Local Officials Warn of AI’s Promise and Peril for Broadband Policy
NEW ORLEANS -- Broadband experts, attorneys and local officials welcomed the use of AI Wednesday at the National Association of Telecom Officers and Advisors' annual conference (see 2508190045) here. Some said it could streamline permitting and speed deployment timelines but warned that federal preemption and lax oversight risk sidelining state and local voices in shaping how the technology changes communications policy.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
Speakers pointed to AI’s potential and improved responsiveness, while also stressing the need for accurate local data to inform decisions. But with Congress and the Trump administration moving to curb state and local regulation, many cautioned that communities could lose control over how AI and broadband policies play out.
AI is "about operating efficiently," said Christian Seidt, the city of Louisville's IT director. "For us, efficiency is how you can automate the process to get there quicker." City governments "take a long time to do something sometimes," he added, so AI can help accelerate broadband deployment.
Seidt noted that AI could be used to analyze applications and provide feedback within minutes. "That's not going to save us any money, but it is going to make us faster as a government in terms of responsiveness." In Louisville, "we're trying to cut out a lot of the misunderstanding of the regulations," he said. The city is currently building generative pre-trained transformers, a type of AI language model, to help its new employees "quickly ask a question about policy or procedure" during their hiring and training.
There's "plenty more" room within government that's "ripe for automation," said Boston Chief Digital Equity Officer Brian Donoghue. Still, concerns were raised about state and local governments' efforts to regulate and implement AI.
The FCC doesn't have the authority to regulate AI, said Rick Ellrod, director of communications policy and regulation for Fairfax County, Virginia. Industry and the FCC have long promulgated a "false narrative" that local governments are "standing in the way of progress," Ellrod said. But industry filings to the FCC don't specify what the actual issues are and what localities are allegedly blocking efforts to deploy broadband with regulations. With the rise of AI and data centers, it's likely "the same thing [will happen] again," he said.
Best Best lawyer Gerry Lederer pointed out that the Trump administration's AI action plan directs OMB to identify and revise or repeal regulations that hinder AI development and orders federal agencies to ensure that AI-related discretionary funding is consistent with the administration's priorities. Lederer also cited an Aug. 8 executive order directing agencies to designate a senior political appointee to review new and existing funding. "I think this executive order opens up the door to every other funding mechanism for every other funding route that folks have," he said.
Local Government Input in Federal Policies Encouraged
Concerns over top-down decision-making fed into a broader discussion about the role of state and local governments in shaping AI and telecom policy. "Have we learned nothing from 150 years of communications regulations?" asked Colantuono Highsmith attorney Jonathan Kramer. "While we are looking at the technology and wanting to see community improvement, we also have to be cognizant of the fact that there are physical effects on our communities."
Andrew Speer, franchise utility manager with the city of Portland, Oregon, said it's frustrating that "we talk in society about being data-driven or being data-informed, [but] I don't often see data used accurately." He emphasized the need for local governments to gather their own data and submit comments to the FCC on proceedings that affect them, such as permitting and rights-of-way. Kramer and Lederer agreed on the importance of having quality data for state and local governments.
Best Best's Cheryl Leanza also encouraged state and local officials to be active in relevant FCC proceedings. The "Delete, Delete, Delete" proceeding uses a direct final rule that is "supposed to be used for mundane issues," Leanza said, but because it can be "used for all kinds of stuff," it "lulls us into a false sense of security." She noted that she has filed protests against the process for several clients already.
Ceilidh Gao, a campaign attorney with the Communications Workers of America, likewise said that "process matters just as much as substance." The direct final rule is "about making it hard to appeal."