1Remarks of Michael O’Rielly, FCC Commissioner
Before the Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee (BDAC)
November 9, 2017
Thank you for the opportunity to once again be before you to say a few words as you get to your work 
of the day.  
Let me reiterate my thanks for all that you have done already and the many hours of work that is ahead 
in the coming months.  The Commission realizes that this effort takes away from your personal and 
professional lives and we are grateful for your contributions.  
I do want to make a couple substantive points since I have your attention.  First, it should be noted that 
the work of the Advisory Committee has not lessened as more people become aware of the underlying 
problem.  In other words, the barriers preventing providers from bringing fixed and wireless broadband 
throughout our nation have increased despite the existence of this committee.  Clearly, just talking 
about it and identifying barriers hasn’t been enough.  While some had hoped that merely pointing out 
the issues or throwing up our arms at those state, local, and tribal governments acting in bad faith 
would resolve any pending problems, that is not the case.  The barriers being imposed are not caused by 
a failure to collaborate, but a failure to heed to current law and a resistance to allow citizens access to 
modern communications unless certain localities impose their will or extract bounties from providers.
Take for instance, the multipage filing by Uniti Group, which is ably represented on the BDAC.  The 
document, which is available in the Commission’s database system, concisely demonstrates the
enormous burdens present when providers attempt to deploy broadband networks.  The filing states, 
“[d]espite federal law to the contrary, many localities have implemented moratoria, in name or in fact, 
on installing small cells in the public rights-of-way.  Even when officials…are provided copies of relevant 
federal rulings prohibiting moratoria, these parties feign ignorance or express their intention to violate 
federal law.”  Feigned ignorance or expressed intention to violate the law.  Unbelievable.  In the case of 
just one state, Florida, Uniti identifies 44 localities that have implemented moratoria.  And those are just 
the ones it knows of.  This cannot be allowed to stand. 
Alternatively, consider the recent paper by the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, 
which criticizes the views of the mayor of San Jose, a member of BDAC.  In the heartbeat of our nation’s 
high-tech headquarters – some would say its capitol – the comments suggest the mayor’s team is 
seeking to extract high rents and fees for merely trying to attach small cells to utility poles.    
And these are just two examples that epitomize the task this organization was created to resolve.  I’ll 
give you one more.  I recently had a conversation with a representative of a large unnamed east coast 
city, who highlighted the coordinated effort being made with other such cities to demand certain prices 
and impose certain requirements for the right to bring broadband to its citizens.  The ideas being 
bandied about were head scratching: from neutral platform requirements to mandating sensor 
attachments to every small cell.  There seems to be no limit to the creativity of those imposing barriers 
to deployment.  And that is why your work is so valuable and timely.  I am counting on you to push the 
envelope when making your recommendations.  Do not just take the easy route.  
Lastly, there has been further debate since your last meeting over the organization’s makeup.  In my 
opinion, this is a somewhat unnecessary distraction.  The Chairman should be given some deference on 
his selection choices, and we should allow the members of the BDAC to function.  
2So, I thank you again for your indulgence.  I look forward to taking your efforts and turning it into 
Commission action in the very near future.