RCRC opposes Assembly Bill 470, authored by Assembly Member Tina McKinnor. This measure would allow any Carrier of Last Resort (COLR) telephone service provider to abandon its obligations to provide reliable and affordable access to basic telephone service in an eligible area.
AB 470 allows telephone companies to relinquish their Carrier of Last Resort (COLR) obligations in areas they determine to be “well-served” by alternative voice services or where no population exists. Under the bill, a COLR provider can unilaterally opt out of its obligations by submitting a notice to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) without requiring CPUC approval. The bill defines “alternative voice service” as any provider offering voice access, 9-1-1 connectivity, and backup power compatibility. An area is deemed “well-served” if three providers, including one wireline provider, offer service at rates comparable to COLR rates. AB 470 also establishes a customer challenge process directly with the company, placing the burden on a consumer to successfully dispute the company’s findings that sufficient alternative services exist. Even if a challenge is successful, the provider is only required to continue service for two additional years. While the CPUC is tasked with developing a transition plan for non-eligible areas, it would have no regulatory authority (per AB 470) over alternative voice services, limiting its ability to enforce consumer protections going forward such as minimum service quality standards and timely maintenance.
RCRC’s chief concerns are:
- Lack of regulatory oversight. This bill allows COLR providers to self-determine service relinquishment without CPUC review or customer notice. Customers have no neutral venue to protest, and successful disputes have no guarantee their service will continue until alternatives exist.
- Consumer protections are at risk. Unlike COLR service, alternative voice services are not required to meet minimum reliability, accessibility, or affordability standards. Providers could exit markets without ensuring comparable service availability. AB 470 would also prevent the CPUC from regulating alternative services.
- Threats to disaster-prone areas. COLR providers are currently required to restore service after emergencies and serve all requesting customers, including in new developments. AB 470 removes this safety net, increasing the risk of disconnected communities, particularly in unprofitable locations and/or disaster-prone areas.
- Flawed definition of “well-served.” This bill assumes that three providers in an area equate to reliable, affordable, and continuous service, but alternative providers can discontinue service at will, or neglect maintenance, leaving gaps in coverage.
- Insufficient Transition Process. While AB 470 claims to support a phased transition to modern technology, it does not establish safeguards to ensure communities have viable alternatives before COLR services are discontinued. AB 470 would provide a financial incentive to discontinue service, not replace antiquated technology with higher-quality offerings.
Read RCRC’s letter of opposition here.
RCRC requests that counties send letters of opposition; a template letter is available here.
Letters can be submitted through the legislative portal (see here). If you need assistance, or for more information, contact RCRC Senior Policy Advocate Tracy Rhine.