Legislative Update June 2026: News from Trenton & Washington and FCC Legislation Changes

by Dave Garb, Legislative Committee Chair

The American Broadband Deployment Act (H.R. 2289) Saga Continues

Recap and update: Since last November, we have been telling everyone about the American Broadband Deployment Act of 2025 (H.R. 2289). If passed, H.R. 2289 would give conglomerate telecommunications companies de-facto power over local zoning laws and provide no public safety protections for construction of “deemed granted” facilities. Sites will be constructed without any action by the government and without any notice to the local government.

Not only will local authorities have no control of the rights-of-way, but they will also have no negotiating power over any franchise fees. Cable franchise renewals would be eliminated. This would removie the ability of state or local governments to enforce franchise obligations such as build-out, customer service, and PEG. Municipalities will lose hundreds of thousands of dollars annually and they might lose the local programming that provides transparency to the local residents.

The response throughout the country has been very active and very loud. Our partners from the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors (NATOA), have shared some of the responses from around the country.

Pennsylvania’s report on H.R. 2289 ABDA response from Local Governments from Dan Cohen and the Cohen Law Group:

• H.R. 2289, entitled “The American Broadband Bill,” (ABDA) would reduce the power of local governments to manage telecommunications companies and, in my judgment, would negatively impact public safety.
• For example, in the cable franchise arena, the bill would eliminate cable franchise renewals, undercutting the ability of local communities to enforce or improve franchise obligations, and creating “forever franchises.” It would also give cable operators the right to change any franchise provision they do not like, such as build-out to every neighborhood, customer service standards, and local PEG channels.

H.R. 2289 also weakens municipal authority to manage wireless facilities and internet service providers. In addition, it tips the balance of judicial review of municipal actions away from municipalities.

Minnesota report on H.R. 2289 ABDA response from Local Governments and PEG centers from Mike Bradley of Bradley Werner:

• Drafted, disseminated and distributed through MACTA and League of Minnesota Cities (LOMC) and Minnesota Association of Community Telecommunications Administrators (MACTA): “You may be surprised to learn that there are no provisions in the 100 pages of the bill that require broadband deployment to any area of the country or provide a single protection for residents. Rather, it is a bill to increase federal intervention into local affairs. It is bad legislation.”

Michigan report on H.R. 2289 ABDA response from Local Governments & PEG centers from Mike Watza, Bloom Sluggett:

• Mike Watza of Bloom Sluggett, Counsel to Michigan Coalition to Protect Public Rights-of-Way (PROTEC), Counsel to Merit Network, wrote to Congresswoman Dingell and committee staff, noting: “We are once again confronted with all manner of attempts to diminish local community self-governance. Chief among these at present is H.R. 2289 which will, if passed, essentially end local self governance of Telecom Access to our ROW and public lands.”
• See the letter, talking points and key provisions of H.R. 2289 here: https://www.natoa.org/news/natoa-action-alert-oppose–hr-2289
• See the bill, H.R. 2289 here: https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/2289/text

Washington State report on H.R. 2289 ABDA response of Local Governments & PEG centers via the board of the Washington Association of Telecommunications Officers & Advisors (WATOA):

• Shared by Seattle’s Alice Lawson and Kirkland’s Mike O’Connor: “We strongly oppose the federal overreach proposed by H.R. 2289. The local permitting and franchising functions targeted by this legislation exist to facilitate safe, productive deployment while also protecting roads and residents from harms caused by poorly planned or executed construction. Federal preemptions that exclusively prioritize the interests of the telecommunications industry, without sufficient safeguards for local public interests, are misguided and jeopardize the ability of urban, suburban, and rural communities to be a partner in pursuing their telecommunications needs along with effective rights-of-way management.”

And right here in New Jersey,

•  “In an effort to make our leaders federally, and locally aware of the implications of H.R. 2289, the Jersey Access Group (JAG) created two videos which you can show to your municipalities and use on your stations detailing the harmful points of H.R. 2289 which can be found at the following locations:

The Harmful Points of H.R. 2289

3 Minute Video on H.R. 2289 Via Dropbox

3 Minute Video on H.R. 2289 Via YouTube

1 Minute Video on H.R. 2289 via Dropbox

1 Minute Video on H.R. 2289 via YouTube

And now JAG has produced a new short video/CG version about the dangers of H.R. 2289:

Alternating the Future of Our Stations – H.R. 2289:

On YouTube

On Google Drive

Please forward ALL these videos to your local, state and federal lawmakers to make everyone aware and informed of the dangers of H.R. 2289 to your local municipalities. Also, please consider airing them on your television channels and other means of communications to keep the members of your community informed.