HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdopt Resolution No. 2021-11 - Positions on Local, State and ITEMS +8
City of Huntington Beach �T�y
<PEVeSW WO)
File #: 21-101 MEETING DATE: 2/1/2021
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
SUBMITTED TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY: Oliver Chi, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Travis K. Hopkins, Assistant City Manager
Subject:
Consider positions on Local, State and Federal Issues, as recommended by the City Council
Intergovernmental Relations Committee (IRC)
Statement of Issue:
On January 27, 2021, the Intergovernmental Relations Committee (IRC), comprised of Mayor Kim Carr and
Council Member Mike Posey (absent Mayor Pro Tern Tito Ortiz) met to discuss current local, state and federal
issues, with relevance to Huntington Beach. Following discussion, the IRC chose to take positions on three
issues, which are being presented to the City Council for approval.
Financial Impact:
None
Recommended Action:
A) Adopt Resolution No. 2021-11, "A Resolution Expressing Support for Actions that will Further Strengthen
Local Governance and Authority Over Housing-Related Issues in Huntington Beach"; and/or
B) Approve a letter of support for the Federal Communications Commission's Emergency Broadband Benefit
Program; and/or
C) Approve a letter in opposition to oil and gas drilling off Southern California coast through the Bureau of
Ocean Energy Management's National Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program.
Alternative Action(s):
Do not approve one or more recommended actions and direct staff accordingly.
Analysis:
On January 27, 2021, the IRC met to review and discuss local, state and federal issues, with relevance to
Huntington Beach. The following is an analysis of the issues that the Committee chose to take positions on
and are presenting to the City Council for approval:
1. SUPPORT/ADOPT - Resolution No. 21-XXXX -A Resolution of the City Council of the City of
Huntington Beach Expressing Support for Actions that will Further Strengthen Local
Governance and Authority Over Housing-Related Issues in Huntington Beach
Over the past several years, State legislators have proposed numerous housing-related bills that aimed
City of Huntington Beach Page 1 of 3 Printed on 1/27/2021
powere4 LegistarTM
File #: 21-101 MEETING DATE: 2/1/2021
to supersede the authority of local jurisdictions to determine what constitutes appropriate land use
policies and practices for their respective communities. While a majority of housing bills introduced in
the State Legislature were not signed into law in 2020, the City expects that many will be re-introduced
during this new legislative cycle. In anticipation of this development, the IRC recommends that the City
Council adopt this Resolution to highlight their support for actions that strengthen local governance and
authority over land and housing-related issues in Huntington Beach.
2. OPPOSE - Oil and Gas Off-Shore Drilling Through the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management's National
Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program
Under the Trump Administration, the Bureau of Ocean Management released an initial framework in 2018 to
open up oil drilling opportunities and production on the Outer Continental Shelf This program has the potential
to promote drilling off Southern California's coasts, which contribute greatly to the City's tourism economy.
With the transition to the Biden Administration, the program had been put on pause indefinitely, albeit without
any statements to disband the program. As such, the IRC wishes to proactively submit a letter of opposition to
discourage the Biden Administration from continuing this program off Huntington Beach shores in the future.
3. SUPPORT - The Federal Communications Commission's Emergency Broadband Benefit
Program
The Consolidated Appropriations Act, passed in December 2020, established an Emergency
Broadband Connectivity Fund of $3.2 billion to support the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program.
This program will reimburse qualified and participating broadband providers for discounts (up to
$50/month) provided to eligible low-income households and households that experienced a substantial
loss of income due to COVID-19. Households are also eligible to receive a $100 one time discount for
devices procured from the provider during this time. The program's goal is to provide high quality
connectivity to these households during the pandemic. The Federal Communications Commission is
responsible for designing and implementing this program and is currently accepting public comment
from providers and municipalities.
Environmental Status:
Not applicable.
Strategic Plan Goal:
Non-Applicable -Administrative Item
Attachment(s):
1. Resolution No. 2021-11, "A Resolution Expressing Support for Actions that will Further Strengthen
Local Governance and Authority Over Housing-Related Issues in Huntington Beach"
2. Opposition Letter to Oil and Gas Off-Shore Drilling Through the Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management's National Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program
3. FCC Public Notice - Wireline Competition Bureau Seeks Comment on Emergency Broadband
Connectivity Fund Assistance
City of Huntington Beach Page 2 of 3 Printed on 1/27/2021
powere't12§,Legistar-
File #: 21-101 MEETING DATE: 2/1/2021
City of Huntington Beach Page 3 of 3 Printed on 1/27/2021
powerel�gy LegistarTI
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-11
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HUNTINGTON BEACH EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR
ACTIONS THAT WILL FURTHER STRENGTHEN LOCAL
GOVERNANCE AND AUTHORITY OVER HOUSING AND
LAND USE ISSUES IN HUNTINGTON BEACH
WHEREAS,the legislature of the State of California continues to propose a number of bills
addressing a range of housing issues at the local level; and
The majority of these bills propose broad, "one size fits all"policies that undermine the
authority of local governing bodies to determine land use policies and practices that best suit
their communities; and
The State has introduced numerous housing/land use related bills which impose broad
mandates which do not take into account the needs and differences of jurisdictions
throughout the State, and in so doing, imposes a variety of unfunded mandates on local
communities; and
It is of great importance to the City of Huntington Beach that we retain our ability to
determine for ourselves land use and housing related priorities over decisions that include,
but are not limited to, the following: determination of projects that require review beyond a
ministerial approval; identifying the appropriate parking requirements for various locales
within our City boundaries; the housing plans and programs that are suitable and practical for
our community; and other related matters; and
The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach feels strongly that our local
government is the agency that is best suited to assess the needs of our community, and the
City does not support the State's increasing efforts to deprive our City Council of self-
determination with regard to land use and housing matters.
NOW, THEREFORE,the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby
resolve as follows:
We support actions that strengthen local governance and authority over housing and
land use issues in Huntington Beach.
21-9314/243952 1
Resolution No. 2021-11
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the Cif of Huntington Beach at a
regular meeting thereof held on the 1st day of uar 52021.
Mayor
REVIEWED AND APPROVED: INITIATED AND APPROVED:
City Manager Assistant City Manag
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney , W
21-9314/243952 2
Res. No. 2021-11
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss:
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH )
I, ROBIN ESTANISLAU, the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the
City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said City, do
hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of
Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted
by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council
at a Regular meeting thereof held on February 1, 2021 by the following vote:
AYES: Peterson, Kalmick, Ortiz, Carr, Posey, Moser, Delgleize
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
RECUSE: None
City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the
City Council of the City of
Huntington Beach, California
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-11
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON
BEACH EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR ACTIONS THAT WILL FURTHER
STRENGTHEN LOCAL GOVERNANCE AND AUTHORITY OVER HOUSING
AND LAND USE ISSUES IN HUNTINGTON BEACH.
WHEREAS,the legislature of the State of California continues to propose a number of bills addressing a range of
housing issues at the local level; and
WHEREAS,the majority of these bills propose broad,"one size fits all"policies that undermine the authority of
local governing bodies to determine land use policies and practices that best suit their communities; and
WHEREAS, the State has introduced numerous housing/land use related bills which impose broad mandates
which do not take into account the needs and differences of jurisdictions throughout the State, and in so doing,
imposes a variety of unfunded mandates on local communities; and
WHEREAS, it is of great importance to the City of Huntington Beach that we retain our ability to determine for
ourselves land use and housing related priorities over decisions that include,but are not limited to,the following:
determination of projects that require review beyond a ministerial approval; identifying the appropriate parking
requirements for various locales within our City boundaries; the housing plans and programs that are suitable and
practical for our community; and other related matters; and
WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach feels strongly that our local government is the
agency that is best suited to assess the needs of our community, and the City does not support the State's increasing
efforts to deprive our City Council of self-determination with regard to land use and housing matters.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby resolve as follows:
We support actions that strengthen local governance and authority over housing and land use issues in
Huntington Beach.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof
held on the day of ,2020.
Mayor
REVIEWED AND APPROVED INITIATED AND APPROVED:
City Manager Assistant City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM
City Attorney
128
January XX, 2021
Walter Cruickshank, Ph.D.
Acting Director
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
1849 C Street, NW
Washington, DC 20240
Dear Acting Director Cruickshank:
On behalf of the City of Huntington Beach, we would like to express our opposition to opening up
oil and gas drilling off the Southern California coast through the Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management's proposed National Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Oil and Gas Leasing Program.
We applaud the recent Biden Administration action to pause new leases for offshore drilling, and
urge that more consideration be given to local needs in areas surrounding proposed oil drilling.
The City of Huntington Beach values our ocean waters and coastline, which provide habitat to an
array of wildlife including marine mammals, birds, and fish. Our ocean and beaches also help
attract millions of annual visitors to the City for recreation, entertainment, and relaxation. Our local
economy is dependent on coastal tourism and the health of our marine ecosystem.
While we are heartened by the current pause on new offshore drilling leases, we are concerned
that any reconsideration of lease sales off the Southern California coast in the future would put
these coastal resources at risk of oil spills and further damage. Previous offshore oil and gas
leasing off the California coast has resulted in oil spills that caused environmental devastation
and hurt localities dependent on coastal tourism.
If offshore drilling should return, we propose that the Southern California region receive the same
waiver to exempt additional lease sales as the State of Florida received from the previous
administration. Previously, the State of Florida was removed from consideration in the Bureau's
draft proposal due to the state's reliance on coastal tourism. We request that any federal actions
be consistent in this nature, and request that our coastline should also be exempt from any new
oil or gas leasing if the proposed program should be revisited.
As the Bureau pauses its new National OCS Program, we urge you to take the time allotted to
work with coastal communities like the City of Huntington Beach to develop a national energy
strategy that does not jeopardize the wellbeing of our local economies and the protection of our
marine ecosystem. Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
Kim Carr
Mayor
City of Huntington Beach, California
Cc: Senator Dianne Feinstein
Senator Alex Padilla
Representative Michelle Steel
129
�HGa T/dry
� S
O
Wy�;
USP
PUBLIC NOTICE
Federal Communications Commission
45 L Street, NE News Media Information 202/418-0500
Internet: https://www.fcc.gov
Washington, D.C. 20554 TTY: 1-888-835-5322
DA 21-6
Released: January 4, 2021
WIRELINE COMPETITION BUREAU SEEKS COMMENT ON EMERGENCY
BROADBAND CONNECTIVITY FUND ASSISTANCE
WC Docket No. 20-445
Comments Due: January 25,2021
Reply Comments Due: February 16,2021
On December 27, 2020,the President signed the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021
(Consolidated Appropriations Actor Act).' Section 904 of Division N—Additional Coronavirus
Response and Relief, Title IX—Broadband Internet Access Service, in the Consolidated Appropriations
Act establishes an Emergency Broadband Connectivity Fund of$3.2 billion and directs the Federal
Communications Commission (Commission)to use that fund to establish an Emergency Broadband
Benefit Program, under which eligible households may receive a discount off the cost of broadband
service and certain connected devices during an emergency period relating to the COVID-19 pandemic,
and participating providers can receive a reimbursement for such discounts.2 The Act also directs the
Commission to provide a public comment period of 20 days and a public reply comment period of 20
days before establishing the rules for this program.' By this public notice,the Wireline Competition
Bureau(Bureau) seeks comment on the provision of assistance from the Emergency Broadband
Connectivity Fund and through the Emergency Benefit Program and other related matters, consistent with
the Congressional directive.
Emergency Broadband Benefit Program. Pursuant to the Consolidated Appropriations Act,the
Emergency Broadband Benefit Program will use available funding from the Emergency Broadband
Connectivity Fund to support participating providers' provision of certain broadband services and
connected devices to qualifying households. To participate in the program, a provider must elect to
participate and either be designated as an eligible telecommunications carrier or be approved by the
Commission.4 Participating providers will make available to eligible households a monthly discount off
the standard rate for an Internet service offering and associated equipment,up to $50.00 per month. On
Tribal lands,the monthly discount may be up to $75.00 per months Participating providers will receive
reimbursement from the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program for the discounts provided.
Participating providers that also supply an eligible household with a laptop, desktop computer, or tablet
' Consolidated Appropriations Act,2021,H.R. 133, 116th Cong.(2020)(enacted),available at
https://w,NN�v.conaress.Qov/bill/1 l6th-conUess/house-bill/l33/text(Consolidated Appropriations Act)(enrolled bill).
2 Consolidated Appropriations Act,2021,H.R. 133,div.N,tit.IX, §904(b)(1)(2020). Section 904 of the Act is
reproduced in its entirety in the attached Appendix.
3 See id. § 904(c)(2).
4Id. § 904(a)(12), (d)(2).
SId. §904(a)(7).
130
Federal Communications Commission DA 21-6
(connected device) for use during the emergency period may receive a single reimbursement of up to
$100.00 for the connected device, if the charge to the eligible household for that device is more than
$10.00 but less than $50.00. An eligible household may receive only one supported device.6 Providers
must submit certain certifications to the Commission to receive reimbursement from the program,' and
the Commission is required to adopt audit requirements to ensure provider compliance and prevent waste,
fraud, and abuse.$
In implementing the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program,the Consolidated Appropriations
Act permits the Commission to apply rules contained in part 54 of the Commission's rules,9 exempts the
Commission from certain rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act and the
Paperwork Reduction Act,10 and grants the Commission authority to use the services of the Universal
Service Administrative Company (USAC)to implement the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program.]]
USAC is an independent, not-for-profit corporation designated as the permanent administrator of the
Universal Service Fund by the Commission.12 We propose to use USAC's services to administer the
Emergency Broadband Benefit Program, as described in detail below.
Participating Providers. We first seek comment on the eligibility and election process for
participating providers. Eligible telecommunications carriers designated pursuant to section 214(e) of the
Communications Act may participate in the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program without seeking
approval from the Commission. Providers that are not designated as eligible telecommunications carriers
must meet the requirements established by and be approved by the Commission to participate in the
Emergency Broadband Benefit Program. The Commission is required to establish an expedited process
for such approval and"to automatically approve as a participating provider a broadband provider that has
an established program as of April 1, 2020, that is widely available and offers internet service offerings to
eligible households and maintains verification processes that are sufficient to avoid fraud,waste, and
abuse."13 Participation in the program is voluntary, and a provider must affirmatively"elect"to
participate.14
We propose to require all providers that wish to participate in the Emergency Broadband Benefit
Program to submit a notice to USAC indicating their election. We propose that such notice indicate, at
least: (1)the states in which it plans to participate, (2) a statement that, in each such state, it was a
"broadband provider"within the meaning of the Consolidated Appropriations Act as of December 1,
2020, (3)whether it seeks to participate in each state because it is either a designated eligible
telecommunications carrier or is seeking designation by the Commission to participate(or both),
(4)whether the provider intends to distribute connected devices in each such state, (5) a description of
any Internet service offerings for which it plans to seek reimbursement in each state, and
(6) documentation demonstrating the standard rates for the services for which it may claim reimbursement
6Id. § 904(b)(5).
Id § 904(b)(6).
I Id. § 904(b)(7).
9 See id. § 904(f).
"See id. §904(h)(establishing that 5 U.S.C. § 553 shall not apply to a regulation promulgated under§ 904(c)or a
rulemaking proceeding to promulgate such a regulation and that a collection of information conducted or sponsored
under the regulations required by §904(c)shall not constitute a collection of information for the purposes of 44
U.S.C. §§3501-3531).
u Id. §904(i)(5).
12 See 47 CFR§§ 54.701 et seq.
13 H.R. 133,div.N,tit.IX §904(d)(2).
14Id. §904(a)(12)(B).
2
131
Federal Communications Commission DA 21-6
from the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program. We expect this information will facilitate USAC's
timely processing of election notices as well as administration of the program. We seek comment on this
proposal. What other information is necessary in the notice of election to ensure efficient processing of
qualifying providers?
The Consolidated Appropriations Act only offers an Emergency Broadband Benefit for an
Internet service offering,15 which the statute defines as a"broadband internet access service provided by
[a broadband] provider to a household, offered in the same manner, and on the same terms, as described
in any of such provider's offerings for broadband internet access service to such household, as on
December 1, 2020."16 Similarly,the Consolidated Appropriations Act limits the Emergency Broadband
Benefit to be"no more than the standard rate" for an Internet service offering(and associated
equipment),17 which it defines as "the monthly retail rate for the applicable tier of broadband internet
access service as of December 1, 2020, excluding any taxes or other governmental fees."18 To avoid
processing elections for providers that cannot receive any reimbursement, we construe the statute as
limiting participation to broadband providers offering service as of December 1, 2020. Similarly, we
believe the submission of documentation demonstrating the standard rates for the services for which a
provider may claim reimbursement from the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program will allow USAC to
more quickly verify that a broadband provider does in fact qualify to participate and will facilitate the
processing of claims. We seek comment on these views.
What is the most efficient method for having participating providers submit this standard rate
information? We also seek comment on how the Commission should interpret the"standard rate" for
supported offerings. For example, how should we address promotional rates that were offered by a
participating provider as of December 1, 2020? How should we address contract rates (of varying
lengths) in determining the standard rate? We note that an Internet service offering is limited to those
"offered in the same manner, and on the same terms, as described in any of such provider's offerings for
broadband internet access service to such household";19 how should we interpret that limitation? For
example,what documentation would show that a service at a particular rate was actually offered in a
particular state? Should we require documentation demonstrating that a certain number or percentage of
the providers' subscribers had purchased service at that rate prior to the creation of the Emergency
Broadband Benefit Program? If the standard rates for Internet access service plans offered by the
provider are not uniform across all areas it serves,we propose that the provider specify the standard rates
for such plans for each area of each state in which it plans to participate and provide supporting
documentation. In the event that the provider's standard rates are uniform across the areas it serves, we
propose that the provider submit supporting documentation for those rates.
A participating provider will be required to interact with both the Commission and USAC to
participate in the program. As such, we expect that a broadband provider will have already registered
with the Commission and USAC and received both an FCC Registration Number and a Service Provider
Identification Number before filing an election notice. And we propose that a provider will include this
information in its election notice. We seek comment on this proposal.
We propose to accept elections on a rolling basis throughout the Emergency Broadband Benefit
Program. Should the Commission adopt a specific timeframe for acting on provider elections? Once
USAC has reviewed an election notice and verified the broadband provider is eligible to participate,how
should it inform applicants of that determination? Should such a determination apply only prospectively,
s Id. § 904(a)(7).
6 Id. §904(a)(9).
17 Id. §904(b)(6)(A).
18Id. §904(a)(13).
19 Id. § 904(a)(9).
3
132
Federal Communications Commission DA 21-6
or be effective as of the date the election notice was properly and completely filed? What information
should USAC disclose to the public about election notices as well as its determinations?
The Consolidated Appropriations Act provides that the Commission"shall expedite the ability of
all participating providers to access the Lifeline National Eligibility Verifier(National Verifier) and
National Lifeline Accountability Database for the purposes of determining whether a household is an
eligible household.1120 We propose that all participating providers be required to have their agents and
other enrollment representatives registered with the Representative Accountability Database, as
previously recommended by the Office of the Inspector General for the Lifeline program, as a best
practice to minimize waste, fraud, and abuse. Should participating providers be subject to any other
Commission regulations or USAC requirements for those databases? Are there any regulations or
requirements of those systems that should not apply to participating providers? Commenters,however,
should take into consideration that such systems must comply with applicable federal requirements on
information privacy and information security. To access the databases,participating providers will be
required to accept USAC's OnePortal Terms and Conditions, agreeing that their access is conditioned on
their compliance with federal laws regarding privacy, data security, and breach notification. We propose
that once USAC has verified a broadband provider's election notice, it should expeditiously process and
prioritize registrations from such providers and take any other steps needed to facilitate access by
participating providers to these databases.
Designating Broadband Providers Where They Are Not Eligible Telecommunications Carriers.
For a broadband provider that is not designated as an eligible telecommunications carrier in a particular
area to participate in the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program, it must"meet[] requirements
established by the Commission . . . and [be] approved by the Commission.1121 The Consolidated
Appropriations Act requires the Commission to adopt an "expedited"process to approve such broadband
providers,22 and further requires the Commission to "automatically approve" a broadband provider that
has an "established program" as of April 1, 2020,that is "widely available" and offers internet service
offerings to eligible households and"maintains verification processes that are sufficient to avoid fraud,
waste, and abuse.1123 We seek comment on how these terms should be interpreted.
We seek comment on how the Commission should implement these provisions. Although the
Commission cannot require a broadband provider to become an eligible telecommunications carrier to
participate,24 we do draw on our experience with the Lifeline program to propose two"requirements."
First, we propose that any broadband provider seeking to participate make the Emergency Broadband
Benefit available across all of its service areas in each of the states in which it is approved to participate.21
We seek comment on this proposal and on our authority for such a requirement. Second,we propose that
broadband providers adopt a plan to combat waste, fraud, and abuse similar to the compliance plans
required of non-facilities-based carriers seeking approval to participate in the Lifeline program.26 We
seek comment on this proposal. Should the Commission require that compliance plans be approved
before a provider may begin participating in the program, and how should the Commission balance the
20Id. §904(b)(3).
21Id. §904(a)(12)(A)(ii).
22 Id. §904(d)(2)(A).
231d. §904(d)(2)(B)•
24Id. §904(a)(12)(B).
21 For a broadband provider that is designated as an eligible telecommunications carrier in some parts of a state but
not others,this would include all such areas where it is not so designated.
26 See Wireline Competition Bureau Provides Guidance for the Submission of Compliance Plans Pursuant to the
Lifeline Reform Order,Public Notice,27 FCC Red 2186(WCB Feb. 29,2012).
4
133
Federal Communications Commission DA 21-6
need to ensure that participating providers are equipped to comply with program rules against the Act's
requirement that the Commission establish an expedited approval process?27
We propose to require broadband providers that wish to participate in the Emergency Broadband
Benefit Program in areas where they are not designated as eligible telecommunications carriers to submit
an application to the Commission. We propose that such an application may be submitted concurrently
with an election notice to USAC. We propose that such notice indicate, at least: (1)the states in which it
plans to participate, (2)the service areas in which the provider has the authority, if needed,to operate in
each state but has not been designated an eligible telecommunications carrier, (3) documentation of the
provider's plan to combat waste, fraud, and abuse, (4)whether it seeks automatic approval because it
offers an established program in each state, and(5) if seeking such automatic approval, documentation
that the broadband provider has a qualifying established program in such states. We expect that a
broadband provider will have already registered with the Commission and received an FCC Registration
Number before filing such an application, and we propose that the provider must include such number
with its application. We expect this information will facilitate the Commission's timely processing of
applications to participate as well as administer the program. We seek comment on this proposal. What
other information is necessary in the application to ensure efficient processing of qualified applicants?
We seek specific comment on the processing of applications seeking automatic approval in one or
more states. Should the Commission prioritize review of such applications before all others? Should the
Commission immediately approve an application to the extent it seeks automatic approval, subject to later
verification and potential revocation? If so, we propose that the Commission should complete any such
verification before any payments are made to such an applicant. Or should the Commission verify that an
applicant qualifies for automatic approval before issuing an approval? In that case, should the
Commission make such approval effective as of the date of the application's proper filing? What
showing must an applicant make to demonstrate it had a qualifying established plan? At a minimum,we
expect the provider to explain the eligibility criteria and other pertinent information about a provider's
existing low-income or COVID-19 program28 including with specificity that it was"widely available" "as
of April 1, 2020.1129 How should the Commission assess such filings? Should the Commission pay
special attention to established programs that target groups vulnerable during the pandemic, such as low-
income households,Americans living in rural or Tribal areas, communities of color, students, veterans, or
the newly unemployed? Should a complete and sufficient plan to combat waste, fraud, and abuse (as
required for all applicants) suffice to show that an established plan"maintains verification processes that
are sufficient to avoid fraud,waste, and abuse" or must an applicant make a separate showing on that
point? If the latter, what documentation should be required of such applicants?
We propose to accept applications on a rolling basis throughout the Emergency Broadband
Benefit Program. Should the Commission delegate to the Wireline Competition Bureau authority to
review and approve(or deny) applications? Should the Commission adopt a specific timeframe for acting
on provider applications? Once the Commission has reviewed an application and approved(or denied) an
application,how should it inform applicants of that determination? What information should the
Commission disclose to the public about applications as well as its determinations?
Tracking and Verifying Household Eligibility. The Consolidated Appropriations Act defines the
Emergency Broadband Benefit as "a monthly discount for an eligible household applied to the actual
amount charged to such household" with certain monetary limits on how much is available per
household.30 In addition, a"participating provider may receive reimbursement for no more than 1
21 H.R. 133,div.N,tit.IX §904(d)(2).
28 Id. §904(a)(6)(E).
29Id. §904(d)(2)(B).
31 Id. §904(a)(7).
5
134
Federal Communications Commission DA 21-6
connected device per eligible household."31 We note that a household that is eligible for the Emergency
Broadband Benefit is not disqualified by participating in the Lifeline program and also may receive both
benefits, either on the same or different services.32
The Consolidated Appropriations Act refers to"eligible households,133 but does not define
"household." We seek comment on using the definition of"household"provided in our Lifeline rules34
for purposes of administering the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program.
To track the eligibility of households and prevent duplicative support,we propose to require all
participating providers to track enrollments of eligible households in the Emergency Broadband Benefit
Program in the National Lifeline Accountability Database. This proposal would require that the National
Lifeline Accountability Database be able to associate a subscriber record with up to two providers—one
Lifeline provider and one Emergency Broadband Benefit provider. Should the Commission apply the
same processes used for Lifeline participation in the National Lifeline Accountability Database to the
Emergency Broadband Benefit Program?35 Where two or more subscribers reside at the same address,
should the Commission require the subscriber to certify that no other person in the subscriber's economic
household is receiving a benefit through the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program?36 Should there be a
limitation on the number of benefits per address regardless of the number of households at that address?
Should additional enrollments at a single residential address require a separate,more rigorous verification
process? Should eligible households be allowed to receive more than one connected device through the
Emergency Broadband Benefit Program, for example, if they change service to a new participating
provider? We seek comment on how to identify and prevent duplicative support.
We next seek comment on the verification of eligibility for households. A household may qualify
for the Emergency Broadband Benefit if at least one member of the household: (1)meets the
qualifications for participation in the Lifeline program;37(2)has been approved to receive benefits under
the free and reduced price lunch program under the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act38 or
the school breakfast program under section 4 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966;39(3)has experienced a
substantial loss of income since February 29, 2020;40(4)has received a Federal Pell Grant under section
" See id. § 904(b)(5).
32 See id. §904(e)("Nothing in this section shall affect the collection,distribution,or administration of the Lifeline
Assistance Program. . . ."). If a household is applying their Lifeline benefit and Emergency Broadband Benefit to
the same broadband service,the household is limited to receiving the total price of the service or the combined
maximum Lifeline and Emergency Broadband Benefit,whichever is lower.
33 Id. §904(a)(6).
34 See 47 CFR§ 54.400(h)("A `household' is any individual or group of individuals who are living together at the
same address as one economic unit. A household may include related and unrelated persons.An`economic unit'
consists of all adult individuals contributing to and sharing in the income and expenses of a household.An adult is
any person eighteen years or older. If an adult has no or minimal income, and lives with someone who provides
financial support to him/her,both people shall be considered part of the same household. Children under the age of
eighteen living with their parents or guardians are considered to be part of the same household as their parents or
guardians.").
3s See 47 CFR § 54.404(b)-(c).
36 See 47 CFR§ 54.410(g).
37 47 CFR§ 54.409(a)-(b).
38 See 42 U.S.C. § 1751 et seq.
39 See 42 U.S.C. § 1773.
40 H.R. 133,div.N,tit. IX §904(a)(6)(C)(income loss must be"documented by layoff or furlough notice,
application for unemployment insurance benefits,or similar. . ."). We seek comment on how to define a
(continued....)
6
135
Federal Communications Commission DA 21-6
401 of the Higher Education Act of 196541 in the current award year; or(5)meets the eligibility criteria
for a participating provider's existing low-income or COVID-19 program, subject to approval by the
Commission and any other requirements deemed by the Commission to be necessary in the public
interest.42 Participating providers may not disqualify a household because a"member of the household
has any past or present arrearages with a broadband provider."43
Participating providers must verify the eligibility of a household for the Emergency Broadband
Benefit either by: (1) directing applicants to the National Verifier and the National Lifeline
Accountability Database, (2)relying on a school to verify participation in the free and reduced price lunch
program or the school breakfast program, or(3) using the provider's eligibility verification process if such
process is approved by the Commission.44
First, for providers that seek to use the National Verifier and National Lifeline Accountability
Database, we propose to require eligible households to directly interact with the National Verifier to apply
for the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program, as is currently required for the Lifeline benefit.
Second, for providers that rely on a school to verify eligibility based on participation of a member
of the household in the free and reduced price lunch program or the school breakfast program'41 we
propose that a provider identify the school it relied on when enrolling a household in the National Lifeline
Accountability Database. What information should such a provider be required to submit or maintain in
such a case? For example, should the information submitted about the school be sufficient for USAC to
verify that the school is in fact enrolled in that the free and reduced price lunch program under the
Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act(42 U.S.C. § 1751 et seq.) or the school breakfast program
under section 4 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. § 1773)? Would a school's participation in
the E-Rate program facilitate any needed verification? Should the Commission require the provider to
submit or document the name of qualifying student(s) (with express parental consent, if necessary) so that
enrollment can be confirmed?46 The USDA Community Eligibility Provision allows the nation's highest
poverty schools and districts to serve breakfast and lunch at no cost to all enrolled students without
collecting household applications, thereby effectively qualifying the entire school or school district for
these programs. In those schools,the household has not individually applied and been approved for
benefits under the programs identified in section 904(a)(6)(B). We seek comment on how households
with students in these Community Eligibility Provision schools should be considered eligible households
for the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program. More broadly,how can the Commission facilitate the
ability of schools to connect with their students for the purposes of remote learning?
Third, for providers that use their own alternative verification process,41 we propose that a
provider identify the process used when enrolling a household in the National Lifeline Accountability
Database. In order to use such a process, a participating provider must submit information detailing the
verification process to the Commission and explain why that process is sufficient to avoid waste, fraud,
and abuse. The Commission shall then determine within seven days of receipt of the information whether
"substantial loss of income since February 29, 2020"and additional types of documentation that would demonstrate
such a loss. Id. Should households with an income currently above a certain level be excluded from the program
even if they have experienced a substantial loss of income? If so,how should that level be defined?
41 See 20 U.S.C. § 1070a.
42 H.R. 133,div.N.tit.IX §904(a)(6).
43 Id. §904(a)(6).
44 Id. §904(b)(2).
41 Id. § 904(b)(2)(C).
46 See 47 CFR§ 54.409(a)(2)(permitting a consumer's dependent to qualify the household).
41 H.R. 133, div.N,tit.IX § 904(b)(2)(B).
7
136
Federal Communications Commission DA 21-6
the proposed process is sufficient. What information should be provided to the Commission?48 We
propose to allow alternative verification methods that are at least as stringent as the methods used by the
National Verifier. What criteria should the Commission consider in determining whether a provider's
proposal is sufficient to avoid waste, fraud, and abuse in the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program?49
We propose to periodically review the alternative process to determine whether the participating provider
is abiding by the representations it has made about this process. What other measures should the
Commission take both before and after an alternative verification process has been approved to avoid
waste, fraud, and abuse? What documentation and records should providers be required to keep to allow
the Commission and Office of Inspector General to audit the providers' eligibility determinations?
Should the Commission delegate to the Wireline Competition Bureau authority to review and approve(or
deny)proposed alternative verification processes?
Covered Services and Devices. The Consolidated Appropriations Act defines"internet service
offering"50 and defines "broadband Internet access service"as eligible for reimbursement with the
meaning given to that term in section 8.1(b) of the Commission's rules.51 We seek comment on whether
the Commission should provide any further clarity regarding services that are eligible for reimbursement
in the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program. We seek comment on whether the Commission should
provide any further clarity on Internet service offerings and associated equipment52 that are eligible for
reimbursement in the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program. Would associated equipment include, for
example, the monthly rental costs for modems and/or routers that are offered as part and parcel of an
Internet service offering? Is there other customer-premises equipment that should be eligible for
reimbursement?
The Consolidated Appropriations Act defines a"connected device" eligible for reimbursement as
"a laptop or desktop computer or tablet."53 We seek comment on whether the Commission should
provide any further clarity regarding devices that are eligible for reimbursement in the Emergency
Broadband Benefit Program. In particular, is there a commonly understood definition of tablet to ensure
that the available funds are directed toward their intended purpose? Alternatively, are there end user
devices, such as mobile phones,that plainly are excluded as a connected device in the program? How
would we distinguish between smaller tablets and larger mobile phones?
We recognize that as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, Americans are continuing to rely on
telework, telemedicine, and virtual learning in order to comply with social distancing measures.54
Participating in these activities requires not only a broadband connection but also a device that can
support video conferencing platforms,particularly for households with students. Because the Act
provides that a member of a household that participates in the free and reduced price lunch or the school
breakfast programs, or is the recipient of a Pell grant in the current award year qualifies a household for
48Id. §904(b)(2)(B).
49 See GAO-15-593SP,A Framework for Managing Fraud Risks in Federal Programs(2015);see also Payment
Integrity Information Act of 2019,Pub.L.No. 116-117, 134 Stat. 133 (Mar.2,2020);GAO-14-704G(2014),
Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government(2014).
50 H.R. 133,div.N,tit. IX § 904(a)(9).
51 See id. §904(a)(1)(citing 47 CFR§ 8.1(b)).
52 See id. §904(a)(7).
53 See id. §904(a)(4).
54 See Lifeline and Link Up Reform and Modernization,Order,35 FCC Red 2729(WCB Mar. 17,2020)
(temporarily waiving Lifeline recertification and reverification requirements);Lifeline and Link Up Reform and
Modernization,Order, 35 FCC Red 2954(WCB Nov. 16,2020)(extending waiver of Lifeline recertification and
reverification requirements to February 28,2021).
8
137
Federal Communications Commission DA 21-6
participation in the program,55 we conclude that the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program is, in part,
designed to ensure that program beneficiaries are able to meaningfully access and participate in remote
learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. To ensure that eligible households with students are able to use
their benefit to participate in such activities,we propose that a connected device provided through the
Emergency Broadband Benefit Program should be expected to support video conferencing platforms and
other software essential to ensure full participation in online learning. We seek comment on whether the
Commission should impose minimum system requirements for connected devices supported by this
program and, if so,what those system requirements should be.
Reimbursement. We propose to provide reimbursement for discounted services and connected
devices provided once a provider has elected to participate in the Emergency Broadband Benefit
Program.56 We propose that participating providers be reimbursed through the Lifeline Claims System
administered by USAC, and subject to all the requirements of the Lifeline Claims Systems' In
submitting claims, we propose the providers include sufficient detail so that USAC and the Commission
can verify that each claimed household has been appropriately enrolled in the National Lifeline
Accountability Database and that the discount does not exceed the standard rate for the applicable service
tier(or$100 for a connected device). Such information would facilitate the swift verification that claims
are valid and meet the requirements of the statute.58 We seek comment on these proposals.
The Consolidated Appropriations Act also requires that a participating provider,when seeking
reimbursement, submit a certification that: the amounts they are seeking are not more than the standard
rate;59 each household for which the provider is seeking reimbursements will not be charged for an
offering if the standard rate is less than or equal to the broadband benefit or will not be charged more than
the difference between the standard rate and the broadband benefit;60 the household will not be charged an
early termination fee if it later terminates a contract;6' each household was not subject to a mandatory
waiting period;6' and each household will be subject to a participating provider's generally applicable
terms and conditions.63 We propose that these certifications accompany each request for reimbursement,
in addition to an annual certification by participating providers. We propose to require each certification
be submitted under penalty of perjury. What other certifications should be added as a prerequisite to
reimbursement?
We seek comment whether a participating provider should be required to submit additional
documentation to receive reimbursement for a connected device provided to the household. The
"H.R. 133,div.N,tit. IX §904(b)(6)(B)&(D).
56 We note that the Consolidated Appropriations Act established the Emergency Broadband Connectivity Fund in
the United States Treasury and,unless exempted,the fund is subject to government-wide statutes governing the
administration of federal funds. See, e.g.,31 U.S.C. §3301 et seq.
57 Wireline Competition Bureau Provides Guidance on the Lifeline Reimbursement Payment Process Based on
NLAD Data,Public Notice,33 FCC Red 128 (WCB Jan. 10,2018). Providers are required to submit a
reimbursement request based on the number of subscribers enrolled in National Lifeline Accountability Database on
the snapshot date. Providers must review the snapshot report,validate the subscribers for which they are requesting
reimbursement,indicate a reason for any unclaimed subscribers, and review,correct,and certify the requested
reimbursement amount. Further information on the Lifeline Claims System can be found on USAC's website at
Iittps://wNN,�v.usac.org/lifeline/reimbursement/lifeline-claims-s sy tem .
Ss H.R. 133,div.N,tit. IX§904(b)(4)-(5).
59 Id. § 904(b)(6)(A).
61 Id. §904(b)(6)(B)(i).
61 Id. §904(b)(6)(B)(ii).
62Id. §904(b)(6)(B)(iii).
61 Id. §904(b)(6)(B)(iv).
9
138
Federal Communications Commission DA 21-6
Consolidated Appropriations Act requires the eligible household to make a financial contribution between
$10 and$50 to the cost of the connected device in order for the participating provider to receive
reimbursement. In order to receive reimbursement for a connected device, we propose to require that a
participating provider certify that the household receiving the device has received the emergency
broadband benefit from the provider and has made a financial contribution between $10 and$50 for such
a device.64 We also propose that such providers retain documentation proving that the eligible household
made a financial contribution towards the cost of the connected device, as well as the amount thereof.65
Finally,the Consolidated Appropriations Act permits reimbursement of up to $100 for the
connected device but does not limit such reimbursement to a"standard rate" as it does for Internet service
offerings. Should the Commission also require a participating provider to demonstrate the retail value or
the costs of connected devices to prevent waste?
Benefits for those on Tribal lands. The Act provides that eligible households on Tribal lands may
receive a discount of no more than $75 for Internet access service provided through this benefit.66 For
efficiency, we propose to use the same definition of Tribal lands as used in the Lifeline program,67 and to
allow members of households on such Tribal lands to use their participation in the same Tribal programs
permitted under the Lifeline program to qualify for the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program, in
addition to other permitted means of qualifying.68 Moreover, for purposes of determining whether a
household resides on Tribal lands,we propose using the processes USAC has in place for identifying the
location of a consumer's residence within the Lifeline program.
We seek comment on applying the definition of Tribal lands and using existing USAC processes
for verifying that an eligible household lives on Tribal lands and is therefore eligible to receive the
increased monthly discount. Moreover,we seek comment on our proposal to rely on a household's
participation in the Tribal-specific assistance programs. Are there other accommodations the
Commission should consider to ensure that eligible households on Tribal lands and the providers that
serve them are able to participate in the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program?
Promoting Awareness. We next seek comment on the best methods to publicize the availability
of the services and connected devices supported by the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program. Should
participating providers have any obligation under the program's rules to publicize the availability of the
benefit? What are the most effective means of publicizing this benefit to the communities most in need?
We seek comment on this idea and on best practices employed by providers with existing low-income
broadband plans to reach low-income households. We also seek comment on whether the Commission or
USAC should also take steps to publicize the program to supplement the outreach of the participating
providers. Should USAC conduct outreach to current Lifeline subscribers? What outreach activities
641d § 904(b)(5), (6)(C).
65 Id. § 904(b)(6)(C).
66 Id §904(a)(7).
67 Tribal lands include"any federally recognized Indian tribe's reservation,pueblo,or colony,including former
reservations in Oklahoma;Alaska Native regions established pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act
(85 Stat. 688);Indian allotments;Hawaiian Home Lands-areas held in trust for Native Hawaiians by the state of
Hawaii,pursuant to the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920 July 9, 1921,42 Stat. 108,et. seq.,as amended;
and any land designated as such by the Commission for purposes of this subpart pursuant to the designation process
in§ 54.412." 47 CFR§ 54.400(e).
1147 CFR § 54.409(b). A consumer residing on Tribal lands can qualify for Lifeline if they participate,a dependent
or someone else in their household participates in certain in Tribal-specific assistance programs,including:Bureau
of Indian Affairs general assistance;Tribally administered Temporary Assistance for Needy Families;Head Start
(only those households meeting its income qualifying standard);or the Food Distribution Program on Indian
Reservations.
10
139
Federal Communications Commission DA 21-6
conducted by the Commission or USAC would most effectively promote awareness among potentially
eligible households?
Finally, we seek comment on using other civic entities to publicize the availability of these funds.
Are there measures schools, libraries and other local institutions can take to encourage participation in
this program? Should the Commission or USAC promote the availability of these funds to other
universal service program participants? We seek comment on these ideas in an effort to identify the most
efficient way to broadcast the awareness of this program to potential recipients.
Auditing. The Consolidated Appropriations Act provides that the Commission shall adopt audit
requirements to ensure that participating providers are in compliance with the program requirements and
to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse in the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program.69 Moreover,within one
year of the date of the enactment of the Act,the Commission's Office of Inspector General must conduct
an audit of the disbursements made to a representative sample of participating providers.70
We seek comment on the audit requirements the Commission should impose on providers
participating in the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program. We propose to direct USAC to conduct
audits, in addition to any audits conducted by the Commission's Office of Inspector General. Should the
Commission use the same or similar audit procedures currently used for Lifeline providers to audit
compliance with the rules of the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program? What documentation should
the Commission require participating providers to retain to permit auditors to assess compliance with the
program rules? What documentation retention policies should the Commission place on providers? How
long should participating providers retain documentation after the end of the program? We propose
implementing the same documentation requirements as are in the Lifeline program, including a
requirement that participating providers retain records for as long as the subscriber receives support from
the Emergency Broadband Connectivity Fund, but no less than the three full preceding calendar years,
and to provide that documentation to the Commission or USAC upon request.71 We seek comment on
that proposal as well as whether the Commission needs to add any other documentation retention
requirements. What steps should the Commission take, and what guidance should the Commission
provide USAC with,to ensure integrity in the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program during the duration
of the program?
Enforcement. We next seek comment on the ability of the Commission to impose administrative
forfeitures and other penalties on program participants found to be in violation of the program rules and
requirements. The Consolidated Appropriations Act declares that a violation of this section or any
regulation promulgated under this section "shall be treated as a violation of the Communications Act of
1934 or a regulation promulgated under such Act.1172 Moreover,the Commission is compelled to enforce
this section and the associated regulations "in the same manner,by the same means, and with the same
jurisdiction,powers, and duties as though all applicable terms and provisions of the Communications Act
69 H.R. 133,div.N,tit.IX §904(b)(7). The Act also specifies that a finding of waste,fraud,abuse,or an improper
payment(as such tern is defined in section 2(d)of the Improper Payments Information Act of 2002(31 U.S.C. §
3321 note))"identify a)the participating provider;b)the amount of funding disbursed to the participating provider;
c)the amount of disbursements identified as an improper payment;d)the extent to which the funding identified as
an improper payment was reimbursement for a connected device or reimbursement for an internet service offering;
e)whether,in the case of a connected device, such device, or the value thereof,has been recovered; f)whether funds
from the Emergency Broadband Connectivity Fund were made available by the participating provider to a person
outside of the eligible household;and g)whether any funds from the Emergency Broadband Connectivity Fund were
made available to reimburse a participating provider for an emergency broadband benefit made available to an
eligible household in which all members of such household necessary to satisfy the eligibility requirements
described in subsection(a)(6)were deceased. Id.
70 Id. § 904(b)(8).
71 See 47 CFR§ 54.417(a).
72 H.R. 133,div.N,tit.IX § 904(g).
11
140
Federal Communications Commission DA 21-6
of 1934 were incorporated into and made a part of this section.1173 Consistent with this statutory direction,
we propose to use the Commission's existing, statutorily permitted enforcement powers to, for example,
initiate investigations and impose administrative forfeitures. We also propose to withhold program funds
from participants found to be in violation of the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program rules. We seek
comment on these proposals. Should we also withhold program funding from participants found to be in
violation of other Commission rules,particularly those Commission rules pertaining to the Commission's
universal service fund programs? We also seek comment on the application of the Commission's
suspension and debarment rules to program participants. Should the Commission make this new program
subject to its existing suspension and debarment ruleS,74 and would doing so be consistent with the
statutory scheme?75
The Consolidated Appropriations Act also provides a safe harbor provision stating that the
Commission may not enforce a violation of this section 904 using section 501, 502, or 503 of the
Communications Act of 1934, or any rules of the Commission promulgated under such sections, if a
participating provider demonstrates that it relied in good faith on information provided to such provider to
make any verification required by subsection 904(b)(2).76 Section 904(b)(2) imposes a duty on
participating providers to verify whether a household is eligible to receive the service and devices
supported by this program. Considering that section 904(b)(2)requires providers to verify household
eligibility but also permits them, among other measures,to rely upon an unspecified alternative
verification process,how will the Commission determine good faith reliance required by this exception?
What should constitute good faith reliance? We seek comment on this safe harbor provision.
Application ofPart 54 Regulations. In addition to the specific instances identified above, we
seek comment on applying the regulations contained in subpart E of part 54 to the Emergency Broadband
Benefit Program,to the extent that those rules do not conflict with the Emergency Broadband Benefit
Program parameters established by the Act.
We propose to use the authority granted by the Consolidated Appropriations Act to use USAC's
services to implement the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program,77 including administering approvals
and elections of participating providers, determinations of household eligibility, including whether a
household resides on Tribal lands,by relying upon the USAC-administered National Verifier,National
Lifeline Accountability Database,Representative Accountability Database, and Lifeline Claims System
for the provider reimbursement process, call centers for program support,provider and consumer
outreach, and conducting program audits. We seek comment on this approach. Are there other functions
of the program that should be administered by USAC? We also seek comment on whether some of the
regulations contained in subpart H of the Commission's rules,which pertain to USAC's functions as
administrator of the Universal Service Fund, should be applied to the Emergency Broadband Benefit
program. For example, we propose to apply sections 54.702(c) of the Commission's rules (prohibiting
USAC from making policy, interpreting unclear provisions of the statute or rules, or interpreting the
intent of Congress). Should other rules pertaining to audits (e.g. sections 54.707 and 54.717) and
Commission review of USAC decisions (sections 54.719-54.725) apply to the Emergency Broadband
Benefit program? We seek comment on which provisions of Subpart H would, if applied, facilitate
effective administration of the program. We also propose to reimburse USAC for its costs in performing
73 Id.
74 See 47 CFR§ 54.8(rules regarding suspension and debarment).
71 See H.R. 133,div.N,tit. IX§904(f)("Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent the Commission from
providing that the regulations in part 54 of title 47,Code 15 of Federal Regulations, or any successor regulation,
shall apply in whole or in part to the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program,shall not apply in whole or in part to
such Program, or shall be modified in whole or in part for purposes of application to such Program.").
761d. §9040).
771d. §904(i)(5).
12
141
Federal Communications Commission DA 21-6
these functions,within the cap placed on administrative expenses provided by the Act, and seek comment
on that proposal.78
We also seek comment on whether the Commission should apply any additional rules to the
Emergency Broadband Benefit Program. For example, for subscribers who do not pay an end-user fee for
their supported service, should the participating provider be required to measure data usage to ensure the
benefit is actually being used? Alternatively,what other measures may the participating provider use to
ensure the benefit for which they are reimbursed is actually used or the beneficiary wishes to continue to
receive the service(such as an affirmative response to a written communication)? Additionally,how can
the Commission ensure that subscribers who receive the Emergency Broadband Benefit are able to
discontinue their monthly benefit or transfer their benefit to a different participating provider? Should the
Commission enable subscribers to initiate those de-enrollments or transfers directly with USAC, in
addition to the procedures required in the Commission's Lifeline rules?79
Program Reporting and Conclusion. The Consolidated Appropriations Act provides that"[a]t the
conclusion of the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program, any participating eligible households shall be
subject to a participating provider's generally applicable terms and conditions."80 The Emergency
Broadband Benefit Program will conclude at the end of the emergency period81 or when the amount
appropriated to the Emergency Broadband Connectivity Fund is expended,S2 whichever is sooner. In light
of this statutory language, how should providers be required to explain these terms and conditions to
eligible households prior to or upon initial enrollment? Is there other information that should be provided
to eligible households before enrollment or while the service is being supported by the program to ensure
eligible households understand the scope of the program and the impact of fund exhaustion on the
program discount?
The FCC is subject to both general government-wide reporting obligations and reporting
obligations in the Consolidated Appropriations Act specific to pandemic relief legislation. In particular,
we note that the CARES Act oversight provisions have been incorporated by reference in the
Consolidated Appropriations Act by expanding the definition of"covered funds" found in the CARES
Act appropriation riders.83 As such, commenters should take into consideration the information
requirements and reporting obligations associated with such oversight provisions. In addition to such
requirements (which include public disclosures of spending),how should the Commission keep
stakeholders informed during the duration of the program regarding the funds remaining in the
Emergency Broadband Connectivity Fund? We seek comment on the information the Commission
should share about disbursements made from the Fund and at what intervals. We also seek comment on
how the Commission should administer the conclusion of the program. What notice should the
Commission give to participating providers? How should participating providers give notice to eligible
households that their benefit will conclude after a certain date? What precipitating events should trigger
such notice, and what information should be included in that notice?
Filing Requirements. Pursuant to section 1.419 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR § 1.419,
interested parties may file comments on or before January 25,2021, and reply comments on or before
78 See id. § 904(i)(3)("Amounts in the Emergency Broadband Connectivity Fund shall be available to the
Commission for reimbursements from participating providers under this section,and the Commission may not use
more than 2 percent of such amounts to administer the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program.").
79 See 47 CFR§ 54.405(e).
80 See H.R. 133,div.N,tit. IX § 904(b)(10).
81 See id. § 904(a)(8).
12 See id. § 904(i)(2).
83 See Consolidated Appropriations Act,2021,H.R. 133,div. O,tit.VIII—Pandemic Response Accountability
Committee Amendments § 801,Amendment to the Pandemic Response Accountability Committee(2020).
13
142
Federal Communications Commission DA 21-6
February 16,2021.84 All filings should refer to WC Docket No. 20-445. Filings must be addressed to
the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary,Federal Communications Commission. Comments
may be filed by paper or by using the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System(ECFS). See
Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (1998).
■ Electronic Filers: Comments and replies may be filed electronically via ECFS:
http://www.fcc.gov/ecfs.
■ Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must file an original and one copy of each
filing. Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery,by commercial overnight courier, or by
first-class or overnight U.S.Postal Service mail.
■ Filings can be sent by commercial overnight courtier or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal
Service mail.85
■ Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail)
must be sent to 9050 Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction,MD 20701.
■ U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail must be addressed to 45 L St,NE,
Washington, DC 20554.
People with Disabilities. To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities
(Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an e-mail to fce504gfcc.Qov or call the
Consumer& Governmental Affairs Bureau at(202) 418-0530 (voice) or(202) 418-0432 (tty).
Ex Parte Rules.Proceedings in this Notice shall be treated as a"permit-but-disclose"proceeding
in accordance with the Commission's ex parte rules.86 Persons making ex parte presentations must file a
copy of any written presentation or a memorandum summarizing any oral presentation within two
business days after the presentation(unless a different deadline applicable to the Sunshine period applies).
Persons making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda summarizing the presentation
must(1)list all persons attending or otherwise participating in the meeting at which the ex parte
presentation was made, and(2) summarize all data presented and arguments made during the
presentation. If the presentation consisted in whole or in part of the presentation of data or arguments
already reflected in the presenter's written comments, memoranda or other filings in the proceeding,the
presenter may provide citations to such data or arguments in his or her prior comments,memoranda, or
other filings (specifying the relevant page and/or paragraph numbers where such data or arguments can be
found) in lieu of summarizing them in the memorandum. Documents shown or given to Commission
staff during ex parte meetings are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and must be filed
consistent with rule 1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by rule 1.49(f) or for which the Commission has
made available a method of electronic filing,written ex parte presentations and memoranda summarizing
oral ex parte presentations, and all attachments thereto,must be filed through the electronic comment
filing system available for that proceeding, and must be filed in their native format(e.g., .doc, .xml, .ppt,
searchable .pdf). Participants in these proceedings should familiarize themselves with the Commission's
ex parte rules.
Sa See 47 CFR§ 1.40)(filing dates that would otherwise fall on a holiday shall be filed on the next business day).
Ss In response to the COVID-19 pandemic,the FCC has closed its current hand-delivery filing location at FCC
Headquarters. We encourage outside parties to take full advantage of the Commission's electronic filing system.
Any party that is unable to meet the filing deadline due to the building closure may request a waiver of the comment
or reply comment deadline,to the extent permitted by law. FCC Announces Closure of FCC Headquarters Open
Window and Change in Hand-Delivery Filing,Public Notice,DA 20-304(rel.Mar. 19,2020).
https://www.fec.Lovldocuinent/fcc-closes-headquai-ters-open-window-and-chances-hand-delivery_policy.
86 See 47 CFR§§ 1.1200(a), 1.1206.
14
143
Federal Communications Commission DA 21-6
For further information,please contact Eric Wu,Attorney Advisor, Telecommunications Access
Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau at(202)418-1543 or by email at Eric.Wugfcc.,gov.
-FCC—
15
144
Federal Communications Commission DA 21-6
APPENDIX
CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2021
DIVISION N—ADDITIONAL CORONAVIRUS RESPONSE AND RELIEF
TITLE IX—BROADBAND INTERNET ACCESS SERVICE
SEC. 904. BENEFIT FOR BROADBAND SERVICE DURING EMERGENCY PER1OD RELATING
TO COVID-19.
(a)DEFINITIONS.—In this section:
(1)BROADBAND INTERNET ACCESS SERVICE.—The term "broadband internet access
service" has the meaning given such term in section 8.1(b) of title 47, Code of Federal Regulations,
or any successor regulation.
(2)BROADBAND PROVIDER.—The term "broadband provider" means a provider of broadband
internet access service.
(3) COMMISSION.—The term "Commission" means the Federal Communications Commission.
(4) CONNECTED DEVICE.—The term "connected device" means a laptop or desktop computer or
a tablet.
(5) DESIGNATED AS AN ELIGIBLE TELECOMMUNICATIONS CARRIER.—The term
"designated as an eligible telecommunications carrier",with respect to a broadband provider,means
the broadband provider is designated as an eligible telecommunications carrier under section 214(e)
of the Communications Act of 1934(47 U.S.C. 214(e)).
(6) ELIGIBLE HOUSEHOLD.—The term "eligible household" means, regardless of whether the
household or any member of the household receives support under subpart E of part 54 of title 47,
Code of Federal Regulations (or any successor regulation), and regardless of whether any member of
the household has any past or present arrearages with a broadband provider, a household in which—
(A) at least one member of the household meets the qualifications in subsection(a) or(b) of
section 54.409 of title 47, Code of Federal Regulations (or any successor regulation);
(B) at least one member of the household has applied for and been approved to receive benefits
under the free and reduced price lunch program under the Richard B. Russell National School
Lunch Act(42 U.S.C. 1751 et seq.) or the school breakfast program under section 4 of the Child
Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773);
(C) at least one member of the household has experienced a substantial loss of income since
February 29, 2020,that is documented by layoff or furlough notice, application for
unemployment insurance benefits, or similar documentation or that is otherwise verifiable
through the National Verifier or National Lifeline Accountability Database;
(D) at least one member of the household has received a Federal Pell Grant under section 401 of
the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070a)in the current award year, if such award is
verifiable through the National Verifier or National Lifeline Accountability Database or the
participating provider verifies eligibility under subsection(a)(2)(B); or
(E) at least one member of the household meets the eligibility criteria for a participating
provider's existing low-income or COVID-19 program, subject to the requirements of subsection
(a)(2)(B) and any other eligibility requirements the Commission may consider necessary for the
public interest.
16
145
Federal Communications Commission DA 21-6
(7) EMERGENCY BROADBAND BENEFIT.—The term "emergency broadband benefit" means a
monthly discount for an eligible household applied to the actual amount charged to such household,
which shall be no more than the standard rate for an internet service offering and associated
equipment, in an amount equal to such amount charged,but not more than $50, or, if an internet
service offering is provided to an eligible household on Tribal land,not more than $75.
(8) EMERGENCY PERIOD.—The term "emergency period" means the period that—
(A)begins on the date of the enactment of this Act; and
(B) ends on the date that is 6 months after the date on which the determination by the Secretary of
Health and Human Services pursuant to section 319 of the Public Health Service Act(42 U.S.C.
247d)that a public health emergency exists as a result of COVID-19, including any renewal
thereof,terminates.
(9) INTERNET SERVICE OFFERING.—The term "internet service offering" means, with respect
to a broadband provider,broadband internet access service provided by such provider to a household,
offered in the same manner, and on the same terms, as described in any of such provider's offerings
for broadband internet access service to such household, as on December 1, 2020.
(10)NATIONAL LIFELINE ACCOUNTABILITY DATABASE.—The term "National Lifeline
Accountability Database" has the meaning given such term in section 54.400 of title 47, Code of
Federal Regulations (or any successor regulation).
(11)NATIONAL VERIFIER.—The term "National Verifier" has the meaning given such term in
section 54.400 of title 47, Code of Federal Regulations, or any successor regulation.
(12)PARTICIPATING PROVIDER.—The term "participating provider" means a broadband
provider that—
(A)
(i)is designated as an eligible telecommunications carrier; or
(ii)meets requirements established by the Commission for participation in the Emergency
Broadband Benefit Program and is approved by the Commission under subsection(d)(2); and
(B) elects to participate in the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program.
(13) STANDARD RATE.—The term "standard rate" means the monthly retail rate for the
applicable tier of broadband internet access service as of December 1, 2020, excluding any taxes or
other governmental fees.
(b) EMERGENCY BROADBAND BENEFIT PROGRAM.—
(1)ESTABLISHMENT.—The Commission shall establish a program,to be known as the
"Emergency Broadband Benefit Program",under which the Commission shall, in accordance with
this section,reimburse,using funds from the Emergency Broadband Connectivity Fund established in
subsection(i), a participating provider for an emergency broadband benefit, or an emergency
broadband benefit and a connected device,provided to an eligible household during the emergency
period.
(2)VERIFICATION OF ELIGIBILITY.—To verify whether a household is an eligible household, a
participating provider shall—
(A)use the National Verifier or National Lifeline Accountability Database;
(B)rely upon an alternative verification process of the participating provider, if—
(i)the participating provider submits information as required by the Commission regarding
the alternative verification process prior to seeking reimbursement; and
17
146
Federal Communications Commission DA 21-6
(ii)not later than 7 days after receiving the information required under clause(i),the
Commission—
(1) determines that the alternative verification process will be sufficient to avoid waste,
fraud, and abuse; and
(II)notifies the participating provider of the determination under subclause(I); or
(C)rely on a school to verify the eligibility of a household based on the participation of the
household in the free and reduced price lunch program or the school breakfast program described
in subsection(a)(6)(B).
(3)USE OF NATIONAL VERIFIER AND NATIONAL LIFELINE ACCOUNTABILITY
DATABASE.—The Commission shall—
(A) expedite the ability of all participating providers to access the National Verifier and National
Lifeline Accountability Database for purposes of determining whether a household is an eligible
household,without regard to whether a participating provider is designated as an eligible
telecommunications carrier; and
(B) ensure that the National Verifier and National Lifeline Accountability Database approve an
eligible household to receive the emergency broadband benefit not later than 2 days after the date
of the submission of information necessary to determine if such household is an eligible
household.
(4)REIMBURSEMENT.—From the Emergency Broadband Connectivity Fund established in
subsection(i),the Commission shall reimburse a participating provider in an amount equal to the
emergency broadband benefit with respect to an eligible household that receives such benefit from
such participating provider during the emergency period.
(5)REIMBURSEMENT FOR CONNECTED DEVICE.—A participating provider that, during the
emergency period, in addition to providing the emergency broadband benefit to an eligible household,
supplies such household with a connected device may be reimbursed up to $100 from the Emergency
Broadband Connectivity Fund established in subsection (i)for such connected device, if the charge to
such eligible household is more than $10 but less than $50 for such connected device, except that a
participating provider may receive reimbursement for no more than 1 connected device per eligible
household.
(6) CERTIFICATION REQUIRED.—To receive a reimbursement under paragraph(4) or(5), a
participating provider shall certify to the Commission the following:
(A) That the amount for which the participating provider is seeking reimbursement from the
Emergency Broadband Connectivity Fund established in subsection (i) for providing an internet
service offering to an eligible household is not more than the standard rate.
(B) That each eligible household for which the participating provider is seeking reimbursement
for providing an internet service offering discounted by the emergency broadband benefit—
(i)has not been and will not be charged—
(I)for such offering, if the standard rate,for such offering is less than or equal to the
amount of the emergency broadband benefit for such household; or
(II)more for such offering than the difference between the standard rate for such offering
and the amount of the emergency broadband benefit for such household;
(ii)will not be required to pay an early termination fee if such eligible household elects to
enter into a contract to receive such internet service offering if such household later
terminates such contract;
(iii)was not, after the date of the enactment of this Act, subject to a mandatory waiting period
is
147
Federal Communications Commission DA 21-6
for such internet service offering based on having previously received broadband internet
access service from such participating provider; and
(iv) will otherwise be subject to the participating provider's generally applicable terms and
conditions as applied to other customers.
(C)That each eligible household for which the participating provider is seeking reimbursement
for supplying such household with a connected device has not been and will not be charged$10
or less or$50 or more for such device.
(D)A description of the process used by the participating provider to verify that a household is an
eligible household, if the provider elects an alternative verification process under paragraph
(2)(B), and that such verification process was designed to avoid waste, fraud, and abuse.
(7) AUDIT REQUIREMENTS.—The Commission shall adopt audit requirements to ensure that
participating providers are in compliance with the requirements of this section and to prevent waste,
fraud, and abuse in the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program. A finding of waste, fraud, or abuse
or an improper payment(as such term is defined in section 2(d) of the Improper Payments
Information Act of 2002 (31 U.S.C. 3321 note))identified by the Commission or the Inspector
General of the Commission shall include the following:
(A)The name of the participating provider.
(B) The amount of funding made available from the Emergency Broadband Connectivity Fund to
the participating provider.
(C)The amount of funding determined to be an improper payment to a participating provider.
(D) A description of to what extent funding made available from the Emergency Broadband
Connectivity Fund that was an improper payment was used for a reimbursement for a connected
device or a reimbursement for an internet service offering.
(E) Whether, in the case of a connected device, such device, or the value thereof,has been
recovered.
(F) Whether any funding from the Emergency Broadband Connectivity Fund was made available
to a participating provider for an emergency broadband benefit for a person outside the eligible
household.
(G) Whether any funding from the Emergency Broadband Connectivity Fund was made available
to reimburse a participating provider for an emergency broadband benefit made available to an
eligible household in which all members of such household necessary to satisfy the eligibility
requirements described in subsection(a)(6)were deceased.
(8) RANDOM AUDIT REQUIRED.—Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this
Act, the Inspector General of the Commission shall conduct an audit of a representative sample of
participating providers receiving reimbursements under the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program.
(9)NOTIFICATION OF AUDIT FINDINGS.—Not later than 7 days after a finding made by the
Commission under the requirements of paragraph(7),the Commission shall notify the Committee on
Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation of the Senate with any information described in such paragraph that the
Commission has obtained.
(10) EXPIRATION OF PROGRAM.—At the conclusion of the Emergency Broadband Benefit
Program, any participating eligible households shall be subject to a participating provider's generally
applicable terms and conditions.
(c)REGULATIONS REQUIRED.-
19
148
Federal Communications Commission DA 21-6
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act,the
Commission shall promulgate regulations to implement this section.
(2) COMMENT PERIODS.—As part of the rulemaking under paragraph (1), the Commission shall
(A)provide a 20-day public comment period that begins not later than 5 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act;
(B)provide a 20-day public reply comment period that immediately follows the period under
subparagraph(A); and
(C) during the comment periods under subparagraphs(A) and(B), seek comment on—
(i)the provision of assistance from the Emergency Broadband Connectivity Fund established
in subsection(i) consistent with this section; and
(ii) other related matters.
(d) ELIGIBILITY OF PROVIDERS.—
(1) RELATION TO ELIGIBLE TELECOMMUNCATIONS CARRIER DESIGNATION.—The
Commission may not require a broadband provider to be designated as an eligible
telecommunications carrier in order to be a participating provider.
(2) EXPEDITED APPROVAL PROCESS.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—The Commission shall establish an expedited process by which the
Commission approves as participating providers broadband providers that are not designated as
eligible telecommunications carriers and elect to participate in the Emergency Broadband Benefit
Program.
(B) EXCEPTION.—Notwithstanding subparagraph(A), the Commission shall automatically
approve as a participating provider a broadband provider that has an established program as of
April 1, 2020,that is widely available and offers internet service offerings to eligible households
and maintains verification processes that are sufficient to avoid fraud, waste, and abuse.
(e)RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section shall affect the collection, distribution, or
administration of the Lifeline Assistance Program governed by the rules set forth in subpart E of part 54
of title 47, Code of Federal Regulations (or any successor regulation).
(f)PART 54 REGULATIONS.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent the Commission
from providing that the regulations in part 54 of title 47, Code of Federal Regulations, or any successor
regulation, shall apply in whole or in part to the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program, shall not apply
in whole or in part to such Program, or shall be modified in whole or in part for purposes of application to
such Program.
(g)ENFORCEMENT.—A violation of this section or a regulation promulgated under this section shall be
treated as a violation of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 151 et seq.) or a regulation
promulgated under such Act. The Commission shall enforce this section and the regulations promulgated
under this section in the same manner,by the same means, and with the same jurisdiction,powers, and
duties as though all applicable terms and provisions of the Communications Act of 1934 were
incorporated into and made a part of this section.
20
149
Federal Communications Commission DA 21-6
(h) EXEMPTIONS.—
(1) CERTAIN RULEMAKING REQUIREMENTS.—Section 553 of title 5, United States Code,
shall not apply to a regulation promulgated under subsection(c) or a rulemaking proceeding to
promulgate such a regulation.
(2) PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT REQUIREMENTS.—A collection of information conducted
or sponsored under the regulations required by subsection (c) shall not constitute a collection of
information for the purposes of subchapter I of chapter 35 of title 44, United States Code(commonly
referred to as the Paperwork Reduction Act).
(i) EMERGENCY BROADBAND CONNECTIVITY FUND.—
(1) ESTABLISHMENT.—There is established in the Treasury of the United States a fund to be
known as the Emergency Broadband Connectivity Fund.
(2)APPROPRIATION.—There is appropriated to the Emergency Broadband Connectivity Fund, out
of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, $3,200,000,000 for fiscal year 2021,to
remain available until expended.
(3) USE OF FUNDS.—Amounts in the Emergency Broadband Connectivity Fund shall be available
to the Commission for reimbursements to participating providers under this section, and the
Commission may use not more than 2 percent of such amounts to administer the Emergency
Broadband Benefit Program.
(4) RELATIONSHIP TO UNIVERSAL SERVICE CONTRIBUTIONS.—Reimbursements provided
under this section shall be provided from amounts made available under this subsection and not from
contributions under section 254(d) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 254(d)).
(5) USE OF UNIVERSAL SERVICE ADMINISTRATIVE COMPANY PERMITTED.—The
Commission shall have the authority to avail itself of the services of the Universal Service
Administrative Company to implement the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program, including
developing and processing reimbursements and distributing funds to participating providers.
0) SAFE HARBOR.—The Commission may not enforce a violation of this section under section 501,
502, or 503 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 501; 502; 503), or any rules of the
Commission promulgated under such sections of such Act, if a participating provider demonstrates to the
Commission that such provider relied in good faith on information provided to such provider to make the
verification required by subsection(b)(2).
21
150
Switzer, Donna
From: Fikes, Cathy
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2021 2:05 PM
To: Agenda Alerts
Subject: FW:TITO!
Importance: High
From: Gary Tarkington <garytarkington@msn.com>
Sent:Thursday,January 28, 2021 1:35 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org>
Subject:TITO!
Importance: High
UNBELIEVEABLE!!
You are NOT the majority community of Huntington Beach that voted for Tito! This is totally unacceptable!
The top item is Mike Posey and Kim Carr removing Tito Ortiz as mayor pro-tem, even though he broke the
record for most votes in a HB city council election in the entire history of HB.
The second item is council trying to inject themselves into state and national politics rather than cleaning
up the mess here in HB. Seems we have some council members who want to play partisan politics rather
than dealing with the train wreck issues we have in our own neighborhood.
STOP with all of this BS and do YOURjob! The Huntington Beach citizens voted him in and he needs to
stay!
Ann Tarkington
Huntington Beach
COMMU NICAT` 0114
Moo"Date
Agenda item No.-
i
Switzer, Donna
From: Fikes, Cathy
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2021 1 1:20 AM
To: Agenda Alerts
Subject: FW: Ortiz
From:Thom Doney<thomdoney@yahoo.com>
Sent:Thursday,January 28, 2021 8:25 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org>
Subject: Ortiz
Do not vote to remove Tito Ortiz from the Mayor Pro-Tem position. He received more votes than any
of you and actually received more votes than several of you combined.
You may have been a top three or four finisher, but you are not connecting with the citizens. You are
not our moral authority.
Keep our city safe, work on finding ways to open businesses, fix the pension mess, fix the homeless
problem, and so much more. We don't need mommy and daddy to tell Tito, and us, that we've been
naughty.
And keep your nose out of the State and National politics. You have enough problems right here at
home. If you can't do that, we will gladly start the recall process and I'll do all I can to help. Just think,
those same 42,000 people who voted for Tito can vote you out.
Kind Regards,
Thom Doney
SUPPLEMENTAL..
COMMUNICATION
Meeft Date: C�/' /as -�----
Agenda Item NO.:, Al Ld/- /D/)
1
February 1, 2021
The Honorable Marlene H. Dortch
Secretary
Federal Communications Commission
45 L Street NE
Washington, DC 20554
Dear Secretary Dortch,
On behalf of the City of Huntington Beach, I write to thank the Federal Communications
Commission for the work it does to ensure needy families have quality internet access. I also
applaud the FCC's efforts to design and implement the upcoming Emergency Broadband Benefit
Program and the FCC to structure the program in a way that will incorporate municipal
contributions and strengths to identify and qualify the greatest number of eligible lower-income
households in our communities.
The City of Huntington Beach and the Huntington Beach City School District have had great
success in our partnership with a local broadband provider to ensure all students and their families
have internet access at home throughout the pandemic. To do this, the provider helps deliver
students and their families with 100 percent free hotspots. We believe these types of innovative
programs should be incorporated into the service reimbursement criteria in this new program.
Based on our experience, we believe local, qualified providers will be excellent partners in this
endeavor. However, should obstacles arise, local governments are often at the fulcrum of major
business and government decisions and can help identify paths forward or give access to data
crucial to decision-making. We encourage the FCC to establish local governments as partners in
the implementation of the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program, allowing local governments
the flexibility to address any problems that may arise.
We thank you for setting up such a much-needed program and are excited to incorporate it on
the ground in Huntington Beach, California.
Sincerely,
Kim Carr
Mayor of Huntington Beach, California
SUPPLEMENTAL
COMMUNICATION
Meeting Date.------i--I �)_l
Agenda m►vo.�__ 1 - /C>
Moore, Tania
From: Fikes, Cathy
Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2021 2:16 PM
To: Agenda Alerts
Subject: FW: Removing Tito Ortiz as mayor pro tern
From:virginia audette <audette100@yahoo.com>
Sent: Saturday,January 30, 2021 9:25 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org>
Subject: Removing Tito Ortiz as mayor pro tern
NO on removing Tito Ortiz. This move seems politically motivated and divisive. It's only been a few months. Why can't you
people work together for the good of the community? All you're doing is fanning the flames.
NO on getting involved in national politics—Again, this seems politically motivated. Seems like someone is just interested
in making headlines for themselves perhaps to run for higher office one day. Why don't you concentrate on the problems
of HB? After all, that's why we voted for you. You have bigger problems to deal with like our unfunded pensions,
homelessness, and rebuilding the local economy. Why don't you just do your job instead of trying to stir up trouble.
Virginia Audette
WJ COPLEMENTAL
COMMUNICATION
Aeetir
Agpnda Rem ado.;
i