Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.1.d -John Stonebraker - FW_ comment re_ 3.1.d Carrier of Last ResortFrom:Clerk of the Board To:BOS Subject:Public Comment - FW: comment re: 3.1.d Carrier of Last Resort Date:Tuesday, March 25, 2025 7:26:34 AM Please see public comment below. -----Original Message----- From: John S. <john@upperridge.info> Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2025 6:54 AM To: Clerk of the Board <clerkoftheboard@buttecounty.net> Subject: comment re: 3.1.d Carrier of Last Resort .ATTENTION: This message originated from outside Butte County. Please exercise judgment before opening attachments, clicking on links, or replying.. Since the text of the letter the Board is being asked to ratify has not been published with this agenda item, I can only support the intent of the transmittal. AT&T has been a bad actor since well before the 1983 breakup and especially since reabsorbing the Baby Bells. This monstrous monopoly should not be allowed to collect a guaranteed Rate of Return from the more lucrative portions of Butte County without continuing to serve the county entire, including portions too remote from a Central Office for Internet-based communications to operate over existing wireline infrastructure. Yet rather than upgrading to better serve rural communities, AT&T lobbies to instead cut us off, as they have managed in other states. Since neither the CPUC nor the Legislature can be trusted to oversee a transition to publicly owned wireline broadband in areas too thinly populated for competitive markets, AT&T's franchise agreement should specify that continued use of county rights-of-way is conditional on providing Basic Service to all interested Butte County residents. Thanks to staff for staying on top of this even if their submission for the March 19 hearing did not make the deadline to get into this packet. John Stonebraker Outer Magalia, CA