### Optimum Under Fire for Noncompliance with New York’s Affordable Broadband Law
New York’s Affordable Broadband Act (ABA), which requires Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to provide low-cost broadband options to low-income residents, has faced pushback and misunderstandings from certain providers. A recent incident involving Optimum, an ISP owned by Altice USA, underscores the difficulties in enforcing the legislation and ensuring that providers adhere to its requirements.
#### Overview of the Law
The New York Affordable Broadband Act, effective January 15, 2025, obligates ISPs with more than 20,000 customers to offer affordable broadband plans to eligible low-income residents. The law outlines two specific plans:
– A $15 monthly option featuring download speeds of at least 25Mbps.
– A $20 monthly option with download speeds of at least 200Mbps.
These rates must encompass all recurring taxes, fees, and equipment rental charges. Eligibility is based on enrollment in programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
#### William O’Brien’s Compliance Challenges
William O’Brien, a low-income New Yorker on SNAP, sought to switch to Optimum’s $15 broadband plan after becoming aware of the law. At that juncture, O’Brien was paying $111.20 monthly for his broadband service, which included $89.99 for the service, $14 for equipment rental, a $6 “Network Enhancement Fee,” and $1.21 in taxes. Despite meeting the eligibility requirements, his requests were twice denied.
During his first attempt to change plans, O’Brien encountered misinformation. A customer service representative informed him that Optimum did not have a $15 plan, even after he provided them with a link to an article explaining the law. Frustrated, O’Brien contacted Ars Technica, a technology news organization, for assistance.
#### Media Involvement and Continued Pushback
After Ars Technica reached out to Optimum’s public relations department, the company acknowledged its error and vowed to rectify the situation. However, when an executive customer relations representative contacted O’Brien, he was informed that the low-income plan was exclusively available to new customers—a condition that the New York law does not allow.
O’Brien’s determination, coupled with ongoing media scrutiny, ultimately led to a resolution. Optimum eventually permitted him to transition to the $15 plan, significantly lowering his monthly bill by nearly $100. However, the plan provided only 50Mbps download and 5Mbps upload speeds, a reduction from his previous 100Mbps service.
#### Systemic Problems and Lack of Readiness
Optimum’s approach to O’Brien’s situation exposed systemic flaws in the company’s application of the law. The company’s website and internal policies initially precluded existing customers from accessing the low-income plan, clearly breaching the ABA. Optimum later acknowledged “confusion among our care teams” and revised its materials and training to align with the law.
The broader implementation of the law has also encountered obstacles. Optimum claimed that the limited notice from state officials provided insufficient time to update its systems and materials. This lack of readiness highlights the challenges associated with enforcing new regulations, particularly in sectors with intricate customer service frameworks.
#### Wider Consequences and Enforcement Issues
Since its introduction, the New York Affordable Broadband Act has met resistance from ISPs. Initially, broadband lobbying organizations successfully blocked the law in 2021, but a U.S. appeals court overturned that decision in 2024. The Supreme Court chose not to hear the case, allowing the law to become effective.
Some ISPs, such as AT&T, have opted to avoid the law entirely. AT&T ceased its 5G home Internet service in New York rather than conform to the affordability mandates. This raises concerns regarding the law’s efficacy and the readiness of ISPs to prioritize consumer access over profit margins.
#### Future Directions
Optimum has committed to promoting its low-income plan more widely and engaging in outreach within low-income communities. However, the company has yet to introduce a $20 plan with 200Mbps speeds, as the law allows. O’Brien, for his part, intends to file a complaint with the New York Attorney General’s office in hopes of obtaining a faster plan.
New York Attorney General Letitia James holds the power to enforce the law and can impose civil penalties of up to $1,000 per infringement. Nonetheless, it remains uncertain how vigorously the state will pursue enforcement or respond to complaints from residents like O’Brien.
#### Conclusion
The situation involving William O’Brien and Optimum underscores the difficulties in applying and enforcing consumer protection regulations within the broadband sector. While the Affordable Broadband Act marks a pivotal advance towards closing the digital divide, its effectiveness is contingent on strong enforcement and the willingness of ISPs to follow through. For low-income residents, the law brings hope for affordable Internet access—but this hope is dependent on providers like Optimum fulfilling their responsibilities.
