electric Service, VA 73. Village of Rockville Centre Electric Utility, 115. City of Frederick, OK NY 116. Hope Water and Light, AR 74. Sherrill Power and Light, NY 117. Tennessee Valley Public Power Association, 75. Greenport Municipal Utilities, NY AL, GA, TN, MS, KY, NC, VA 76. Sherburne Municipal Electric, NY 118. City of Rock Falls, IL 77. Salamanca Board of Public Utilities, NY 119. City of Carlyle, IL 78. City of Ashland Electric Utility, OR 120. City of Princeton, IL 79. City of Lucas, KS 121. City of Mascoutah, IL 80. Kansas Municipal Utilities, KS 122. City of Altamont, IL 81. American Municipal Power (AMP), OH, PA, 123. City of Carmi Municipal Electric Utilities, IL MI, KY, VA, WV, IN, MD, DE 124. City of Farmer City, IL 82. Ohio Municipal Electric Association, OH 125. City of Breese Municipal Utilities, IL 83. Evansville Water & Light, WI 126. Municipal Electric Systems of Oklahoma, OK 84. City of Burlington, KS 127. Rochelle Municipal Utilities, IL 85. Tacoma Public Utilities, WA 128. Texas Public Power Association, TX 86. Owatonna Public Utilities, MN 129. City of Springfield Office of Public Utilities, 87. Illinois Municipal Utilities Association, IL IL 88. Illinois Municipal Electric Agency, IL 130. Village of Ladd, IL 89. Northeast Public Power Association, CT, ME, 131. Edmond Electric, OR MA, NH, RI, VT 132. Northwest Public Power Association, AK, 90. Colorado Association of Municipal Utilities, CA, ID, NV, MT, OR, UT, WA, WY CO (separate letter) 91. Alabama Municipal Electric Authority, AL

3

February 27, 2019

The Honorable Anna Eshoo 241 Cannon House Office Building Washington, DC 20515

Dear Congresswoman Eshoo:

As elected officials, we are committed to serving the residents of our cities by ensuring the digital infrastructure of tomorrow is safe, reliable, and is accessible for everyone. Cities and counties are not only leaders in innovation, but also have an obligation to the public to ensure safe, equitable deployment, and fiscally prudent broadband investment to their communities. It is essential that communities maintain control of the small cell application and review process to ensure safe deployment of this technology and that everyone benefits. The Federal Communications Commission preempted this process in a rushed and overreaching manner. For these reasons, we applaud your effort in restoring authority to the rightful position of local jurisdictions and support the Accelerating Wireless Broadband Development by Empowering Local Communities Act (H.R. 530).

H.R. 530 would return local governments’ ability to balance competing interests for the use of the public rights-of-way by overturning actions of the Federal Communications Commission in August and September of 2018. While we support the Commission’s goal of ensuring affordable broadband access for every American, the Commission’s actions do nothing to achieve that goal. It puts the interests of national corporations over the needs of our communities by making it impossible for local governments to manage the public rights-of-way effectively and equitably. It cedes control of local property to national corporations without fair compensation in return, and without taking into account considerations for closing the digital divide, public safety, public utility services such as water, sewer, and electricity, the travelling public, environmental concerns, economic development, and maintenance costs.

Your leadership in passing H.R. 530 is critical to ensuring local governments have the necessary tools to manage local public assets in a manner that balances competing interests while encouraging responsible deployment of wireless broadband facilities. Without this action, communities will face financial strain and potentially delayed progress in adopting to the FCC’s overreaching actions. It is necessary for both industry and our residents to reverse the FCC’s rules on small cells and restore local control.

Sincerely,

Mayor City of Seattle, WA City of San Jose, CA

Mayor Mayor Marsha McLean Portland, OR Santa Clarita, CA

Mayor Gleam Davis Mayor Rahm Emanuel Santa Monica, CA Chicago, IL

Mayor Cassie Franklin Mayor Jason Snider Everett, WA Tigard, OR

Mayor James Cahill Mayor Jim Brainard New Brunswick City, NJ Carmel, IN

Mayor Lee Brand Mayor Paul Soglin City of Fresno, CA City of Madison, WI

Mayor Alan Nagy Mayor Jackie Biskupski City of Newark, CA Salt Lake City, UT

Mayor Pauline Cutter Mayor City of San Leandro, CA City of Tacoma, WA

Mayor Mayor Denis Law Las Vegas, NV Renton, WA

Mayor Matt Watkins Mayor Jim Ferrell Pasco, WA City of Federal Way, WA

Mayor Eric Filseth Mayor Rebecca Erickson City of Palo Alto, CA City of Poulsbo, WA

Mayor Madeline Rogero Mayor Jonathan Chicquette Knoxville, TN City of Normandy Park, WA

Mayor Ethan Berkowitz Mayor Bob Severns Anchorage, AK Oak Harbor, WA

Mayor Lyda Krewson Mayor Nancy Backus St. Louis, MO Auburn, WA

Mayor Dana Ralph Mayor Robert McGarvey Kent, WA Rancho Cordova, CA

Mayor Miguel Pulido Mayor David Briley Santa Ana, CA Metropolitan Nashville and Davidson County, TN

Mayor Lucy Vinis Mayor Eugene, OR Philadelphia, PA

Mayor Richard Cahill Mayor Greg Wheeler Yarrow Point, WA Bremerton, WA

Mayor John Marchione County Executive Dave Somers Redmond, WA Snohomish County, WA

Mayor Ethan Strimling Mayor Susan Sample Portland, ME West University Place, TX

Mayor Michael Rawlings Mayor Don Britain Dallas, TX Kennewick, WA

Mayor Steve Callaway Mayor Hillsboro, OR Columbus, OH

Mayor Michael Hancock Mayor Gene Winstead Denver, CO Bloomington, MN

Mayor Donna Colson Mayor Cheryl Maki Burlingame, CA Auburn, CA

Mayor Randall Putz Mayor Rich Constantine Big Bear Lake, CA Morgan Hill, CA

Mayor Paula Perotte Mayor John Allard Goleta, CA Roseville, CA

Mayor Lisa Matichak Mayor Rochelle Nason Mountainview, CA Albany, CA

Mayor Shawn Christianson Mayor John A. Dell’Osso Hillsborough, CA Cotati, CA

Mayor Martine Watkins Mayor Teresa Barrett Santa Cruz, CA Petaluma, CA

Mayor Elizabeth Patterson Mayor Carol Herrera Benicia, CA Diamond Bar, CA

Mayor Lakhvir Ghag Mayor Barbara Coler Live Oak, CA Fairfax, CA

Mayor Maria Belen Bernal Mayor Randall Stone South Gate, CA Chico, CA

Mayor Dennis Michael Mayor Rancho Cucamongo, CA Los Angeles, CA

Mayor Donald Hahn Mayor Jim Darling State College, Pennsylvania McAllen, TX

Mayor Martin J. Walsh Mayor Boston, MA Oakland, CA

Mayor Robert McBain Mayor Eric Lucan Piedmont, CA Novato, CA

Mayor Lisa Gillmor Mayor Benjamin Cantu Santa Clara, CA Manteca, CA

Mayor Melanie Bagby Mayor Ed Waage Cloverdale, CA Pismo Beach, CA

Mayor Bob Link Mayor Gary Phillips Visalia, CA San Rafael, CA

Mayor Janice Parvin Mayor Kelly Seyarto Moorpark, CA Murrieta, CA

Mayor Paul Leon Mayor Linda Evans Ontario, CA La Quinta, CA

Mayor Bill Peake Mayor Todd Rigby Pacific Grove, CA Eastvale, CA

Mayor Robin Grundmeyer Mayor Frank Navarro Norco, CA Colton, CA

Mayor Claire Alaura Mayor Amy Harrington Oakley, CA Sonoma, CA

Mayor Robert Storer Mayor Danville, CA , NY

County Executive Marc Elrich Chairperson Cynthia Reid Ward Montgomery County, MD Griffin, Georgia

Mayor Mayor Sacramento, CA San Francisco, CA

Mayor Daniel Horrigan Akron, OH

The Honorable Anna Eshoo United States House of Representatives 202 Cannon House Office Building Washington, DC 20515

March 1, 2019

Dear Representative Eshoo:

We the undersigned strongly support H.R. 530, the Accelerating Wireless Broadband Development by Empowering Local Communities Act of 2019, to overturn actions by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) that are in violation of the Communications Act of 1934. The FCC’s assertion of authority over public power pole attachments is in plain contravention of section 224 of the Communications Act that explicitly prevents the Commission from regulating attachments to public power electric utility poles.

On September 26, 2018, the Commission adopted its Declaratory Ruling and Third Report and Order (Report and Order). In it, the FCC asserts that it can preempt state and local laws or requirements governing access to public right-of-way (ROW) and publicly-owned infrastructure within the ROW, including rates, terms, or conditions of pole attachment agreements, using sections 253 and 332 of the Communications Act. Section 253 seeks to promote competition for telecommunications services by barring state and local barriers to entry. Section 332 gives the FCC exclusive jurisdiction over mobile communications services and provides telecommunications companies with nondiscriminatory access to state and local ROW. Neither section 253 nor section 332 has anything to do with pole attachments, which are exclusively governed by section 224.

In adopting the Report and Order, the FCC claims its actions will “remove regulatory barriers that would unlawfully inhibit the deployment of infrastructure necessary to support…new [broadband] services.” Yet the Commission provided no empirical evidence of public power utilities being a barrier to broadband deployment because of pole attachment rates or regulations. Instead, it arbitrarily imposes federal, one- size-fits-all pole attachment regulations on public power utility poles. This regulatory overreach by the Commission to regulate public power utilities using sections 253 and 332 of the Communication Act limits the ability of public power utilities to responsibly and equitably manage their electric utility poles, and it is contrary to the clear exemption in section 224 and the express intent of Congress.

The Commission’s actions also ignore legitimate concerns related to the placement of communications infrastructure on public power utility poles. For example, accommodating wireless attachments above the electric line may create lineworker safety issues and may run afoul of lineworker safety standards such as the National Electric Safety Code (NESC), which is mandatory in some states. In addition, small cells and accompanying infrastructure may be too heavy or large for existing public power utility poles, and if existing poles cannot support this additional infrastructure, poles may break, fall, or otherwise cause electric reliability concerns. Finally, wireless attachments may cause radio frequency interference to utility systems, which also may affect electric reliability.

Public power utilities provide reliable and affordable electricity to over 49 million Americans. We strongly support repealing the Commission’s Report and Order, which we believe exceeds the FCC’s authority under the Communications Act to the detriment of public power utility customers. We greatly Public Power Utilities Support H.R. 530 March 1, 2019 appreciate you introducing this legislation to overturn the Commission’s unlawful actions to regulate public power pole attachments. We look forward to working with you to advance this important legislation.

Sincerely,

American Public Power Association Minnesota Municipal Utilities Association, MN City of Palo Alto Utilities Department, CA Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency, MN California Municipal Utilities Association, CA Crisp County Power Commission, GA Northern California Power Agency, CA Tennessee Municipal Electric Power Southern California Public Power Authority, CA Association, TN Sacramento Municipal Utility District, CA City of Ellinwood, KS Lakeland Electric, FL Shawano Municipal Utilities, WI Washington Public Utility Districts Association, Rochester Public Utilities, MN WA Oregon Municipal Electric Utilities Association, JEA (Jacksonville), FL OR Kansas Power Pool, KS Austin Utilities, MN San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, CA Vernon Public Utilities, CA City of Wauchula, FL Chelan PUD, WA Idaho Falls Power, ID Zeeland Board of Public Works, MI Greenville Utilities Commission, NC Sioux Center Municipal Utilities, IA Princeton Public Utilities, MN Bristol Tennessee Essential Services (BTES), Turlock Irrigation District, CA TN Electric Cities of Georgia, Inc. (ECG), GA Arizona Municipal Power Users’ Association, Keys Energy Services, FL AZ Mason County PUD #3, WA City of Acworth, GA Beaches Energy Services, FL City of Adel, GA Fort Pierce Utilities Authority, FL City of Albany, GA Seattle City Light, WA City of Blakely, GA Roseville Electric Utility, CA City of Cairo, GA Muscatine Power & Water, IA City of Camilla, GA Athens Utilities Board, TN City of Cartersville, GA Florida Municipal Electric Association, FL City of College Park, GA Florida Municipal Power Agency, FL City of Commerce, GA Redwood Falls Public Utilities, MN City of Covington, GA Spring Valley Public Utilities, MN City of Grantville, GA

Page 2

Public Power Utilities Support H.R. 530 March 1, 2019

City of Jackson, GA Northeast Public Power Association, CT, ME, MA, NH, RI, VT City of Monroe, GA Colorado Association of Municipal Utilities, CO City of Sylvania, GA Alabama Municipal Electric Authority, AL City of Thomasville, GA City of Perry, OK City of West Point, GA Ponca City Utility Authority, OK City of Calhoun, GA Arkansas River Power Authority, CO City of Tallahassee, FL Oklahoma Municipal Power Authority, OK City Utilities of Springfield, MO City of Pryor Municipal Utility Board, OK Kissimmee Utility Authority, FL Laverne Public Works Authority, OK CPS Energy, TX Missouri River Energy Services, SD, IA, MN, Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems, UT, ND CA, ID, NV, NM, WY Grant County PUD, WA Salt River Project, AZ City of Mulvane, KS Omaha Public Power District, NE Municipal Electric Utilities of Wisconsin, WI Los Angeles Department of Water & Power, CA Lincoln Electric System, NE New York Association of Public Power, NY WPPI Energy, WI, MI, IA Jamestown Board of Public Utilities, NY City of Yale, OK Massena Electric Department, NY Blooming Prairie Public Utilities, MN Village of Rockville Centre Electric Utility, NY City of Weiser, ID Sherrill Power and Light, NY Blue Ridge Power Agency, VA Greenport Municipal Utilities, NY Town of Bedford Electric Department, VA Sherburne Municipal Electric, NY Danville Utilities, VA Salamanca Board of Public Utilities, NY City of Martinsville Electric Department, VA City of Ashland Electric Utility, OR City of Salem Electric Department, VA City of Lucas, KS City of Radford Electric Department, VA Kansas Municipal Utilities, KS Town of Richlands Electric Department, VA American Municipal Power (AMP), OH, PA, MI, KY, VA, WV, IN, MD, DE Virginia Tech Electric Service, VA Ohio Municipal Electric Association, OH City of Frederick, OK Evansville Water & Light, WI Hope Water and Light, AR City of Burlington, KS Tennessee Valley Public Power Association, AL, GA, TN, MS, KY, NC, VA Tacoma Public Utilities, WA City of Rock Falls, IL Owatonna Public Utilities, MN City of Carlyle, IL Illinois Municipal Utilities Association, IL City of Princeton, IL Illinois Municipal Electric Agency, IL City of Mascoutah, IL

Page 3

Public Power Utilities Support H.R. 530 March 1, 2019

City of Altamont, IL Rochelle Municipal Utilities, IL City of Carmi Municipal Electric Utilities, IL Texas Public Power Association, TX City of Farmer City, IL City of Springfield Office of Public Utilities, IL City of Breese Municipal Utilities, IL Village of Ladd, IL Municipal Electric Systems of Oklahoma, OK Edmond Electric, OK

Cc: The Honorable Frank Pallone The Honorable Greg Walden The Honorable Michael Doyle The Honorable Bob Latta

Page 4