Carr Expects Some Local Government Support on Next Big Infrastructure Order

“We’ve had really positive discussions with a variety of stakeholders,” Carr said. “I’ve traveled and met with a lot of mayors, I met with county officials … and state governors,” he said. “There’s common ground here.” Some mayors filed in support of the actions, he said. The FCC never gets 100 percent buy-in from either side when it “takes a step on this issue,” Carr said after the event. “If industry gets 100 percent of what they’ve been asking for, I don’t think anyone should be expecting that,” he said. “There is between the two extremes a tremendous amount of common ground.”

Fifth-generation wireless must be deployed beyond the biggest cities, Carr said. Whether it's built in smaller markets depends on the amount of regulatory reform, he said. With small cells, “30 percent of the cost is cut” with that, he said. Parts of 5G will be widely deployed even if all markets aren’t densified, he said.

In recent comments on C-SPAN (see 1806210021), Commissioner Mike O’Rielly questioned why FCC software lets the agency to hold only one auction at a time. Why can’t it hold multiple auctions concurrently, he asked. “We spend upwards of $100 million a year for personnel and software. … That’s problematic.”

“We’re full steam ahead,” Carr responded. “I’ll look to see whether we ultimately need to do more [on] the software.” For the U.S. to lead on 5G, Carr said, “it’s going to require a partnership across the board” at the local, state and federal level, he said. Every community should get a “fair shot at 5G.”

Carr said 5G is “equally” a wireline play and a wireless one. About 80 percent of new deployments will be small cells and “you need a lot more wired infrastructure to connect all those antennas,” he said. Carr said in general he supports opening up the C-band for 5G (see 1806260027) but hasn’t made any decisions on the approach the FCC should take.

Collaborating

Local governments are grateful to Carr "for making clear that there is no rush to pre-emption,” said Best Best local government attorney Gerry Lederer. "He and [aide] Will Adams are also to be applauded for the constructive and positive dialogue they have opened with local government leaders. We look forward to that dialogue continuing.” Carr is “hearing firsthand how much mayors, county executives and other local elected officials want the latest wireless technologies deployed in their communities and welcome FCC insights on methods for achieving such deployments without breaking local government budgets, frustrating community design or failing to address digital inclusion,” Lederer told us. “Any FCC leadership on updating or refreshing last century’s RF standards would also be welcomed by local elected leaders.”

Lederer said if the FCC’s action “are constructive, not pre-emptive, and reflect and respect the types of agreements industry and local government have developed in Los Angeles, Boston, San Jose, New York and elsewhere, I am sure there is much local government will support.”

“Carr and his staff have worked very collaboratively on this,” Jonathan Adelstein, president of the Wireless Infrastructure Association, told us. “They have had an open door and shown a willingness to work with all stakeholders. We agree that there is a tremendous amount of common ground, which is why WIA works closely with state and local officials on siting issues. This collaboration will lead to a stronger order and an order better able to withstand judicial scrutiny.”

One audience member said the FCC needs to worry about whether Americans can afford broadband. “How do you regulate the costs of the internet service,” she asked. “We pay $80, $100 … per month. People can’t afford that.” Cost is a concern, Carr said. “People want better, faster and cheaper,” he said. “The commission has not been in the business … of regulating rates.” Cutting red tape and increasing competition is the best way to keep costs low, he said.

Nicol Turner-Lee of Brookings led the discussion with Carr, noting the importance of a strong Lifeline program to 5G. Without Lifeline, “we’re going to find ourselves in a build-it-and-they-won’t-come mode, because people will not be able to afford the new technology,” she told us. The program is a “complement” to the work the FCC is doing on deployment, she said. “The digital divide is not about just wires and poles, it’s about people.”

“The conversation about the necessity of 5G is an important one,” Turner-Lee said. “We also need to be conscious that the digital divide exists and that we don’t want to impose an urban/rural divide based on the accelerated deployment of 5G.”

Brookings Notebook

The FCC is moving backward on pushing to promote super-fast broadband, said former FCC Chief of Staff Blair Levin, now at Brookings, in a speech Tuesday to the Gigabit Summit in Kansas City, Missouri. The FCC has “curiously interpreted its statutory mandate to dramatically reduce its regulatory powers over broadcasters, ISPs, telephone companies, cable companies and wireless companies, while simultaneously asserting new authority to regulate prices and micromanage over one set of enterprises: local governments,” he said. Levin slammed the work of the FCC Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee. “The BDAC did not have a balanced membership that could have led to a real consensus between stakeholders,” he said, according to the text of his speech. “The FCC overwhelmingly filled the BDAC with industry representatives and therefore undercut its potential to build political capital for a balanced and optimal set of solutions.” The FCC reinforced “a false narrative about how cities are the cause of delays in 5G deployments, while ignoring the real, market driven causes of delay,” Levin said. The BDAC also started with an incorrect assumption, that wireless doesn’t have “the leverage to negotiate the deals it needs to make investments in new networks,” he said. “The carriers themselves recognize they have the necessary leverage.” The FCC didn't comment.