Viewpoints
The National Multifamily Housing Council (NMHC) argues the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) misses the mark on regulatory overreach that could stifle the broadband market for renters.
By: Kevin Donnelly, NMHC and Valerie M. Sargent, Broadband Communities
With the FCC’s recent proposal to ban bulk billing arrangements in the multifamily industry, the National Multifamily Housing Council (NMHC) has been hard at work to ensure policymakers understand the full impact on the multifamily broadband industry. NMHC has been successful in advocating to the FCC, and before Congress, educating them about the pro-consumer and pro-renter benefits of bulk internet and managed Wi-Fi.
Congress has begun to weigh in on this issue, and NMHC has been encouraging the FCC to proceed very cautiously and not upend the multifamily broadband market, and potentially disconnect millions of Americans, along with raising the cost of broadband for millions more.
What’s next?
Since March, when the FCC announced its intention to propose to ban bulk billing agreements, the draft rulemaking has been in circulation within FCC offices and is under review. Essentially, this means that the proposal is circulating privately and won’t be made public until the comment period opens. NMHC and other stakeholders have called for increased transparency and pushed the FCC to not only make the proposal public but to allow for an extended comment period so that property owners, renters, broadband providers, and others have ample time to collect data and properly inform the FCC about the continued benefits of bulk billing agreements and managed Wi-Fi solutions. NMHC has also already led several coalition efforts opposing the move and has helped engage public housing authorities, digital equity advocates, and advocates for low-income and minority populations to weigh in forcefully against this flawed proposal. All advocacy efforts warn the FCC against going down this road, because bulk billing has evolved into managed Wi Fi, and together they are extremely beneficial to removing barriers to adoption and deployment of broadband to a broad range of residents, including the most vulnerable.
Housing providers often include broadband bulk billing as an added benefit, negotiating lower broadband costs for residents compared to standard market rates. Prohibiting bulk internet agreements could negatively affect residents’ access to affordable broadband services, especially in rural and low-income areas, as well as smaller rental communities that face challenges in connectivity. This restriction could also deter future investments in broadband infrastructure, ultimately hampering efforts to bridge the digital divide.
Call to action
For those interested in joining the advocacy efforts led by NMHC and its members, or communicating the importance and benefit to bulk billing, please reach out to Kevin Donnelly at NMHC to learn how you can engage in advocacy efforts and do more to protect bulk and managed Wi-Fi solutions in the market.
There is much more to come, and this is an all hands on deck moment for both providers and property owners to preserve the ability to enter into these pro-consumer agreements. As the process plays out over the next several months, NMHC will be launching a member survey to collect real-time data, along with a search for case studies from across the marketplace that show that bulk arrangements are working, and high-quality managed Wi-Fi systems are serving residents well. NMHC will continue to educate the FCC about the need in the marketplace for these types of agreements to continue.
NMHC appeals FCC digital discrimination rule
Another recent area where the FCC has erred in its approach is in putting forward a final digital discrimination rule that goes far beyond what Congress intended and could end up harming renters and their access to affordable and reliable broadband. While NMHC supports the underlying goal of ending digital discrimination and has worked tirelessly on advancing digital equity policies, NMHC filed an appeal of this rule in federal court in early March.
Again, NMHC strongly supports the goal of ending digital discrimination, yet believes that the FCC is significantly flawed in its approach. In its final rule, the FCC includes property owners as a “covered entity.” This would hold housing providers liable under the FCC’s enforcement plan if adequate broadband is not available to its renters.
For the first time, the FCC interpreted its regulatory authority to cover property owners in a similar way as broadband service providers in the rule. This extension lacks legal authority and is a significant departure from the FCC’s existing regulations.
The FCC also adopted disparate impact analysis to its framework for determining whether facially neutral business practices have an unlawful discriminatory effect on the basis of a resident’s income, also for the first time. Both misinterpretations could allow the FCC to limit other pro-competitive, pro-consumer practices, including property access/control, infrastructure cost-share agreements, bulk billing arrangements, and managed Wi-Fi, which would negatively impact housing operations and affordability.
NMHC believes the FCC’s rule goes far beyond what was intended by Congress in the Infrastructure and Investment Jobs Act (IIJA). Overly broad and impermissibly vague rules were adopted that risk freezing investment in broadband deployment. This would create a cross purpose and would limit renter access at the same time the federal government is providing historic funding in an attempt to end the digital divide.
With enforcement effective by fall of this year, NMHC and other challengers to this rule are hoping for a swift resolution to these issues.
