94598 pushed back 6 months from Dec to June 2024...

[rpineau]

My status page now says June 2024 .. . . .

[dane]

As far as I know, this is still waiting on City approval. So the new date is just an estimate, until they allow us to proceed we can't make an accurate estimate.

[drbubbles]

Thanks Dane, is that Concord or Walnut Creek city approval (or both?)

[dane]

Thanks Dane, is that Concord or Walnut Creek city approval (or both?)

As far as I know, both are subjecting us to this non-standard process. It's a new experience, we don't have other cities doing this, and it's not part of the CPUC General Order 95 process for aerial construction, so it's thrown a bit of a wrench into the normal process pipeline here for construction of new networks.

[drbubbles]

I've written to City of Concord to find out what is going on. Will try Walnut Creek next.

[drbubbles]

Have there been any successful RBAT Rapid Response Team interventions to get poles replaced? (Rapid Broadband Assessment Team) It sounds almost too good to be true but if it has got results since introduced in December then it could help.

[rpineau]

Mine now says "July 2024" ...
- Ordered 6/16/2022
- "forecasted fiber live date" of December 2023
- moved to June 2024
- I an message above I was told May 2024 (build page also said May 2024 shortly after that)
- nothing happened in May 2024
- Got pushed to June 2024
and now ... July 2024 ... so when July arrives... is it going to move to August... then September ... then 2025 ... then 2026 ...
I mean.. it's "only " been 2 years since I ordered ... so what's 2 more years at this point ...

[drbubbles]

It appears to be an issue with the city of Concord and Walnut Creek refusing / delaying unreasonably the erection of bypass poles, presumably because they are under pressure from the dinosaurs that are fighting to slow down the competition. I've written to them asking for clarification and not received a reply. From what I can understand if this is unreasonable then it is also probably illegal. In December the FCC started a program to attempt to address this sort of thing, but I've not been able to find anything about whether it has met with success anywhere yet. It would be good to get feedback from Dane about whether this program got going at all and whether it applies in our case.

On the other hand, it could be that they are just about to give permission and we all get 10gb fiber in a few weeks, that would be great!

Mine now says August 2024 (I signed up in early 2023, so I haven't been waiting nearly as long as you! Fingers crossed.)

"FCC to Consider ‘Rapid Response Team’ for Pole Attachment Disputes at December Meeting"

https://broadbandbreakfast.com/fcc-adop ... r-meeting/

and:
https://www.fcclawblog.com/2023/12/arti ... expansion/

Edit: it look more complicated, there is pushback against the newly adopted FCC rules. (note: this particular objection is not in CA, it is in a bunch of other states, but I expect there'll be a CA one too)
https://broadbandbreakfast.com/broadban ... ole-rules/
Presumably this is just another delaying tactic.

Dane, does the new FCC RBAT process codified as 47 C.F.R. § 1.1415 apply in this case, i.e., should there be a petition to the RBAT and do we contact them as consumers or is it something that the expanding providers contact them about?

[dane]

Unfortunately California is one of a small number of "reverse preemption" states, where the local state Public Utilities Commission has chosen to take over regulation of utility poles. So, the CPUC would be the venue. And while they've taken up the issues around one-touch make-ready, they haven't issued a ruling that would compel pole owners to fix unsafe poles in a timely way when new attachers such as Sonic come along. This leaves us setting costly (and somewhat unsightly) temporary safety bypass poles, which remain in place until the pole owner fixes the preexisting safety condition.

But clearly, Cities shouldn't be blocking deployment meanwhile. This is the current process, and while it should be improved by the CPUC, blocking broadband deployment isn't the answer. It's certainly your right as a resident there to voice your concern that the City's blocking deployment is impacting you.

If these issues frustrate you, you could make an informal public comment to the CPUC, letting them know that one touch make-ready isn't working as expected, and deployment of fiber broadband to your home is being blocked or delayed as a result.

[drbubbles]

Thanks for the clarification Dane, I'll try that.