WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HD 3126

An Act relative to assuring a jumpstart in investments in telecoms to preserve access to the internet

194th Legislature (2025-2026) Introduced by Dave Robertson

Creates a dedicated Municipal Broadband Development Fund with net neutrality rules to accelerate publicly owned broadband and enforce open access.

Senate concurred
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HD 3126

Summary of HD 3126: An Act relative to assuring a jumpstart in investments in telecoms to preserve access to the internet

Overview

HD 3126 is a proposed Massachusetts Act designed to accelerate investment in municipal broadband and to reinforce open internet principles. The bill would create a dedicated Municipal Broadband Development Fund, establish a net neutrality framework for broadband providers, and enable state funding to expand publicly administered broadband services. The measure priorities municipal, publicly-owned broadband expansion and ties funding to compliance with net neutrality standards.

  • Introduced: February 27, 2025
  • House docket: No. 3126 (H.95) filed January 16, 2025
  • Status: Senate concurred (as of the latest action)
  • Primary sponsor: Rep. David Allen Robertson (Tewksbury)

What the bill would do (core purposes)

  • Jumpstart municipal broadband investments to preserve access to the internet.
  • Create a dedicated funding stream and a governance structure to support publicly administered broadband services.
  • Establish net neutrality protections to ensure open, non-discriminatory access for end users.

Key provisions

1) Municipal Broadband Development Fund (new Fund)

  • Establishes a separate fund on the books of the Commonwealth, named the Municipal Broadband Development Fund.
  • The fund is subject to appropriation and is intended for purposes described in the open access provisions (see below).
  • The Massachusetts Treasurer may receive and expend funds from:
    • State appropriations
    • Gifts, grants, and donations
    • Federal reimbursements/grants or other monies
    • Interest earned on the fund
  • Funds held are to be managed as a trust for the purposes of the related section of law, with investment discretion aimed at achieving the highest safe yield.

2) Expanded definitions and scope (Chapter 25C)

  • Introduces terms to govern net neutrality and municipal broadband:
    • BroadBand Internet Service Provider (BISP): mass-market service via wire or fiber that transmits/receives data to most internet endpoints, excluding dial-up and some wireless options unless defined otherwise.
    • Data Cap, Net Neutral, Open Access, End-User, Paid Prioritization, Surcharge.
    • Municipal agency: government departments and related bodies at the city/town level.
  • Net Neutrality concepts are codified, emphasizing open access, no data caps, and no paid prioritization.

3) Net Neutrality certification and enforcement (Section 9)

  • The Department of Telecommunications and Cable (and related agency) would implement a net neutrality seal and certification process.
  • A BISP would be deemed net neutral if it avoids paid prioritization, ensures open access, and is free of data caps or related surcharges based on usage.
  • State agencies and municipalities may not renew contracts with non-compliant BISPs.

4) Surtax on non-compliant BISPs (Section 9(d))

  • The Treasurer, with the Department, would levy a surtax of at least 50% on any surcharge charged by a BISP; proceeds go to the Municipal Broadband Development Fund.

5) Competitive bidding for public funding (Section 10)

  • The Department, with the Treasurer, would develop a competitive bidding process to award funds to municipal agencies for expanding/creating/advertising/maintaining publicly administered BISPs that meet net neutrality standards.
  • Recipients found in violation of net neutrality must repay the awarded funds plus 5% to the Municipal Broadband Trust Fund.

Who/what would be affected

  • Public sector: municipalities and other state/municipal bodies seeking to deploy or maintain publicly owned broadband networks.
  • Private BISPs: subject to net neutrality certification, possible contract non-renewals with non-compliant providers, and potential surtaxes on surcharges.
  • Taxpayer/funding landscape: creation of a new dedicated fund and new revenue source (surtaxes) to support municipal projects.

Procedural and timeline aspects

  • Referred to the Joint Committee on Advanced Information Technology, the Internet and Cybersecurity (Feb 27, 2025).
  • Senate concurred (status indicates cross-branch approval as of the latest action).
  • The municipal broadband funding framework and net neutrality certification would operate alongside existing Chapter 10 (Section 35QQQ) and Chapter 25C authorities, with implementation guided by accompanying rules and regulations.

Potential impacts and considerations

  • Promotes expansion of publicly owned broadband to improve universal access and maintain open internet standards.
  • Increases state revenue stream for broadband investments through a surtax on BISPs.
  • Creates compliance incentives to adhere to net neutrality, potentially reshaping procurement and contracting for state and municipal internet services.
  • Could influence private ISPs’ pricing and service strategies due to the net neutrality and surcharge framework.

If you’d like, I can provide a side-by-side comparison with current law or draft a one-page briefing for policymakers.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.